Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection:a literature review

Supplier evaluation and selection problem has been studied extensively. Various decision making approaches have been proposed to tackle the problem. In contemporary supply chain management, the performance of potential suppliers is evaluated against multiple criteria rather than considering a single factor-cost. This paper reviews the literature of the multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection. Related articles appearing in the international journals from 2000 to 2008 are gathered and analyzed so that the following three questions can be answered: (i) Which approaches were prevalently applied? (ii) Which evaluating criteria were paid more attention to? (iii) Is there any inadequacy of the approaches? Based on the inadequacy, if any, some improvements and possible future work are recommended. This research not only provides evidence that the multi-criteria decision making approaches are better than the traditional cost-based approach, but also aids the researchers and decision makers in applying the approaches effectively.

How screening criteria change during brand development

Purpose - Despite the increasing sophistication of new product development (NPD) research, the reliance on traditional approaches to studying NPD has left several areas in need of further research. The authors propose addressing some of these gaps, especially the limited focus on consumer brands, evaluation criteria used across different project-review points in the NPD process, and the distinction between "kills", "successes", and "failures". Moreover, they propose investigating how screening criteria change across project-review points, using real-time NPD projects. Design/methodology/approach - A postal survey generated 172 usable questionnaires from a sample of European, North American, Far Eastern and Australian consumer packaged-goods firms, providing data on 314 new product projects covering different development and post-commercialization review points. Findings - The results confirm that acceptance-rejection criteria vary through the NPD process. However, financial criteria dominate across all the project-review points. Initial screening is coarse, focusing predominantly on financial criteria. Fit with organizational, product, brand, promotional, and market requirements dominate in the detailed screen and pre-development evaluation points. At pre-launch, decision-makers focus on product, brand, and promotional criteria. Commercial fit, production synergies, and reliability of the firm's market intelligence are significant discriminators in the post-launch review. Moreover, the importance of marketing and channel issues makes the criteria for screening brands different from those of industrial markets. Originality/value - The study, although largely descriptive and involves a relatively small sample of consumer goods firms, offers new insights into NPD project evaluation behavior. Future, larger-scale investigations covering a broader spectrum of consumer product sectors are needed to validate our results and to explain the reasons behind managers' decisions. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

The derivation and application of risk tolerability criteria

This research involves a study of the questions, "what is considered safe", how are safety levels defined or decided, and according to whom. Tolerable or acceptable risk questions raise various issues: about values and assumptions inherent in such levels; about decision-making frameworks at the highest level of policy making as well as on the individual level; and about the suitability and competency of decision-makers to decide and to communicate their decisions. The wide-ranging topics covering philosophical and practical concerns examined in the literature review reveal the multi-disciplined scope of this research. To support this theoretical study empirical research was undertaken at the European Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC) of the European Space Agency (ESA). ESTEC is a large, multi-nationality, high technology organisation which presented an ideal case study for exploring how decisions are made with respect to safety from a personal as well as organisational aspect. A qualitative methodology was employed to gather, analyse and report the findings of this research. Significant findings reveal how experts perceive risks and the prevalence of informal decision-making processes partly due to the inadequacy of formal methods for deciding risk tolerability. In the field of occupational health and safety, this research has highlighted the importance and need for criteria to decide whether a risk is great enough to warrant attention in setting standards and priorities for risk control and resources. From a wider perspective and with the recognition that risk is an inherent part of life, the establishment of tolerability risk levels can be viewed as cornerstones indicating our progress, expectations and values, of life and work, in an increasingly litigious, knowledgeable and global society.

Uses of frontier efficiency methodologies and multi-criteria decision making for performance measurement in the energy sector

Guest editorial Ali Emrouznejad is a Senior Lecturer at the Aston Business School in Birmingham, UK. His areas of research interest include performance measurement and management, efficiency and productivity analysis as well as data mining. He has published widely in various international journals. He is an Associate Editor of IMA Journal of Management Mathematics and Guest Editor to several special issues of journals including Journal of Operational Research Society, Annals of Operations Research, Journal of Medical Systems, and International Journal of Energy Management Sector. He is in the editorial board of several international journals and co-founder of Performance Improvement Management Software. William Ho is a Senior Lecturer at the Aston University Business School. Before joining Aston in 2005, he had worked as a Research Associate in the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. His research interests include supply chain management, production and operations management, and operations research. He has published extensively in various international journals like Computers & Operations Research, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, European Journal of Operational Research, Expert Systems with Applications, International Journal of Production Economics, International Journal of Production Research, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, and so on. His first authored book was published in 2006. He is an Editorial Board member of the International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology and an Associate Editor of the OR Insight Journal. Currently, he is a Scholar of the Advanced Institute of Management Research. Uses of frontier efficiency methodologies and multi-criteria decision making for performance measurement in the energy sector This special issue aims to focus on holistic, applied research on performance measurement in energy sector management and for publication of relevant applied research to bridge the gap between industry and academia. After a rigorous refereeing process, seven papers were included in this special issue. The volume opens with five data envelopment analysis (DEA)-based papers. Wu et al. apply the DEA-based Malmquist index to evaluate the changes in relative efficiency and the total factor productivity of coal-fired electricity generation of 30 Chinese administrative regions from 1999 to 2007. Factors considered in the model include fuel consumption, labor, capital, sulphur dioxide emissions, and electricity generated. The authors reveal that the east provinces were relatively and technically more efficient, whereas the west provinces had the highest growth rate in the period studied. Ioannis E. Tsolas applies the DEA approach to assess the performance of Greek fossil fuel-fired power stations taking undesirable outputs into consideration, such as carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide emissions. In addition, the bootstrapping approach is deployed to address the uncertainty surrounding DEA point estimates, and provide bias-corrected estimations and confidence intervals for the point estimates. The author revealed from the sample that the non-lignite-fired stations are on an average more efficient than the lignite-fired stations. Maethee Mekaroonreung and Andrew L. Johnson compare the relative performance of three DEA-based measures, which estimate production frontiers and evaluate the relative efficiency of 113 US petroleum refineries while considering undesirable outputs. Three inputs (capital, energy consumption, and crude oil consumption), two desirable outputs (gasoline and distillate generation), and an undesirable output (toxic release) are considered in the DEA models. The authors discover that refineries in the Rocky Mountain region performed the best, and about 60 percent of oil refineries in the sample could improve their efficiencies further. H. Omrani, A. Azadeh, S. F. Ghaderi, and S. Abdollahzadeh presented an integrated approach, combining DEA, corrected ordinary least squares (COLS), and principal component analysis (PCA) methods, to calculate the relative efficiency scores of 26 Iranian electricity distribution units from 2003 to 2006. Specifically, both DEA and COLS are used to check three internal consistency conditions, whereas PCA is used to verify and validate the final ranking results of either DEA (consistency) or DEA-COLS (non-consistency). Three inputs (network length, transformer capacity, and number of employees) and two outputs (number of customers and total electricity sales) are considered in the model. Virendra Ajodhia applied three DEA-based models to evaluate the relative performance of 20 electricity distribution firms from the UK and the Netherlands. The first model is a traditional DEA model for analyzing cost-only efficiency. The second model includes (inverse) quality by modelling total customer minutes lost as an input data. The third model is based on the idea of using total social costs, including the firm’s private costs and the interruption costs incurred by consumers, as an input. Both energy-delivered and number of consumers are treated as the outputs in the models. After five DEA papers, Stelios Grafakos, Alexandros Flamos, Vlasis Oikonomou, and D. Zevgolis presented a multiple criteria analysis weighting approach to evaluate the energy and climate policy. The proposed approach is akin to the analytic hierarchy process, which consists of pairwise comparisons, consistency verification, and criteria prioritization. In the approach, stakeholders and experts in the energy policy field are incorporated in the evaluation process by providing an interactive mean with verbal, numerical, and visual representation of their preferences. A total of 14 evaluation criteria were considered and classified into four objectives, such as climate change mitigation, energy effectiveness, socioeconomic, and competitiveness and technology. Finally, Borge Hess applied the stochastic frontier analysis approach to analyze the impact of various business strategies, including acquisition, holding structures, and joint ventures, on a firm’s efficiency within a sample of 47 natural gas transmission pipelines in the USA from 1996 to 2005. The author finds that there were no significant changes in the firm’s efficiency by an acquisition, and there is a weak evidence for efficiency improvements caused by the new shareholder. Besides, the author discovers that parent companies appear not to influence a subsidiary’s efficiency positively. In addition, the analysis shows a negative impact of a joint venture on technical efficiency of the pipeline company. To conclude, we are grateful to all the authors for their contribution, and all the reviewers for their constructive comments, which made this special issue possible. We hope that this issue would contribute significantly to performance improvement of the energy sector.

Genetic analysis of dyslexia candidate genes in the European cross-linguistic NeuroDys cohort

Dyslexia is one of the most common childhood disorders with a prevalence of around 5-10% in school-age children. Although an important genetic component is known to have a role in the aetiology of dyslexia, we are far from understanding the molecular mechanisms leading to the disorder. Several candidate genes have been implicated in dyslexia, including DYX1C1, DCDC2, KIAA0319, and the MRPL19/C2ORF3 locus, each with reports of both positive and no replications. We generated a European cross-linguistic sample of school-age children-the NeuroDys cohort-that includes more than 900 individuals with dyslexia, sampled with homogenous inclusion criteria across eight European countries, and a comparable number of controls. Here, we describe association analysis of the dyslexia candidate genes/locus in the NeuroDys cohort. We performed both case-control and quantitative association analyses of single markers and haplotypes previously reported to be dyslexia-associated. Although we observed association signals in samples from single countries, we did not find any marker or haplotype that was significantly associated with either case-control status or quantitative measurements of word-reading or spelling in the meta-analysis of all eight countries combined. Like in other neurocognitive disorders, our findings underline the need for larger sample sizes to validate possibly weak genetic effects. © 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved.

Collaborative design of assessment criteria to improve undergraduate student engagement and performance

Student engagement is vital in enhancing the student experience and encouraging deeper learning. Involving students in the design of assessment criteria is one way in which to increase student engagement. In 2011, a marking matrix was used at Aston University (UK) for logbook assessment (Group One) in a project-based learning module. The next cohort of students in 2012 (Group Two) were asked to collaboratively redesign the matrix and were given a questionnaire about the exercise. Group Two initially scored a lower average logbook mark than Group One. However, Group Two showed the greatest improvement between assessments, and the quality of, and commitment to, logbooks was noticeably improved. Student input resulted in a more defined, tougher mark scheme. However, this provided an improved feedback system that gave more scope for self-improvement. The majority of students found the exercise incorporated their ideas, enhanced their understanding, and was useful in itself.

Safety criteria for the private spaceflight industry

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) has set specific rules and generic guidelines to cover experimental and operational flights by industry forerunners such as Virgin Galactic and XCOR. One such guideline Advisory Circular (AC) 437.55-1[1] contains exemplar hazard analyses for spacecraft designers and operators to follow under an experimental permit. The FAA's rules and guidelines have also been ratified in a report to the United States Congress, Analysis of Human Space Flight Safety[2] which cites that the industry is too immature and has 'insufficient data' to be proscriptive and that 'defining a minimum set of criteria for human spaceflight service providers is potentially problematic' in order not to 'stifle the emerging industry'. The authors of this paper acknowledge the immaturity of the industry and discuss the problematic issues that Design Organisations and Operators now face.