An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework

International Journal of Production Economics

Volumn 182, Issue , 2016, Pages 144-156

  Dong, Qingxing ^a   Cooper, Orrin ^b  

^a CENTRAL CHINA NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

Author keywords

Orders of magnitude AHP (OM AHP); Risk assessment; Risk matrix; Supply chain risk management; The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; FORMAL METHODS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; RISK MANAGEMENT; RISKS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SUPPLY CHAINS;

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP); BUSINESS ENVIRONMENTS; ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE; RISK ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK; RISK MATRIX; SUPPLY CHAIN OPERATION; SUPPLY CHAIN RISK MANAGEMENT; TRADITIONAL ASSESSMENT;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84984601487     PISSN: 09255273     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.08.021     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Altay, N., Ramirez, A., Impact of disasters on firms in different sectors: implications for supply chains. J. Supply Chain Manag. 46 (2010), 59–80.
2. Amid, A., Ghodsypour, S.H., O'Brien, C., Fuzzy multiobjective linear model for supplier selection in a supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 104 (2006), 394–407.
3. Aqlan, F., Lam, S.S., A fuzzy-based integrated framework for supply chain risk assessment. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 161 (2015), 54–63.
4. Aqlan, F., Lam, S.S., Supply chain risk modelling and mitigation. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53 (2015), 5640–5656.
5. Arbel, A., A university budget problem: a priority-based approach. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 17 (1983), 181–189.
6. Bhutta, K.S., Huq, F., Supplier selection problem: a comparison of the total cost of ownership and analytic hierarchy process approaches. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 7 (2002), 126–135.
7. Chan, F.T.S., Chung, S.H., Multicriterion genetic optimization for due date assigned distribution network problems. Decis. Support Syst. 39 (2005), 661–675.
8. Chan, F.T.S., Kumar, N., Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega 35 (2007), 417–431.
9. Chan, F.T.S., Chung, S.H., Wadhwa, S., A hybrid genetic algorithm for production and distribution. Omega 33 (2005), 345–355.
10. Chemweno, P., Pintelon, L., Van Horenbeek, A., Muchiri, P., Development of a risk assessment selection methodology for asset maintenance decision making: an analytic network process (ANP) approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ., 2015.
11. Chopra, S., Sodhi, M.S., Managing risk to avoid supply-chain breakdown. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 46 (2004), 53–61.
12. Christopher, M., Lee, H., Mitigating supply chain risk through improved confidence. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 34 (2004), 388–396.
13. Dalkey, N., Helmer, O., An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag. Sci., 1963, 458–467.
14. Ellis, S.C., Shockley, J., Henry, R.M., Making sense of supply disruption risk research: a conceptual framework grounded in enactment theory. J. Supply Chain Manag. 47 (2011), 65–96.
15. Fang, C., Marle, F., A simulation-based risk network model for decision support in project risk management. Decis. Support Syst. 52 (2012), 635–644.
16. Gaudenzi, B., Borghesi, A., Managing risks in the supply chain using the AHP method. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 17 (2006), 114–136.
17. Hallikas, J., Lintukangas, K., Purchasing and supply: an investigation of risk management performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 171:Part 4 (2016), 487–494.
18. Hallikas, J., Karvonen, I., Pulkkinen, U., Virolainen, V.-M., Tuominen, M., Risk management processes in supplier networks. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 90 (2004), 47–58.
19. Harker, P.T., Shortening the comparison process in the AHP. Math. Model. 8 (1987), 139–141.
20. Ho, W., Zheng, T., Yildiz, H., Talluri, S., Supply chain risk management: a literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53 (2015), 5031–5069.
21. Hosseini Firouz, M., Ghadimi, N., Optimal preventive maintenance policy for electric power distribution systems based on the fuzzy AHP methods. Complexity, 2015 (n/a-n/a).
22. Hu, Y., 2013. Lack of skilled staff hindering growth, China Daily.
23. Kleindorfer, P.R., Saad, G.H., Managing disruption risks in supply chains. Prod. Oper. Manag. 14 (2005), 53–68.
24. Knemeyer, A.M., Zinn, W., Eroglu, C., Proactive planning for catastrophic events in supply chains. J. Oper. Manag. 27 (2009), 141–153.
25. Korpela, J., Lehmusvaara, A., Tuominen, M., An analytic approach to supply chain development. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 71 (2001), 145–155.
26. Korpela, J., Lehmusvaara, A., Tuominen, M., Customer service based design of the supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 69 (2001), 193–204.
27. Kou, G., Lin, C., A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 235 (2014), 225–232.
28. Kou, G., Ergu, D., Shang, J., Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: adapting Hadamard model to mitigate judgment contradiction. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 236 (2014), 261–271.
29. Kou, G., Peng, Y., Wang, G., Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial risk analysis using MCDM methods. Inf. Sci. 275 (2014), 1–12.
30. Kou, G., Lu, Y., Peng, Y., Shi, Y., Evaluation of classification algorithms using mcdm and rank correlation. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 11 (2012), 197–225.
31. Kouvelis, P., Dong, L., Boyabatli, O., Li, R., Integrated Risk Management: A Conceptual Framework with Research Overview and Applications in Practice, the Handbook of Integrated Risk Management in Global Supply Chains, 2011, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, 1–12.
32. Li, K., 2015. Report on the Work of the Government (2015). In: Council, S. (Ed.), 03-05.
33. Lipovetsky, S., Optimal hierarchy structures for multi-attribute-criteria decisions. J. Syst. Sci. Complex. 22 (2009), 228–242.
34. Manuj, I., Mentzer, J.T., Global supply chain risk management strategies. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 38 (2008), 192–223.
35. Mu, E., Carroll, J., Development of a fraud risk decision model for prioritizing fraud risk cases in manufacturing firms. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 173 (2016), 30–42.
36. Muralidharan, C., Anantharaman, N., Deshmukh, S., A multi-criteria group decisionmaking model for supplier rating. J. Supply Chain Manag. 38 (2002), 22–33.
37. Ozdemir, M.S., Validity and inconsistency in the analytic hierarchy process. Appl. Math. Comput. 161 (2005), 707–720.
38. Radivojević, G., Gajović, V., Supply chain risk modeling by AHP and Fuzzy AHP methods. J. Risk Res. 17 (2014), 337–352.
39. Rangel, D.A., de Oliveira, T.K., Leite, M.S.A., Supply chain risk classification: discussion and proposal. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53 (2015), 6868–6887.
40. Reuven, R., L., Using the analytic hierarchy process to rank foreign suppliers based on supply risks. Comput. Ind. Eng. 55 (2008), 535–542.
41. Ritchie, B., Brindley, C., An emergent framework for supply chain risk management and performance measurement. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 58 (2007), 1398–1411.
42. Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocaton. 1980, McGraw-Hill, NewYork.
43. Saaty, T.L., How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48 (1990), 9–26.
44. Saaty, T.L., Principia Mathematica Decernendi: Mathematical Principles of DecisionMaking. 2010, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
45. Saaty, T.L., Shang, J.S., An innovative orders-of-magnitude approach to AHP-based mutli-criteria decision making: prioritizing divergent intangible humane acts. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 214 (2011), 703–715.
46. Samvedi, A., Jain, V., Chan, F.T.S., Quantifying risks in a supply chain through integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51 (2013), 2433–2442.
47. Sarkis, J., Talluri, S., A model for strategic supplier selection. J. Supply Chain Manag. 38 (2002), 18–28.
48. Schoner, B., Wedley, W.C., 1989. Alternative Scales in AHP. In: Lockett, A.G., Islei, G. (Eds.), Improving Decision Making in Organisations: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making Held at Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, UK, August 21st–26th, 1988. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 345–354.
49. Sodhi, M.S., Son, B.-G., Tang, C.S., Researchers' Perspectives on supply chain risk management. Prod. Oper. Manag. 21 (2012), 1–13.
50. Tang, C.S., Perspectives in supply chain risk management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 103 (2006), 451–488.
51. Tang, O., Nurmaya Musa, S., Identifying risk issues and research advancements in supply chain risk management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 133 (2011), 25–34.
52. Tsai, W.H., Hung, S.-J., A fuzzy goal programming approach for green supply chain optimisation under activity-based costing and performance evaluation with a value-chain structure. Int. J. Prod. Res. 47 (2009), 4991–5017.
53. Tuncel, G., Alpan, G., Risk assessment and management for supply chain networks: a case study. Comput. Ind. 61 (2010), 250–259.
54. Wallenius, J., Dyer, J.S., Fishburn, P.C., Steuer, R.E., Zionts, S., Deb, K., Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: recent accomplishments and what Lies Ahead. Manag. Sci. 54 (2008), 1336–1349.
55. Wang, X., Chan, H.K., Yee, R.W., Diaz-Rainey, I., A two-stage fuzzy-AHP model for risk assessment of implementing green initiatives in the fashion supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 135:2 (2012), 595–606.
56. Wedley, W.C., Choo, E.U., Multi-criteria ratios: what is the unit?. J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal. 18 (2011), 161–171.
57. Wiengarten, F., Humphreys, P., Gimenez, C., McIvor, R., Risk, risk management practices, and the success of supply chain integration. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 171:Part 3 (2016), 361–370.
58. Wu, T., Blackhurst, J., Chidambaram, V., A model for inbound supply risk analysis. Comput. Ind. 57 (2006), 350–365.
59. Zhu, K., Cooper, O., Yang, S., Dong, Q., An extension of the AHP dummy pivot modeling applied to the restructuring of the iron and steel industry in China. Eng. Manag. IEEE Trans. 61 (2014), 370–380.