桃園創新學報 第三十三期

模糊多屬性分析應用於廠商之供應鏈敏捷性評估

3. Calculate the improvement degree (  ( X it ) ). The difference of each dimension can be

calculated by Eq. (9), as listed in Table 4, and thus dimension X3 has a maximum
positive value, and X3 is identified as the best direction for improvement, while
dimensions X5 and X1 rank second and third, respectively.

Table 4. The result of first-stage assessment

Agility dimension X1 X2 X3 X4 X5

(1) Importance
9 8 11 5 10
grade
(2) First-stage aggregated
8.1321 9.1373 8.5008 5.8859 7.9717
weighted rating
Improvement degree
＋0.8673 －1.1373 ＋2.4992 －0.8859 ＋2.0283
(1)－ (2)

Second-stage assessment calculations.

1. Aggregate X ( it ) and I ( it ) to yield the first-stage aggregated weighted rating ( IX ( it ) ).

Using Eq. (10) and letting μ= 0.5, the following results are thus obtained:

IX (1) = s8.5551, IX ( 2 ) = s8.5498, IX ( 3) = s9.67, IX ( 4 ) = s5.4295, IX ( 5) = s8.9284,

2. Aggregate IX ( it ) and I ( it ) to yield the degree of A-FSCA (D(FSCA)) and the importance
of A-FSCA (I(FSCA)), respectively. Using Eq. (11) and (12), the modified LOWGA
operator  Q2 guided by ‘most’ with its parameters (0.3. 0.8), and the algorithm for
calculating the W2* yields W2 = (0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.4, 0) T,  3 = 0.45, and W2* = (0.1620, 0.1791,
0.1980, 0.2189, 0.2420) T. The following assessment is then made:

D(FSCA) =  'most' (s8.5551, s8.5498, s9.67, s5.4249, s8.9284) = s7.8746 ,

I(FSCA) =  'most' (s9.441, s8.4371, s10.0738, s5.2221, s9.2289) = s8.0091 .

Therefore, s8.0091 and s7.8746 are the linguistic assessments for the importance and
degree of A-FSCA, respectively.

3. Calculate the improvement of A-FSCA (  (FSCA) ). Eq. (13) shows that a

226