AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PERTINENCE OF DECISION-MAKING

TECHNIQUES IN SUPPLIER SELECTION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

ABSTRACT
Due to its relevance in logistics and supply chain management (LSCM)., supplier selection
(SS) has received a massive attention in research. At least three important scholarly studies
have extensively analysed the SS literature. This appraisal intends to accentuate the
implementation of Decision-making techniques in supplier selection. Holding an embellished
courseware, SS has great felicity in the trial run of DM techniques. The main intent of this
study is to uncover the topmost concordant proposition imputing management and
sustainable directions. This study employs a systematic review approach, articles from year
2015 to 2020 warily selected and scrutinized within entrenched framework. DM techniques
erstwhile definitely integrated into the up growth of supplier selection. Therefore, a detailed
methodological decision analysis is imperative to define its novel development. This paper
carries four standpoints of this essential audit, unfolding decision problems, decision makers,
Decision environment and decision approaches. The selected articles for this certain review
are set on MCDM, MP and AI techniques. Despite of paying peculiar immersion to
favourable regulations that can prevail over future research in this domain, there are a few
limitations such as, ignoring conference papers and relying on a few systems.

Keywords: Decision making techniques, Supplier selection, multiple criteria, articles

elucidation, ambiguity, literature review

1) INTRODUCTION
Supplier selection is the route of action, which assists companies to determinate, estimate,
and originates conventions with suppliers. This avenue feels necessity for ample investments
and Human Corporation for any business. Prior modules also inquired into subtle
reinforcement of Decision-making techniques and underscored how decision- making
techniques can be pragmatic in SS, as it’s a fundamental part of trade in this very date.
However, this is the need of an hour to recognize the adaptations in this potency, so we could
have better perception that how the downfall or successful outcomes of business is swayed by
suppliers. From year 2015 to 2020 we have perceived the interrelation between Incorporating
fiscal assumptions in SS is revealed, instigating the LCSM (Logistic and supply chain

1
management). There are various scales for selecting the genuine suppliers for the businesses
such as traits of materials, fidelity, exactions, flexibility, confederacy and others. Moreover,
all the tactics of decision- making, applicable for supplier selection examined in this
systematic article profusely. A lot of new techniques, objectives and several approaches have
been conferring to supplier selection and decision- making.
In the past much work regarding this has been done notwithstanding, following few questions
still waiting for definite answers namely which decision-making techniques has been used
mostly in the management system? What are divisions of decision-making techniques? What
is the linkage among all the decision-making techniques? How to develop vague supplier
selection/ and what are the existing research modes for supplier selection?
This review considers published articles between 2015 and 2020, Peer reviewed articles and
conference articles are included the divergent articles are excluded after definitive screening
and extrication. Intention is not only to offer inclusive survey but also to dig up the refined
techniques and shifts. Paper exhaustively composed the literature correlated with the Labels
of, supplier selection, trader selection and decision-making. From pedagogic databases
including world scientific Net, science Direct, Emerald, IEEE Xplore, Academic search
premier, springer –link journals, and tried to detect resolutions of our questions. Furthermore,
the systematic review of article based on primarily four aspects 1-Decision environment, 2-
Decision approaches, 3- Decision problems and 4- Decision makers. These facets could be
check by inquisitive survey. In this study, it is also centric to inspect the relativity of
decision-making techniques with supplier selection and at which extent these techniques are
critical in supplier selection process. The utility of decision-making process for the supplier
selection is an afflictive realm for business entities operating in the Multinational markets for
making apt operational choices resulting in weightier efficiency. There was certain need to
calculate few rules with regard to decision makers. There is certain proportion of barriers too,
which are inarguably pivotal to disclose in this piece of research. In next segments, research
methodology (illustrating the schemes for selecting literature). A methodological decision
analysis pattern (to arrange the selected articles and eventually shapes a summary table).
Bottommost sections did enclose specified literature review on the DM techniques,
instructions for future works and conclusion is in last of all.

2) RESEARCH METHODOLGY

2
In this part, the main objective is to look over the applications of DM techniques in recent
research on SS. Hence, we elucidate the following conditions to limit our collection of
Articles.
 The searched articles are from renowned databases such as Elsevier’s Science
Direct, Academic Search Premier, IEEE Xplore, Emerald Insight, Hindawi,
Taylor & Francis Online, Science Direct, Springer Link, World Scientific Net, and
Google Scholar.
 Out of 120 collected articles, 41 identified as suitable for this review.
 Articles published between 2015 and 2020 have been selected for collecting data
about the decision making and supplier selection.
 Articles issued before 2015, excluded from this study. Therefore, details without
the depiction of decision- making not used in this review.
 The articles should base on the decision-making process and business
management.
 There must be some code words hinged on business management such as
decision- making, supplier selection, and vendor selection to make consistency in
topic.
 The articles should not be unpublished articles, textbook or any notes.
 The articles selected by giving considering to these conditions 1) uncertain and
certain decision-making issues 2) Structural, semi- Structural and Non- Structural
DM problems 3) group- involved and individual DM problems.
The reporting of different phases of this systematic review in the form of PRISMA flow
diagram mapping out the records identified, included, and excluded and the reason for
exclusion is in Fig2 and below this, Table 1 describes the List of Articles selected for this.

3
4
Identification(Fig1 Research methodology of this survey)
ARTICLES VIA DATABASES ARTICLES IDENTIFIED VIA Manual search
( IEEE XPLORE,EMERALD, OTHER SOURCES (GOOGLE
SCIENCE SCHOLAR, REASEARCH
DIRECT,HINDAWI ,SPRINGER
GATE) n=5
LINK,WORLD SCIENTIFIC
NET….)
n=27
n=88

Title screening
n=120

Screening

Records after Duplicates Zotero, Duplicate excluded

removed Endnote
n= 109 n=11

Records excluded
Records screened
n=88 n= 21

Eligibility

Full -text articles assessed for

eligibility
Full- text articles excluded
n= 71
n=17 Reasons

Inclusion
1. Being irrelevant to topic n=4
2. Repetitive publications n=2
3. Not an observational study n=5
Studies after Qualitative 4. Abstract opinions n=2
Synthesis 5. Decision making does not
n=41 concern ongoing business
management n=4

Fig2

5
 Table1.Articles selected for review

List of studies selected for systematic review

(Amir Hossein (Fikri Dwei.rSameer (Awasthi G. &., (Schünemann H.J,

Azadnia, 2015) Kumar, 2016) 2018) 2019)
(Adile Yesim Yayla, (Bingyi Kang, 2016) (D, 2018) (Brozek Chiu, 2020)
2015)

(Sharma, 2015) (Kannan Govindan, (Irwan, 2018) (Workman, 2020)

2016)
(yokabed (Bag, 2016) (Kuo-jen Hu, 2016) (Hsiu Mei Wang Chen,
Beikkhakhian, 2016)
2015)
(Xiaolu Zhang, (Qingxing Donga, (Zhang, 2018) (I dobos, 2018)
2015) 2016)

(Miao, 2015) (Awasthi A. G., 2017) (Yazdani, 2019) (yoon, 2018)

(Dweiri, 2016) (Govindan k. a., 2017) (Remenova, 2019) (Armando

Guarnaschelli, 2017)
(Govindan S. a., (Supansa Chaising, (Piccialli, 2019) (Chen, 2018)
2016) 2017)

(Sandeep Mondal, (Bimal Nepal, 2015) (Sawik, 2016) (Barker, 2016)

2016)

(Dong, 2017) (Lee, 2015) (Muhammad (ARUN KR, 2015)

Abdullahi, 2015)
(Mahdi Mahdiloo,
2015)

3) ANALYSIS OF METHODOLOGICAL DECISIONS

Here is a framework, consists of four aspects which serve as guide for analysis and will focus
on the application of decision-making techniques for supplier selection.

o Decision problems

6
 o Decision makers
o Decision environment
o Decision approaches

3.1 Decision Problems Analysis

Formulating an adequate and coherent decision for any company easier said than done.
Thereby, the decision-making process has particular stages and following those steps for
decision making, makers’ the procedure accessible. Howbeit there are some concerns of
decision makers. The problems revolve around Structural, Semi-Structural and non-
Structural DM problems. One of the major issues in the decision-making process is diverse
options for the decision maker (Yazdani, 2019) mainly, for the international business or
companies have abundant of suppliers and among them a few numbers of suppliers remain
favourable for the company. In this scenario, choosing a legitimate and accurate supplier for
the firm became challenging for the decision makers (Remenova, 2019). Aside from this, there
are risks for the company for instance, if the decision becomes wrong for the company, then
there would be catastrophic consequences. Due to this reason, a part of companies does not
have the aptitude to take risks and this is an axillary issue for the companies in the decision-
making process.

3.2 Environment of Decision Making

This review designates, the environment complication is the assertive issue that research is
attempting to resolve in the years 2015 to 2020. Decision making process is contingent on the
environment of the company. There are primarily three environments of decision making
such as risk, certainty and uncertainty. Occasionally, the companies of the international
market confront, risks of losing suppliers unavailability of the raw materials by suppliers and
that becomes a threat for the company (Sen, 2018)This is called the risk environment and the
companies have to make felicitous decisions for the company so that the company does not
have to face loss.
Apart from that, at times the companies take decisions about supplier selection for acquiring
all the goals and following the principles of the company. Likewise, sustainable suppliers are
affable for the development of the company (Piccialli, 2019) thereupon; called the certainty
environment for the decision-making process. On the contrary, the possible uncertainty of the
suppliers is the cause for decision-making. Subsequently titled as, uncertainty environment of

7
decision- making. The uncertain hybrid approaches could possibly control the practical
supplier selection Problems.
3b.3 Approaches for Decision Making
There are multiple approaches for the decision-making process but certain specific
approaches, prime for Decision Model are stated as Certainty Approach, , (Schünemann H.J,
2019) uncertainty Approach, (Workman, 2020), (Mishra, 2020).Problem seeking Approach,
(Zhang, 2018), and problem Solving Approach (D, 2018)
Suppliers are decisive for the global market in this age, because the suppliers provide the raw
materials and aid to deliver the products to the people of the other territories. Three
approaches for decision-making such as problem solving, avoiding and problem seeking
revised from the articles.

3.4 Decision Maker

Decision makers handle an Integral role in an organization for the Refinement in the global
market. All companies should have decision makers that have precise skills just as, problem
solving skills, technical skills, Knowledge about suppliers or process of DM and
comprehension about organization management. Decision maker takes the factual decision
for the company in any ambience (Dimara, 2021). The expansion of the economy of the
organization relies on the proper decision for several sectors of the organization. More than
that, the organizations must have several decision makers for numerous sectors of the
company since it helps to release the stress of the decision makers ( (Campbell, 2017).

And if we condense the DM techniques analysis, we would be able to comment that

convolutions have ability to possibly come from people’s verdicts, including choosing
proficient analysts (personnel selection): combining information from non-identical sources
(information integration): conforming different or clashing ideas of Decision makers (group
conciliation); and inducing decision makers’ apprehension that can be rather cryptic,
compromised, and corporeal.

4) SYNOPSIS OF INDEPENDENT DM TECHNIQUES

This section is all about layouts of DM techniques into three categories depend on our
dissection
 Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques (MCDM)
 Mathematical Programming Techniques (MP)

8
  Artificial Intelligence Techniques (AI)
It is eminent to bring a statement that nearly all the techniques in (Junyi Chai,
2013) are operating until now, although others are brush aside; specific unusual techniques
also appeared in spell of 2015 to 2020. Howbeit these afore mentioned three forms of
techniques, be a number of individual approaches division. Seeing that discrete types of DM
techniques have implied by the decision makers in different state of affair (Brozek, 2020)
Present survey has one illustrative Article for each absolute DM technique. Viewers
can discover the classic practice of these techniques in the cognate Articles.
4.1 Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques
MCDM is a sort of contextual substructure that points to display well-informed endorsement
about substitution to Decision makers. In the literature, MCDM considered as obstacle of SS.
In consequence of that, a diverse amount of symmetrical MCDM techniques has been
engaging in problem solving actions. MCDM additionally has four groups labelled as
1) Multi attribute utility Methods such as AHP and ANP (Dweiri, 2016)
2) Outranking methods such as Elimination and choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE)
and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation
(PROMETHEE),
3) 3) Compromise Methods such as Techniques for order Performance by similarity to
ideal solution (TOPSIS) (yokabed Beikkhakhian, 2015) and Multi-Criteria
optimization and compromise solution VIKOR (Awasthi G. &., 2018) and
4) 4) other MCDM techniques essentially SMART and DEMATEL
Until 2013, AHP and ANP were presiding techniques but in after 2015 the integrated fuzzy
AHP and ANP techniques set off preferable too. (Lee, 2015)

4.1.1. Multi-Attribute Utility Methods

An approach, commonly give out a rate to each substitution respectively, being an assessable
rendition of proclivity. AHP and ANP are two symbols of this system. ANP is just an
expansion of AHP. Both are two utmost frequent hunks of DM techniques that account for
contemporary decision approaches for SS. The articles for detail of MAUM can investigate
from articles, (Adile Yesim Yayla, 2015) and (Irwan, 2018)
4.1.2. Out Ranking Methods
ELECTRE and PROMETHEE are two offshoots of this method, that make use of binate
association through delicate inclination, such as ‘as least as ‘and ‘as good as’. Procedure of

9
ELECTRE works on unequivocal preferences links when in fact PROMETHEE accelerates
ELECTRE. (Govindan k. a., 2017)
Point to be note here that ELECTRE not turned up after 2013, but one more method
QUALIFLEX reputed as new out ranking method. (Xiaolu Zhang, 2015)

4.1.3. Compromised Methods

If there is any alternative to ideal solution it should called as compromised solution and this is
the very base of this method. A compromise typifies an accord on the premise of
modification. While model tries to compromise programming methods, both TOPSIS and
VIKOR grounded on an assemblage task that acts for adjacency to the supreme solution. The
contrast is that TOPSIS utilize linear normalisation and on the other hand VIKOR (Awasthi
G. &., 2018) uses vector normalisation.it is much easier to establish TOPSIS formulation and
smooth to integrate into a devious SS process. (yokabed Beikkhakhian, 2015)

4.1.4. Other MCDM Methods

SMART and DEMATEL are rudimentary ranking techniques, adopt the simple additive
weight method to secure entire values as the ranking marker. Quantitative and qualitative
standards are possible to hold through this approach, but cannot handle undetermined
decision. DEMATEL is a organizational model for pursuing the noteworthy relation amid
compound formula, and a portion of integration. (Govindan S. a., 2016)
The use of SMART is not included in our consideration.

4.2 Mathematical Programming Techniques (MP)

MP is an extensive cast round in Decision-making. Moreover, is particular upsurge

technique. Wallenius et al. 2018 put forward its two major category namely as discrete
alternative and optimization problems with multiple criteria. It has further two supplemental
branches
1. Basic and independent MP techniques
2. Mixed integer programming

1. Basic and independent MP techniques

There are six basic independent MP techniques named as 1) Data envelopment analysis DEA
2) Linear programming LP 3) Goal programming GP 4) Stochastic programming SP.

10
Let us probe the brief detail of all these MP techniques. DEA is for estimating the respective
regulation of approximate units. (I dobos, 2018)
LP is the next root in basic and independent MP techniques, route for resolving a way to get
the outstanding upshot in a mathematical linear problem. It has following types 1. The
simple LP employment, 2. The Fuzzy LP, 3. The multi-objective LP, and 4. The mixed
Integer LP (Irwan, 2018)
Goal Programming GP is a branch of optimization mode. This technique is observed as an
development of MOLP to look at adverse impartial meter. (Armando Guarnaschelli, 2017)
Stochastic Programming SP is a shell for creating unpredictable optimization troubles in
which viable assortments ruling the figures are well known. This technique is worthy as
mathematical mechanism for sorting multiplex existent SS knots. (yoon, 2018)

2. Mixed integer programming

There are five Mixed MP techniques. Since innumerable years these techniques have been
employing for contrasting causes like for individualistic applications, and to conceal liable
elements, in the backdrop of reliant vectors, for ambiguity, for green supplier selection and to
regulate deleterious plans etc.
These mixed integer programming techniques titled as Mixed integer linear programming,
(Chen, 2018) Mixed integer nonlinear programming, Stochastic mixed integer programming,
Multi objective mixed integer linear/nonlinear programming and Multi objective stochastic
mixed integer programming (Sawik, 2016)

4.3 Artificial Intelligence Techniques (AI)

The Artificial Intelligence is getting bigger in the multiracial level gradually. It cooperates to
compel resoluteness for almost twelve zones of different corporations. Few sectors are Grey
System Theory GST, Bayesian Networks BN, Neural Networks NN, Genetic Algorithm GA
Decisions tree DT, Rough Set theory RST, Support vector machine SVM. In Addition to that,
AI techniques need the decision maker with accurate apprehension of technology and other
required skills.
In this review major and minor AI techniques such as BN, GST, GA, DT, and SVM. These
techniques can be found in articles (Barker, 2016) , (Sandeep Mondal, 2016), (Bimal Nepal,
2015).

One key point is significant to note here that after 2013 the complications of uncertainty have
more inclined towards risk factors than uncertainty. Almost Half of the articles contemplate

11
 about imperil factors, which can be rightly divided into two parts first one is about risk in
manufacturing, including obstructions in quality products or apparatus dereliction. Second
arbitrary unsettling threats are from natural reasons for example sudden industrial action,
supplier’s insolvency or any kind of violent intimidation (yoon, 2018)
In Next sections of this review, there is a summarized form of the DM techniques used in
supplier selections and the prominent attributes of all the DM approaches in selected years
with their literature reviews. Supplier selection is an application terrain, its progress relies
firmly on the development of generic strategies, so this summarised form provides beneficial
knowledge on current studies

These all techniques referred as individual approaches and along these another new form is
also approaching called as emerging techniques and this is the highlight of this survey that
many new techniques like QFD, MCM, MS, MCS and TBL are making their place in global
market. From these techniques, QFD is most commonly used and it can integrate with AHP
too. All these have enough potential to be a component of decision- making integration for
structural and non-structural Supplier selection as a part of sustainable operations, so over all
Every DM technique is mandatory in social development and in protection of environment
and economics for the right causes.

Supplier selection
approaches

Method of
MCDM MP AI Combined
prequalification of Fuzzy Logics
Fig3 ()
supplier Techniques Techniques Techniques Techniques

DEA AHP LP ANN AHP+ANN MOL+LP

ANP MOLP

TOPSIS GP AHP + ANP

Table2 the summarization of the used DM techniques

The used DM techniques Literature Features or
resources usage
MCDM techniques Multi attribute AHP Integrated fuzzy
utility method (Awasthi G. &., with AHP
2018), Considering
(Dong, 2017), decision group

12
 Expert choice
(Fikri software
Dwei.rSameer Certainty in SS
Kumar, 2016), Certainty usage
(Brozek Chiu, Integrated fuzzy
2020),
TOPSIS with AHP
(Schünemann H.J,
Seeking certainty
2019), (Lee,
approach
2015),
Fuzzy
(Adile Yesim
TOPSIS+AHP
Yayla, 2015)
Integrated AHP
(Amir Hossein
with LP
Azadnia, 2015),
(Irwan, 2018),
(Qingxing Donga,
2016)

ANP (Muhammad Integrated

Abdullahi, DEMATEL with
2015), ANP
(Govindan S. a., Integrated fuzzy
2016), Delphi with
DEMATEL ANP
(Chen, 2018)
Problem seeking
Approach
Out Ranking PROMETHEE (Govindan k. a., Using linear
Method 2017) programming
QUALIFLEX (Xiaolu Zhang, Considers hesitant
2015) fuzzy elements
Compromise TOPSIS (Beikkhakhian, Fuzzy
Method 2015) (Adile TOPSIS+AHP
Yesim Yayla,
2015)
VIKOR (Qingxing Integrated fuzzy
Donga, 2016), AHP with
(Awasthi G. &., VIKOR
2018)
Other DEMATE (Govindan S. Using ANP and
Methods a., 2016), PROMTHEE
(Muhammad
Abdullahi, 2015)

Mathematical Basic LP (ARUN KR, Building supply

programming MP Independent 2015), (ARUN KR, base Integrated
2015), (Irwan, AHP with LP
Techniques Techniques 2018) ,
SP (Mishra, 2020) , Typical linear
(yoon, 2018) programming
usage
Integrated AHP
with SP
GP (Kuo-jen Hu, Integrated a voting
2016) method with GP
(Armando Using
Guarnaschelli, lexicographic goal
2017) programming

DEA (Zhang, 2018) , Multi objective

(Mahdi Mahdiloo, usage

13
 Typical usage of
DEA
(I dobos, 2018)

Mixed MILP (cunha A, 2018) Typical usage of

programming , (Chen, 2018) MILP

MINLP (Mondal, 2016) Typical usage if

MINLP
MILP+SP (Sawik, 2016) Considering
Uncertainty and
Risk
MILP+MOP (Bruna mota, Life Cycle
2018) Analysis
MINLP+MOP (Dincer konur, considering green
2017) SS
MIP+MOP+SP (Sawik, 2016) considering Risk
factors
Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques BN (Sandeep Considering Risk
Mondal, 2016) Factors
(Barker, 2016)
SVM (Sandeep Self -organizing
Mondal, 2016) map
GA (Bimal Nepal, Problem seeking
2015) Approach
GST (Seyed Hamid Considering Fuzzy
Hashmi, 2015) elements
DT (Mellat, 2017) Integrated DT with
(Bimal Nepal, BN
2015)

5. SOME OBSERVATION REMARKS

5.1) preferred Journals

We have seen that Decision-making techniques are obligatory in collecting suppliers, to

initiate the indubitable benchmark and to elect professional decision makers. Over time the
complexity of supplier selection has significantly increased, many new techniques are
appearing, the regular methods have been followed by new techniques which embrace the
integration of existing methods to decode real world supplier selection problems. In this
review of over 40 articles utilizing various supplier selection approaches from 2015 to 2020.
It is finding out that some articles suggested individual and integrated methods in supplier
selection process. The paper identified that MCDM, MP. In addition, AI is most used
approaches in supplier selection. Relevant Articles collected from seven different journals.
For instance, international journal of Production Research has more than 15 articles related to
this subject in this review and other prominent journals were Expert system with
Applications, carrying around 10 articles of Decision- making techniques, and Omega with

14
eight articles. Journals like International journal of Economics, journal of Supply Chain
Management, IEEE transactions on Engineering Management and journal of Logistic systems
and Management also played an influential role in execution of this paper.

5.2 Evaluating trendy DM technique

According to this survey, the enormous number of articles was seeking to form collective
techniques into a worthwhile model to drive knots like mass conglomeration, unsure details,
etc. Table 2 indicates that MCDM specifically AHP is most used technique in supplier
selection followed by ANP and LP. The AHP technique observed in almost 10 articles in this
review and can be used in certainty environments, uncertainty environments etc. Recently
AHP and ANP becomes module of hybridization too. The reason for the popularity of AHP
and ANP is their ingrained nature. These are appropriate instruments for independent usage
in SS system. We can also find fuzzy versions towards most of the independent DM
techniques. Fig 5 shows the statistical analysis of most popular DM techniques in supplier
selection.

Fig5

5.3) Research Limitations and challenges

15
 To be added
6. CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable knowledge accumulation of status of DM techniques in supplier

selection from year 2015 to 2020. We found out that There were three major perspectives
regarding this MCDM, MP and AI and these years were also modified by many other popular
integrated approaches too. AHP was most used technique and many articles have findings
about it. In traditional researches the scope of integrated techniques was not in trend but in
recent years it’s a trend to use these kinds of trends, as it’s necessary for global market to talk
about risk factors and uncertainty.
Up to 41 Articles (from different databases and journals) collected for this detailed
systematic review to discuss more than 20 different techniques in SS in varied circumstances.
A little slot is even so on deck for future ventures as Inquisitors can outstretch methodology
formula to gain maximal aptness, Moreover, an extra disquisition with tremendous constancy
can be achieved in particular Emphasizing on comprehension of higher quality how explicit
strategies bring variety to one and all. Future work can also have this focal point on the
scrutiny of the Supplier selection patterns in an outright line of field Last but not least,
because of emergent tendencies in supplier selection, surplus investigation is also
recommended to enumerate the advancing supplier selection directives.

7. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

References
Adile Yesim Yayla, A. O. (2015). : A hybrid data analytic methodology for 3PL transportation
provider evaluation using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. International journal of
production Research, 53(20), 6097-6113.
Amir Hossein Azadnia, M. Z. (2015). Sustainable supplier selection and order lot-sizing: an
integrated multi-objective decision-making process. International journal of
Production Research, 53(2), 383-408.
Armando Guarnaschelli, C. M. (2017). An approach to export process managment in a wood
product enterprise. International journal of production, 190, 88-95.
ARUN KR, P. (2015). INVENTTORY LOT SIZING WITH SUPPLIER SELECTION UNDER
NON STATIONARY STOCHASTIC DEMAND. International journal of production
Research, 4(1), 123-654.
Awasthi, A. G. (2017). Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-
VIKOR based approach.
Awasthi, G. &. (2018). Multi tier sustainableglobal supplier selection using a Fuzzy AHP-
VIKOR based approach. international journal of production Economics, 195, 106-
117.
Bag, S. (2016). Service supplier selection using analytic hierarchy process. Journal of
Supply chain Managment , Vol. 5(3), 9-16.

16
Barker, H. (2016). A bayesian network model for resilience based supplier selection.
International Journal of production Economics, 180, 68-87.
Beikkhakhian. (2015). The application of ISM model in evaluating agile suppliers selection
criteria and ranking suppliers using fuzzy TOPSIS.
Bimal Nepal, y. (2015). Bayesian belief network based framework for sourcing risk analysis
during supplier selection. International Journal of Production Research, 53(20), 6114-
6135.
Bingyi Kang, Y. H. (2016). A New Methodology of Multicriteria Decision-Making In Supplier
Selection. Supply cHAIN mANAGMENT, 68-81.

Brozek Chiu, G. (2020). Approaching the approach to assessing the Certainity of moddled
evidence. International journal of Production Research, 90-107.
Bruna mota, G. (2018). sustainable supply chains an integrated modelling approach under
uncertainity. Omega, 77, 32-57.

Chen, L. W. (2018). cordinating,supplier selectionand project scheduling in

rsourceconstrained construction supply chain. International journal of production
Research , 95, 1-15.
cunha A, L. S. (2018). an integrated approach for production lot sizing and raw material
purchasing. European journal of Operational Research, 269(3), 923-938.
D, B. (2018). CSR stakeholders and complexity seeking certainity in decision making in the
goals of sustainable develpment. International journal of Production Research, 55-76.

Dincer konur, j. c. (2017). Economic and envirnmental considerations in a stochastic

inventory contro model with order splitting under different delivery schedules among
suppliers. Omega, 71, 46-65.
Dong, Q. Z. (2017). Gaining consensus in a moderated group; A model with a two fold
feedback mechanism. Expert system with applications, 71, 87- 97.
Dweiri, k. k. (2016). Designing an integrated AHP based decision support system for supplier
selection in automotive industry .
Fikri Dwei.rSameer Kumar, S. A. (2016). Designing an integrated AHP based decision
support system forsupplier selection in automotive industry. Expert systems with
Applications, 62, 273-283.
Govindan, k. a. (2017). Aplication of novel PROMETHEE based method for construction of a
group compromise ranking to prioritization of green suppliers in food supply chain.
Omega, 71, 129-145.
Govindan, S. a. (2016). supplier selection based on coperate social responsibility practices.
International journal of production Economics, 2oo, 353-379.
Hsiu Mei Wang Chen, 1. S.-Y.-K. (2016). A Fuzzy MCDM Approach for Green
SupplierSelection from the Economic and Environmental Aspect. Supply chain
Managment, 40-98.
I dobos, G. v. (2018). Inventory -related costs in green supplier selection problems with data
envelopment analysis DEA. Internation journal of Economics, 209, 374-380.
Irwan, A. J. (2018). A combined supply chain optimisation model for the installation phase of
offshore wind projects. International journal of production, 56(3), 1189-1207.
Junyi Chai, J. N. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A
systematic review of literature.

17
Kannan Govindan, M. K. (2016). Application of a novel PROMETHEE-based method
forconstruction of a group.

Kuo-jen Hu, V. F. (2016). An integrated approach for the electronic contract manufacturer
selection problem. Omega, 62, 68-81.
Lee, c. K. (2015). Assessing business Impacts of aligibility critarion and order allocation
strategy in multi-Criteria supplier selection. Exoert systems with Applications, 42,
1136-1148.
Mahdi Mahdiloo, K.-H. L. (2015). technical, envirnmental and eco efficiency measurement
for supplier selection: an extesion and application of data envelpment analysis.
International journal of production Economics, 168, 279-289.
Mellat, M. (2017). an assesment of supply chain disruption mitigation strategies.
International journal of Production Economics, 184, 210-230.
Miao, C. S. (2015). Collaborative Decision-Making Method. International journal of
Economics.
Mishra, A. a. (2020). A minimax Regret approach to decision making under uncertainity.
Omega, 71(3), 698-718.
Mondal, T. (2016). Dynamic supplier selection model under two echelon supply network.
Expert system with Applications, 65, 255-270.
Muhammad Abdullahi, J. R. (2015). An integrated approach for supplier portfolio selection.
Expert systems with App[lications, 42(1), 679-690.

Piccialli, c. (2019). Decision making in Iot environment through unsupervised learning. IEEE
intelligent Systems, 35(1), 27-35.
Qingxing Donga, K. Z. (2016). Gaining consensus in a moderated group: A model with a
twofold feedback mechanism. Expert system with Applications, 71, 87-97.
Remenova, K. (2019). HOW SUCCESSFULLY CAN DECISION-MAKING STYLE PREDICT
THE ORIENTATION TOWARD WELL- OR ILL-STRUCTURED DECISION-MAKING
PROBLEMS. journal of competitiveness, 11(1), 99-115.
Sandeep Mondal, m. (2016). A neural feature extraction model for classification of firms and
prediction of outsourcing sucess, advantage of using relational sources of information
for new suppliers. International Journal of Production Research, 54(20), 6071-6081.
Sawik, T. (2016). integrated supply, production and distribution scheduling under disaruption
risks. Omega, 62, 131-144.
Schünemann H.J, H. (2019). Grading Method group and the Statistical MethoD Group.
Omega, 375-402.

Seyed Hamid Hashmi, A. K. (2015). An integrated green supplier selection approach with
analytic network process and improved grey relation analysis. International journal of
Economics, 159, 178-191.
Sharma, V. Y. (2015). "Multi-criteria decision making for supplier selection using fuzzy AHP
approach",. Expert systems with Applications, 27, 46-75.
Supansa Chaising, P. T. (2017). Application of a Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Approach for Selecting of Raw Material Supplier for Small and Medium Enterprises.
ICDAMT.

18
Xiaolu Zhang, Z. X. (2015). Hesitant fuzzy QUALIFLEX approach with a signed distance
based comparison method for multiple criteria decision analysis. Expert systems with
Applications, 42(2), 873-884.
XinyangDenga, Y. Y. (2014). Supplier selection using AHP methodology extended by D
numbers.
Yazdani, p. z. (2019). A combined compromise solution method for multi- critaria decision
making problems. Managment Decision , 57(9).
yokabed Beikkhakhian, B. K. (2015). THE Application of ISM model in evaluating agile
suppliers selection criteria and ranking suppliers using Fuzzy Topsis- AHP methods.
Expert systems of Applications, 42(15-16), 6224-6236.
yoon, Y. T. (2018). Models for supplier selection and risk mitigation; a holistic approach.
Internation journal of Production Research, 56(10), 3636-3661.
Zhang, C. (2018). Experience capitalization to support deciion making in inventive problem
solving. omega, 25-40.

19