IMC UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES KREMS

THUONG MAI UNIVERSITY

*****
Revolutionizing Supplier Selection: A
Computational and Data-Driven Approach

Class: Computational Thinking

Members: Le Luong Lan Anh
Nguyen Ngoc Quang
Do Minh Trang
Dinh Thi Ha Vi
1. Introduction:
1
In the dynamic sphere of technology manufacturing, the viability of our small business
pivots on the adept assimilation of pioneering components and materials into our product
line. As an enterprise specializing in cutting-edge technology, the efficacy of our supply
chain is a critical determinant of our competitiveness within the market. At the nexus of
this supply chain resides our association with suppliers, an integral partnership tasked
with furnishing the indispensable components and materials requisite for our
manufacturing endeavors.

However, a discerning examination of our extant supplier selection process has brought
to light glaring inefficiencies and antiquated methodologies that impede operational
agility. The prevailing system, grounded in conventional decision-making paradigms,
lacks the nimbleness and precision mandated by the fluid nature of our industry.
Acknowledging the imperative for reform, our organization has embarked on a
transformative initiative to overhaul our supplier selection process.

The exigency for revising our operational modus operandi is accentuated by the inherent
limitations of our extant approach. Manual evaluations, subjective decision criteria, and
the absence of systematic data analysis have resulted in suboptimal supplier selections,
precipitating delays, cost overruns, and compromised product quality. In an industry
characterized by rapid technological evolution, such inefficiencies not only imperil our
fiscal standing but also jeopardize our capacity to introduce state-of-the-art products to
the market expeditiously.

Against this backdrop, our commitment to embracing a data-driven decision-making

approach stands resolute as the linchpin of our reimagined supplier selection process.
Acknowledging the transformative potential of computational thinking in augmenting
decision-making processes, our objective is to harness its constituent elements—
Decomposition, Pattern Recognition, Abstraction, and Algorithmic Thinking—to refine
and optimize our supplier selection protocols. This strategic pivot toward data-driven
decision-making is not merely a technological augmentation but a paradigmatic shift that
reflects our dedication to operational excellence and perpetual competitiveness in the
dynamic landscape of the technology sector.

In the ensuing sections of this research exposition, we shall delve into the intricacies of
our data-driven decision-making model. This will encompass an exploration of the
2
cardinal tenets of computational thinking, an elucidation of the criteria paramount for
supplier evaluation, the formulation of an algorithm designed to operationalize our
decision-making process, and a practical demonstration of its application. Through this
comprehensive endeavor, our aspiration is to rectify the deficiencies inherent in our
current supplier selection process and establish a resilient and agile framework that
positions our organization at the vanguard of technological innovation.

As we embark on this transformative trajectory, the import of embracing a data-driven

decision-making approach cannot be overstated. It transcends a mere procedural
refinement; rather, it constitutes a strategic imperative—one that will delineate our
pursuit of operational excellence, fortify our competitive standing, and propel our small
business into a future where adaptability and efficiency reign supreme.

2. Utilizing Computational Thinking:

In the pursuit of operational excellence and the reformation of our supplier selection
process, we acknowledge the indispensable role of Computational Thinking (CT) as a
guiding framework. CT comprises four pivotal components: Decomposition, Pattern
Recognition, Abstraction, and Algorithmic Thinking. Each constituent contributes to a
comprehensive approach that facilitates the design of a robust and efficient decision-
making process for supplier selection.

2.1 Decomposition:

Decomposition involves the systematic breakdown of intricate problems into smaller,

more manageable sub-problems. In the context of supplier selection, this necessitates the
deconstruction of the multifaceted decision-making process into discrete elements. We
will meticulously analyze the various facets of supplier evaluation, including cost,
quality, reliability, delivery time, and other pertinent criteria. By methodically
deconstructing the decision process, we can address each criterion independently,
affording a more granular and precise assessment of potential suppliers (Wing, 2006).

2.2 Pattern Recognition:

3
Pattern Recognition entails the identification of trends, regularities, or similarities within
data. In supplier selection, discerning patterns within historical supplier performance data
can yield valuable insights. Through the analysis of past interactions, we can identify
patterns related to on-time delivery, consistency in product quality, and adherence to cost
estimates. Recognition of these patterns enables informed predictions about future
supplier behavior, thereby enhancing the decision-making process (Bundy et al., 2007).

2.3 Abstraction:

Abstraction involves simplifying complex systems by focusing on essential details while

disregarding irrelevant information. In the context of supplier selection, abstraction will
enable us to distill the critical aspects of each supplier's performance. By abstracting from
intricacies, we can create a streamlined evaluation process that prioritizes the most
pertinent information, such as cost-effectiveness and adherence to delivery schedules,
leading to more informed and efficient decision-making (Wing, 2006).

2.4 Algorithmic Thinking:

Algorithmic Thinking entails the formulation of a step-by-step solution to a problem. In

the supplier selection process, algorithmic thinking will be applied to craft a systematic
and reproducible decision-making algorithm. This algorithm will consider the weighted
evaluation of supplier criteria, facilitating an objective and consistent approach to
supplier selection. The algorithm will be designed to adapt to changing business
requirements, ensuring its relevance in dynamic market conditions (Wing, 2008).

Through the integration of these components of Computational Thinking into the design
of our decision process, we aim to cultivate a systematic and data-driven approach to
supplier selection. This not only enhances the efficiency and accuracy of our decision-
making but also positions our organization to adapt and thrive in the ever-evolving
landscape of technology manufacturing.

3. Supplier Evaluation Criteria:

4
In crafting a robust and nuanced supplier selection process, the success of our endeavor
hinges on the careful consideration of distinct criteria that collectively influence the
reliability and performance of potential suppliers. To this end, we have identified and
prioritized ten pivotal criteria, each serving a unique role in the evaluation and
comparison of suppliers. In the pursuit of transparency and objectivity, we've assigned a
rating scale ranging from 1 to 5 to each criterion, with 5 indicating the highest level of
fulfillment.

 Cost (Rating Scale: 5):

- The financial aspect is of utmost importance, assessing the competitiveness of a
supplier's pricing structure encompassing both product cost and associated fees.

 Quality (Rating Scale: 5):

- Unwavering commitment to product quality is paramount, ensuring that potential
suppliers consistently meet our stringent quality standards.

 Reliability (Rating Scale: 5):

- Timely deliveries, order fulfillment, and overall dependability are scrutinized under
this criterion, given the critical role of reliability in our operational efficiency.

 Delivery Time (Rating Scale: 4):

- The efficiency of a supplier's delivery processes is evaluated, recognizing the direct
impact on our ability to meet market demands promptly.

 Flexibility (Rating Scale: 4):

- In the face of dynamic market conditions, the ability of a supplier to adapt to changes,
whether in demand or design, is assessed under this criterion.

 Communication (Rating Scale: 4):

- Effective and transparent communication practices, coupled with responsiveness, are
crucial factors evaluated to ensure a smooth collaboration.

 Innovation Capability (Rating Scale: 4):

- Given the nature of our industry, this criterion assesses a supplier's ability to
contribute innovative solutions, be it in product design, manufacturing processes, or
technological advancements.

 Ethical Practices (Rating Scale: 3):

- Upholding ethical standards is a non-negotiable consideration, encompassing aspects
such as labor conditions, environmental responsibility, and commitment to fair trade.

 Financial Stability (Rating Scale: 3):

5
 - Financial stability is pivotal in assessing a supplier's ability to meet contractual
obligations, with this criterion scrutinizing the supplier's overall financial health.

 Scalability (Rating Scale: 3):

- In anticipation of business growth, scalability is evaluated to ensure that suppliers can
seamlessly expand their operations in line with increasing demands without
compromising quality or efficiency.

By systematically applying these criteria and judiciously assigning scores based on the
established rating scale, our objective is to institute an impartial and all-encompassing
framework for supplier selection. This approach ensures that our choices align
strategically with the overarching goals and values of our organization.

4. Algorithm Design:

Our data-driven decision-making process for supplier selection is designed to be

systematic, transparent, and adaptable to the dynamic nature of the technology
manufacturing landscape. The algorithm, outlined below, incorporates Computational
Thinking principles—Decomposition, Pattern Recognition, Abstraction, and Algorithmic
Thinking—to ensure a comprehensive and efficient decision-making process.

4.1. Flowchart:

Start

Pattern
Decomposition Recognition Abstration

Algorithmic Criteria Weighted

Thinking Evaluation Scoring

End End

 Flowchart Description:

6
 - Start: Initiates the decision-making process.
- Decomposition: Break down the supplier evaluation process into distinct criteria
(Cost, Quality, Reliability, etc.).
- Pattern Recognition: Identifies patterns within historical supplier performance
data.
- Abstraction: Simplifies complex supplier information, focusing on critical details.
- Algorithmic Thinking: Formulates a step-by-step approach for evaluating
suppliers.
- Criteria Evaluation: Applies the predefined rating scale to evaluate each supplier
against the established criteria.
- Weighted Scoring: Assigns weights to each criterion based on its importance.
- Calculate Total Score: Computes the total score for each supplier based on the
weighted criteria evaluations.
- Rank Suppliers: Ranks suppliers based on their total scores.
- Select Top Supplier: Identifies and selects the top-ranked supplier for further
consideration.
- End: Concludes the decision-making process.

5. Manual Execution Example:

6. Python Code:

7. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS): Crafting a Roadmap for Supplier

Selection Excellence

In the intricate landscape of technology manufacturing, the quest for operational

excellence is often anchored in the meticulous selection of suppliers. The blueprint for
this process lies in a well-structured Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), which serves as
a guide, dissecting the project into manageable components. This essay delineates the
tasks and subtasks encapsulated in our WBS for implementing an enhanced supplier
selection process.

 Project Initiation: Setting the Foundation for Success

The journey commences with project initiation, where objectives are meticulously
defined, and the project team is strategically assembled. Simultaneously, a timeline is
crafted, and stakeholders are thoroughly analyzed to ensure alignment with overarching
goals.

 Research and Analysis: The Keystone of Informed Decision-Making

The second phase delves into a comprehensive review of the current supplier selection
process. This involves documenting existing steps and identifying areas of weakness,
7
paving the way for improvement. Concurrently, industry best practices become the focal
point, as we explore data-driven decision-making models and scrutinize supplier
evaluation criteria within the realm of technology manufacturing. (Schwalbe, 2018)
(Klastorin, 2009)

 Computational Thinking Integration: Fusing Logic and Innovation

With a foundational understanding in place, the third segment immerses the project team
in computational thinking principles. This involves a systematic mapping of these
components—Decomposition, Pattern Recognition, Abstraction, and Algorithmic
Thinking—onto the decision-making process. The team is equipped to apply these
principles to supplier evaluation criteria, thereby enhancing the precision and efficiency
of the process (McConnell, 2006).

 Criteria Definition: Precision in Evaluation

Moving forward, the criteria for supplier evaluation are meticulously defined, considering
factors like cost, quality, reliability, and more. We collaboratively assign weights to these
criteria, engaging cross-functional teams and conducting in-depth analyses to ascertain
their relative importance.

 Algorithm Design: Precision in Action

The algorithm design phase encapsulates the development of the decision-making

algorithm, manifested in a meticulously crafted flowchart and pseudocode. This blueprint
serves as a guide for the subsequent stages, ensuring a systematic and transparent
approach to supplier selection.

 Testing and Validation: Ensuring Reliability

Before implementation, a stringent testing and validation process is undertaken. Test

cases are defined, and the algorithm is executed with representative data. This phase aims
to verify the computational thinking components' application and validate the accuracy of
the algorithm.

 Implementation: Bridging Theory and Practice

As the algorithm is seamlessly integrated into the supplier selection process, user
documentation becomes imperative. Training materials for end-users and a reference
guide for algorithm utilization are meticulously developed to facilitate a smooth
transition.

8
  Pilot Testing: A Real-world Litmus Test

A subset of suppliers becomes the focus as the algorithm undergoes a real-world pilot
test. Supplier selection outcomes are rigorously monitored and evaluated, accompanied
by valuable feedback from end-users.

 Optimization: Nurturing Continuous Improvement

Analysis of pilot test results paves the way for optimization. The algorithm's parameters
are fine-tuned, criteria weights are adjusted, and the integration of computational thinking
principles is refined, ensuring the system is attuned to dynamic requirements.

 Full-Scale Implementation: Scaling Excellence

The culmination of meticulous planning sees the full-scale implementation of the

algorithm across all supplier evaluations. Training sessions are conducted to ensure all
relevant teams are adept at leveraging this innovative approach.

 Monitoring and Continuous Improvement: Sustaining Excellence

Finally, a robust monitoring system is established, complete with key performance

indicators (KPIs). Regular monitoring of supplier selection outcomes and constant
feedback collection form the bedrock of a system committed to continuous improvement.

In conclusion, the Work Breakdown Structure serves not merely as a project management
tool but as a strategic guide for ushering in a new era of supplier selection excellence. It
navigates the complexities of technology manufacturing, combining computational
thinking principles with practical implementation, ensuring a seamless and effective
supplier selection process.

8. Conclusion

9. References:

- Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3),

33-35.
- Bundy, A., Robins, A., & Collopy, F. (2007). Learning to build models of dynamic
systems: The contributions of learning-from-examples and analogy. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 136(3), 380-415.

9
 - Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and
Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717-3725.
- Schwalbe, K. (2018). Information Technology Project Management. Cengage
Learning.
- Klastorin, T. D. (2009). Project Management: Tools and Trade-offs. John Wiley &
Sons.
- McConnell, S. (2006). Code Complete: A Practical Handbook of Software
Construction. Microsoft Press.

10