DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Implementation and Performance Evaluation of a Firm's Green Supply Chain Management under Uncertainty

  • Lin, Yuanhsu ;
  • Tseng, Ming-Lang ;
  • Chiu, Anthony S.F. ;
  • Wang, Ray
  • Received : 2014.01.06
  • Accepted : 2014.02.19
  • Published : 2014.03.30

Abstract

Evaluation of the implementation and performance of a firm's green supply chain management (GSCM) is an ongoing process. Balanced scorecard is a multi-criteria evaluation concept that highlights implementation and performance measures. The literature on the framework is abundant literature but scarce on how to build a hierarchical framework under uncertainty with dependence relations. Hence, this study proposes a hybrid approach, which includes applied interpretive structural modeling to build a hierarchical structure and uses the analytic network process to analyze the dependence relations. Additionally, this study applies the fuzzy set theory to determine linguistic preferences. Twenty dependence criteria are evaluated for a GSCM implemented firm in Taiwan. The result shows that the financial aspect and life cycle assessment are the most important performance and weighted criteria.

Keywords

Green Supply Chain Management;Fuzzy Set Theory;Balanced Scorecard;Analytic Network Process;Interpretive Structural Modeling

References

  1. Cebeci, U. (2009), Fuzzy AHP-based decision support system for selecting ERP systems in textile industry by using balanced scorecard, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(5), 8900-8909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.11.046
  2. Chen, F. H., Hsu, T. S., and Tzeng, G. H. (2011), A balanced scorecard approach to establish a performance evaluation and relationship model for hot spring hotels based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DEMATEL and ANP, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), 908-932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.02.001
  3. Diabata, A. and Govindan, K. (2011), An analysis of the drivers affecting the implementation of green supply chain management, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(6), 659-667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.12.002
  4. Dreyer, B. and Gronhaug, K. (2004), Uncertainty, flexibility, and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Business Research, 57(5), 484-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00315-6
  5. Dyson, R. G. (2000), Strategy, performance and operational research, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51(1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600916
  6. Fu, C. and Yang, S. (2012), The combination of dependence- based interval-valued evidential reasoning approach with balanced scorecard for performance assessment, Expert Systems with Applications, 39 (3), 3717-3730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.09.069
  7. Green, K., Morton, B., and New, S. (1996), Purchasing and environmental management: interaction, policies and opportunities, Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 188-197. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0836(199609)5:3<188::AID-BSE60>3.0.CO;2-P
  8. Agarwal, A., Shankar, R., and Tiwari, M. K. (2007), Modeling agility of supply chain, Industrial Marketing Management, 36(4), 443-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.12.004
  9. Harland, C. M., Lamming, R. C., and Cousins, P. D. (1999), Developing the concept of supply strategy, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 19(7), 650-674. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579910278910
  10. Johnston, D. A., McCutcheon, D. M., Stuart, F. I., and Kerwood, H. (2004), Effects of supplier trust on performance of cooperative supplier relationships, Journal of Operations Management, 22(1), 23-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.001
  11. Bremser, W. G. and Barsky, N. P. (2004), Utilizing the balanced scorecard for R&D performance measurement, R&D Management, 34(3), 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2004.00335.x
  12. Al-Najjar, B. and Alsyouf, I. (2003), Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making, International Journal of Production Economics, 84(1), 85-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(02)00380-8
  13. Banker, R. D. and Datar, S. M. (1989), Sensitivity, precision, and linear aggregation of signals for performance evaluation, Journal of Accounting Research, 27(1), 21-39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491205
  14. Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T. S., and Subba Rao, S. (2006), The impact of supply chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational performance, Omega, 34(2), 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.08.002
  15. Lin, Y. H., Tseng, M. L., Cheng, Y. L., Chiu, A. S. F., and Geng, Y. (2013), Performance evaluation of technological innovation capabilities in uncertainty, Scientific Research and Essays, 8(13), 501-514.
  16. Lin, Y., Cheng, H. P., Tseng, M. L., and Tsai, J. C. C. (2010), Using QFD and ANP to analyze the environmental production requirements in linguistic preferences, Expert Systems with Applications, 37 (3), 2186-2196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.07.065
  17. Linton, J. D., Klassen, R., and Jayaraman, V. (2007), Susainable supply chains: an introduction, Journal of Operations Management, 25(6), 1075-1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.01.012
  18. Pagell, M., Yang, C. L., Krumwiede, D. W., and Sheu, C. (2004), Does the competitive environment influence the efficacy of investments in environmental management? Journal of Supply Chain Management, 40(3), 30-39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2004.tb00172.x
  19. Pan, N. F. (2008), Fuzzy AHP approach for selecting the suitable bridge construction method, Automation in Construction, 17(8), 958-965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2008.03.005
  20. Kaplan R. S. and Norton D. P. (1992), The balanced scorecard-measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review, 70, 71-79.
  21. Pineno, C. J. (2001), The balanced scorecard: an incremental approach model to health care management, Journal of Health Care Finance, 28(4), 69-80.
  22. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
  23. Saaty, T. L. (1996), Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process: The Organization and Prioritization of Complexity, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
  24. Klassen, R. D. and Whybark, D. C. (1999), Environmental management in operations: the selection of environmental technologies, Decision Sciences, 30(3), 601-631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1999.tb00900.x
  25. Sarkis, J. (1998), Evaluating environmentally conscious business practices, European Journal of Operational Research, 107(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00160-4
  26. Singh, M. D., Shankar, R., Narain, R., and Agarwal, A. (2003), An interpretive structural modeling of knowledge management in engineering industries, Journal of Advances in Management Research, 1(1), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/97279810380000356
  27. Stanley, L. L. and Wisner, J. D. (2001), Service quality along the supply chain: implications for purchasing, Journal of Operations Management, 19(3), 287-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00052-8
  28. Tseng, M. L. (2009), Application of ANP and DEMATEL to evaluate the decision-making of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 156(1-4), 181-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0477-1
  29. Tseng, M. L. (2010), Implementation and performance evaluation using the fuzzy network balanced scorecard, Computers and Education, 55(1), 188-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.004
  30. Tseng, M. L. (2011), Green supply chain management with linguistic preferences and incomplete information, Applied Soft Computing, 11(8), 4894-4903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2011.06.010
  31. Tseng, M. L. (2013), Modeling sustainable production indicators with linguistic preferences, Journal of Cleaner Production, 40, 46-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.11.019
  32. Tseng, M. L. and Lin, Y. H. (2009), Application of Fuzzy DEMATEL to develop a cause and effect model of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 158(1-4), 519-533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0601-2
  33. Warfield, J. N. (1974), Developing interconnected matrices in structural modeling, IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics, 4(1), 81-87.
  34. Tseng, M. L., Chiang, J. H., and Lan, L. W. (2009), Selection of optimal supplier in supply chain management strategy with analytic network process and choquet integral, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 57(1), 330-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2008.12.001
  35. Tseng, M. L., Lin, Y. H., Chiu, A. S. F., and Liao, J. C. H. (2008), Using FANP approach on selection of competitive priorities based on cleaner production implementation: a case study in PCB manufacturer, Taiwan, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 10(1), 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-007-0109-4
  36. Wang, C. H., Lu, I. Y., and Chen, C. B. (2010), Integrating hierarchical balanced scorecard with non-additive fuzzy integral for evaluating high technology firm performance, International Journal of Production Economics, 128(1), 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.07.042
  37. Wu, H. Y., Tzeng, G. H., and Chen, Y. H. (2009), A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 10135-10147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.005
  38. Wu, S. I. and Hung, J. M. (2008), A performance evaluation model of CRM on non-profit organizations, Total Quality Management, 19(4), 321-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360701591978
  39. Yao, Y., Palmer, J., and Dresner, M. (2007), An interorganizational perspective on the use of electronically- enabled supply chains, Decision Support Systems, 43(3), 884-896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.01.002
  40. Zadeh, L. A. (1975), The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-III, Information Sciences, 9(1), 43-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(75)90017-1
  41. Zadeh, L. A., (1965), Fuzzy set, Information and Control, 18(3), 338-353.
  42. Zhu, Q. and Geng, Y., (2001), Integrating environmental issues into supplier selection and management: a study of large and medium-sized state-owned enterprises in China, Greener Management International, 35, 27-40.
  43. Zhu, Q. and Sarkis, J. (2004), Quality management and environmental management practices: an analysis of different size organizations in China, Journal of Environmental Quality Management, 13(3), 53-64 https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.20004
  44. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., and Lai, K. H. (2008), Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management practices implementation, International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.11.029
  45. Zsidisin, G. A. and Siferd, S. P. (2001), Environmental purchasing: a framework for theory development, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 7(1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-7012(00)00007-1

Cited by

  1. Effect of Unequal Lot Sizes, Variable Setup Cost, and Carbon Emission Cost in a Supply Chain Model vol.2015, pp.1563-5147, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/469486
  2. Fuzzy DEMATEL-based green supply chain management performance vol.118, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-03-2017-0121
  3. Decision analysis in referrals of children and adolescent victims of violence: An ANP approach vol.69, pp.9, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2017.1404186