IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i21p2729-d666245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Jovčić

    (Department of Transport Management, Marketing and Logistics, Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, Studentská 95, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Průša

    (Department of Transport Management, Marketing and Logistics, Faculty of Transport Engineering, University of Pardubice, Studentská 95, 532 10 Pardubice, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Third-party logistics (3PL) is becoming more and more popular because of globalization, e-commerce development, and increasing customer demand. More and more companies are trying to move away from their own account transportation to third-party accounts. One reason for using 3PLs is that the company can focus more on its core activities, while the 3PL service provider can provide distribution activities in a more professional way, save costs and time, and increase the level of customer satisfaction. An emerging issue for companies in the logistics industry is how they can decide on the 3PL evaluation and selection process for outsourcing activities. For the first time, the entropy and the criteria importance through intercriteria correlation (CRITIC) methods were coupled in order to obtain hybrid criteria weights that are of huge importance to decide on the 3PL provider evaluation and selection process. The obtained criteria weights were further utilized within the additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method to rank the alternatives from the best to the worst. The introduced hybrid–ARAS approach can be highly beneficial, since combining two methods gives more robust solutions on one hand, while on the other hand eliminating subjectivity. Comparative and sensitivity analyses showed the high reliability of the proposed hybrid–ARAS method. A hypothetical case study is presented to illustrate the potentials and applicability of the hybrid–ARAS method. The results showed that 3PL-2 was the best possible solution for our case.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša, 2021. "A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:21:p:2729-:d:666245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/21/2729/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/21/2729/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheng, Ching-Hsue & Yang, Kuo-Lung & Hwang, Chia-Lung, 1999. "Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 423-435, July.
    2. Lai, Kee-hung, 2004. "Service capability and performance of logistics service providers," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 385-399, September.
    3. Liu, Fuh-Hwa Franklin & Hai, Hui Lin, 2005. "The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting supplier," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 308-317, September.
    4. Jharkharia, Sanjay & Shankar, Ravi, 2007. "Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 274-289, June.
    5. Hsu, C.-H. & Wang, Fu-Kwun & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2012. "The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 95-111.
    6. Cheng, Ching-Hsue, 1997. "Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 343-350, January.
    7. Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša & Momčilo Dobrodolac & Libor Švadlenka, 2019. "A Proposal for a Decision-Making Tool in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis and the Fuzzy Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Andy C L Yeung, 2006. "The Impact of Third-Party Logistics Performance on the Logistics and Export Performance of Users: An Empirical Study," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 8(2), pages 121-139, June.
    9. Alireza Alinezhad & Javad Khalili, 2019. "New Methods and Applications in Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM)," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-3-030-15009-9, September.
    10. Korpela, Jukka & Tuominen, Markku, 1996. "A decision aid in warehouse site selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-3), pages 169-180, August.
    11. Hamdan, Amer & (Jamie) Rogers, K.J., 2008. "Evaluating the efficiency of 3PL logistics operations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 235-244, May.
    12. M M Akarte & N V Surendra & B Ravi & N Rangaraj, 2001. "Web based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 52(5), pages 511-522, May.
    13. Wang, Guangping & Dou, Wenyu & Zhu, Weichun & Zhou, Nan, 2015. "The effects of firm capabilities on external collaboration and performance: The moderating role of market turbulence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 1928-1936.
    14. Lai, Kee-hung & Ngai, E. W. T. & Cheng, T. C. E., 2002. "Measures for evaluating supply chain performance in transport logistics," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 439-456, November.
    15. Chia-Nan Wang & Thanh-Tuan Dang & Ngoc-Ai-Thy Nguyen & Thi-Thu-Hong Le, 2020. "Supporting Better Decision-Making: A Combined Grey Model and Data Envelopment Analysis for Efficiency Evaluation in E-Commerce Marketplaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-24, December.
    16. S Yahya & B Kingsman, 1999. "Vendor rating for an entrepreneur development programme: a case study using the analytic hierarchy process method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(9), pages 916-930, September.
    17. Seyed Amirali Hoseini & Alireza Fallahpour & Kuan Yew Wong & Amir Mahdiyar & Morteza Saberi & Serdar Durdyev, 2021. "Sustainable Supplier Selection in Construction Industry through Hybrid Fuzzy-Based Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aguezzoul, Aicha, 2014. "Third-party logistics selection problem: A literature review on criteria and methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 69-78.
    2. Stefan Jovčić & Petr Průša & Momčilo Dobrodolac & Libor Švadlenka, 2019. "A Proposal for a Decision-Making Tool in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis and the Fuzzy Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, August.
    3. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    4. Jung-Yu Lai & Juite Wang & Yi-Hsuan Chiu, 2021. "Evaluating blockchain technology for reducing supply chain risks," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1089-1111, December.
    5. Aman Dua & Deepankar Sinha, 2019. "Assessment of Quality of Multimodal Transportation for Containerized Exports," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 8(1), pages 10-22, January.
    6. Hosang Jung, 2017. "Evaluation of Third Party Logistics Providers Considering Social Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    7. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    8. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Chia-Nan Wang & Ngoc-Ai-Thy Nguyen & Thanh-Tuan Dang & Chen-Ming Lu, 2021. "A Compromised Decision-Making Approach to Third-Party Logistics Selection in Sustainable Supply Chain Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy VIKOR Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-27, April.
    10. Eleonora Bottani & Piera Centobelli & Teresa Murino & Ehsan Shekarian, 2018. "A QFD-ANP Method for Supplier Selection with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks Considerations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 911-939, May.
    11. Raut, Rakesh D. & Gardas, Bhaskar B. & Narwane, Vaibhav S. & Narkhede, Balkrishna E., 2019. "Improvement in the food losses in fruits and vegetable supply chain - a perspective of cold third-party logistics approach," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    12. Reza Farzipoor Saen, 2009. "A decision model for ranking suppliers in the presence of cardinal and ordinal data, weight restrictions, and nondiscretionary factors," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 177-192, November.
    13. Kayakutlu, Gulgun & Buyukozkan, Gulcin, 2011. "Assessing performance factors for a 3PL in a value chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 441-452, June.
    14. Chan, Felix T.S. & Kumar, Niraj, 2007. "Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 417-431, August.
    15. Y H Yang & Y V Hui & L C Leung & G Chen, 2010. "An analytic network process approach to the selection of logistics service providers for air cargo," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(9), pages 1365-1376, September.
    16. R-H Lin, 2009. "Potential use of FP-growth algorithm for identifying competitive suppliers in SCM," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(8), pages 1135-1141, August.
    17. Kahraman, Cengiz & Cebeci, Ufuk & Ruan, Da, 2004. "Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 171-184, January.
    18. Pal Singh, Satender & Adhikari, Arnab & Majumdar, Adrija & Bisi, Arnab, 2022. "Does service quality influence operational and financial performance of third party logistics service providers? A mixed multi criteria decision making -text mining-based investigation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    19. Krakovics, Fabio & Eugenio Leal, José & Mendes Jr., Paulo & Lorenzo Santos, Rafael, 2008. "Defining and calibrating performance indicators of a 4PL in the chemical industry in Brazil," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 502-514, October.
    20. García Alcaraz Jorge Luis & Alvarado Iniesta Alejandro & Maldonado Macías Aidé Araceli, 2013. "Selección de proveedores basada en análisis dimensional," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 58(3), pages 249-278, julio-sep.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:21:p:2729-:d:666245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.