IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlogis/v8y2024i1p10-d1317722.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance Evaluation of Retail Warehouses: A Combined MCDM Approach Using G-BWM and RATMI

Author

Listed:
  • Abdullah M. Barasin

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80204, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ammar Y. Alqahtani

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80204, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

  • Anas A. Makki

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering—Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80204, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Background : The retail sector has experienced significant growth in recent years, necessitating efficient supply chain management and sustainable logistics practices. Evaluating the performance of retail warehouses is crucial for meeting customer expectations and enhancing operational efficiency. Methods : This study employed a combined multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach, using the group best–worst method (G-BWM) for weighting criteria and ranking the alternatives based on the trace-to-median index (RATMI) for warehouse ranking. The performance criteria were cost, quality, time, productivity, and safety. Data were collected from four mega retail warehouses in the western region of Saudi Arabia for evaluation and analysis. Results : The evaluation of retail warehouse performance using the MCDM approach provided valuable insights for decision-makers and warehouse experts. The criteria weights were determined using the G-BWM, and the RATMI enabled the ranking of the warehouses based on their weighted performance scores. The results highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each warehouse, facilitating strategic planning, resource allocation, and operational improvements. Conclusions: This study presents a novel combined MCDM performance evaluation approach for retail warehouses. The study has implications for effective decision-making processes, resource allocation, and operational efficiency. Furthermore, it serves as a foundation for future research, exploring additional dimensions of warehouse performance and enabling sustainable logistics within the broader supply chain context.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdullah M. Barasin & Ammar Y. Alqahtani & Anas A. Makki, 2024. "Performance Evaluation of Retail Warehouses: A Combined MCDM Approach Using G-BWM and RATMI," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlogis:v:8:y:2024:i:1:p:10-:d:1317722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2305-6290/8/1/10/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2305-6290/8/1/10/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reda M. S. Abdulaal & Omer A. Bafail & Ghous Ali, 2022. "Two New Approaches (RAMS-RATMI) in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Tactics," Journal of Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-20, September.
    2. Katarina Urošević & Zoran Gligorić & Igor Miljanović & Čedomir Beljić & Miloš Gligorić, 2021. "Novel Methods in Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Process (MCRAT and RAPS)—Application in the Mining Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Rouwenhorst, B. & Reuter, B. & Stockrahm, V. & van Houtum, G. J. & Mantel, R. J. & Zijm, W. H. M., 2000. "Warehouse design and control: Framework and literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 515-533, May.
    4. Francielly Hedler Staudt & Gülgün Alpan & Maria Di Mascolo & Carlos M. Taboada Rodriguez, 2015. "Warehouse performance measurement: a literature review," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(18), pages 5524-5544, September.
    5. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Şeyda Savalan, 2022. "An Integrated Fuzzy MCDM Hybrid Methodology to Analyze Agricultural Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    7. Varmazyar, Mohsen & Dehghanbaghi, Maryam & Afkhami, Mehdi, 2016. "A novel hybrid MCDM model for performance evaluation of research and technology organizations based on BSC approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 125-140.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Snežana Tadić & Aida Kalem & Mladen Krstić & Nermin Čabrić & Adisa Medić & Miloš Veljović, 2025. "Benchmarking Analysis of Railway Infrastructure Managers: A Hybrid Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Grey Best–Worst Method (G-BWM), and Assurance Region Data Envelopment Analysis (AR-DEA) Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-27, March.

    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. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Hamideh Asadi & Gholamreza Shams & Jolanta Tamošaitienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2021. "Model for the Sustainable Material Selection by Applying Integrated Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    2. I. Kudelska & G. Pawłowski, 2020. "Influence of assortment allocation management in the warehouse on the human workload," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 779-795, June.
    3. Afrasiabi, Ahmadreza & Chalmardi, Mazyar Kaboli & Balezentis, Tomas, 2022. "A novel hybrid evaluation framework for public organizations based on employees’ performance factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Shanky Garg & Rashmi Bhardwaj, 2024. "Exploring the influence of factors causing stress among doctoral students by combining fuzzy DEMATEL-ANP with a triangular approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(8), pages 4695-4719, August.
    5. Gawlik, Remigiusz, 2016. "Encompassing the Work-Life Balance into Early Career Decision-Making of Future Employees Through the Analytic Hierarchy Process," MPRA Paper 80260, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. van Gils, Teun & Ramaekers, Katrien & Caris, An & de Koster, René B.M., 2018. "Designing efficient order picking systems by combining planning problems: State-of-the-art classification and review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 1-15.
    7. Heidary Dahooie, Jalil & Qorbani, Ali Reza & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Providing a framework for selecting the appropriate method of technology acquisition considering uncertainty in hierarchical group decision-making: Case Study: Interactive television technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    8. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Zarei, Esmaeil & Khan, Faisal & Abbassi, Rouzbeh, 2021. "Importance of human reliability in process operation: A critical analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    10. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Ramin Bazrafshan & Fatih Ecer & Çağlar Karamaşa, 2022. "The Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability Strategy Integrated with Bayesian BWM-MARCOS Methods to Determine the Optimal Lithium Battery Plant Located in South America," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Paul, Ananna & Shukla, Nagesh & Trianni, Andrea, 2023. "Modelling supply chain sustainability challenges in the food processing sector amid the COVID-19 outbreak," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    12. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    13. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    14. Juuso Pajasmaa & Kaisa Miettinen & Johanna Silvennoinen, 2025. "Group Decision Making in Multiobjective Optimization: A Systematic Literature Review," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 329-371, April.
    15. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    16. Željko Stević & Irena Đalić & Dragan Pamučar & Zdravko Nunić & Slavko Vesković & Marko Vasiljević & Ilija Tanackov, 2019. "A new hybrid model for quality assessment of scientific conferences based on Rough BWM and SERVQUAL," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 1-30, April.
    17. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Modeling personalized cognition of customers in online shopping," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    19. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    20. Kavitha, S. & Satheeshkumar, J. & Amudha, T., 2024. "Multi-label feature selection using q-rung orthopair hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach extended to CODAS," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 148-173.

    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:jlogis:v:8:y:2024:i:1:p:10-:d:1317722. 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.