IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i18p3230-d907925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Approach for Supply Chain Management Contract Selection in the Oil and Gas Industry: Combination of Uncertainty and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Amir Karbassi Yazdi

    (School of Engineering, Universidad Católica del Norte, Larrondo 1281, Coquimbo 1781421, Chile)

  • Yong Tan

    (School of Management, University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP, UK)

  • Cristi Spulbar

    (Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Craiova, 200585 Craiova, Romania)

  • Ramona Birau

    (Doctoral School of Economic Sciences, University of Craiova, 200585 Craiova, Romania)

  • Jorge Alfaro

    (School of Engineering, Universidad Católica del Norte, Larrondo 1281, Coquimbo 1781421, Chile)

Abstract

The oil and gas industry plays a significant role in the economies of many countries today. Due to various factors, including oil price fluctuations, wars, sanctions, and many other instances, selling and supplying these products at low prices is necessary. As a result, the global economy may suffer as well. Supply chain management is one way to reduce the prices of these products. This study was conducted to identify supply chain management contracts in the oil and gas industry. The paper presents an application of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) for coping with uncertainty. We contribute to the literature by proposing a new hybrid MCDM method with gray numbers for ranking supply chain management contracts in the oil and gas industry. The results show that the factors for evaluating supply chain management contracts must be selected, and then according to these factors, the supply chain management contracts must be chosen. As a result, we provide our customers with the best deals and help oil and gas companies minimize their costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Amir Karbassi Yazdi & Yong Tan & Cristi Spulbar & Ramona Birau & Jorge Alfaro, 2022. "An Approach for Supply Chain Management Contract Selection in the Oil and Gas Industry: Combination of Uncertainty and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:18:p:3230-:d:907925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/18/3230/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/18/3230/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hu, Kuo-Jen & Yu, Vincent F., 2016. "An integrated approach for the electronic contract manufacturer selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 68-81.
    2. Cai, Jianhu & Hu, Xiaoqing & Tadikamalla, Pandu R. & Shang, Jennifer, 2017. "Flexible contract design for VMI supply chain with service-sensitive demand: Revenue-sharing and supplier subsidy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(1), pages 143-153.
    3. Zhou, Yong-Wu & Lin, Xiaogang & Zhong, Yuanguang & Xie, Wei, 2019. "Contract selection for a multi-service sharing platform with self-scheduling capacity," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-217.
    4. Hamilton, James D., 2003. "What is an oil shock?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 363-398, April.
    5. Li, Jianbin & Luo, Xiaomeng & Wang, Qifei & Zhou, Weihua, 2021. "Supply chain coordination through capacity reservation contract and quantity flexibility contract," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Ruml, Anette & Qaim, Matin, 2020. "Effects of marketing contracts and resource-providing contracts in the African small farm sector: Insights from oil palm production in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    7. Jiahua Zhang & Lian Qi & Shilu Tong, 2021. "Dynamic Contract under Quick Response in a Supply Chain with Information Asymmetry," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(5), pages 1273-1289, May.
    8. Cheaitou, Ali & Larbi, Rim & Al Housani, Bashayer, 2019. "Decision making framework for tender evaluation and contractor selection in public organizations with risk considerations," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    9. Hadi Sarvari & Daniel W. M. Chan & Behrouz Ashrafi & Timothy O. Olawumi & Nerija Banaitiene, 2021. "Prioritization of Contracting Methods for Water and Wastewater Projects Using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Farsi, Maryam & Erkoyuncu, John Ahmet, 2021. "An agent-based approach to quantify the uncertainty in Product-Service System contract decisions: A case study in the machine tool industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    11. Yucekaya, A., 2022. "Electricity trading for coal-fired power plants in Turkish power market considering uncertainty in spot, derivatives and bilateral contract market," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Ni, Jian & Zhao, Jun & Chu, Lap Keung, 2021. "Supply contracting and process innovation in a dynamic supply chain with information asymmetry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 552-562.
    13. Aubrey Clark & Giovanni Reggiani, 2021. "Contracts for acquiring information," Papers 2103.03911, arXiv.org.
    14. Alexandre Dolgui & Dmitry Ivanov & Semyon Potryasaev & Boris Sokolov & Marina Ivanova & Frank Werner, 2020. "Blockchain-oriented dynamic modelling of smart contract design and execution in the supply chain," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(7), pages 2184-2199, April.
    15. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    16. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    17. Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer, 1963. "An Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 458-467, April.
    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. Daniel Fernández & Álvaro Rodríguez-Prieto & Ana M. Camacho, 2022. "Optimal Parameters Selection in Advanced Multi-Metallic Co-Extrusion Based on Independent MCDM Analytical Approaches and Numerical Simulation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-26, November.

    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. Diaz-Sarachaga, Jose Manuel & Ariza-Montes, Antonio, 2022. "The role of social entrepreneurship in the attainment of the sustainable development goals," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 242-250.
    2. Javid Nafari & Alireza Arab & Sina Ghaffari, 2017. "Through the Looking Glass: Analysis of Factors Influencing Iranian Student’s Study Abroad Motivations and Destination Choice," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, June.
    3. Vineet Kaushik & Shobha Tewari, 2023. "Modeling Opportunity Indicators Fostering Social Entrepreneurship: A Hybrid Delphi and Best-Worst Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 667-698, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Junli Zhang & Guoteng Wang & Zheng Xu & Zheren Zhang, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Method and Strengthening Measures for AC/DC Hybrid Power Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Hamzeh Soltanali & Mehdi Khojastehpour & Siamak Kheybari, 2023. "Evaluating the critical success factors for maintenance management in agro-industries using multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 949-968, June.
    10. Yossi Hadad & Baruch Keren & Dima Alberg, 2023. "An Expert System for Ranking and Matching Electric Vehicles to Customer Specifications and Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    12. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    13. Abderahman Rejeb & Karim Rejeb & John G. Keogh & Suhaiza Zailani, 2022. "Barriers to Blockchain Adoption in the Circular Economy: A Fuzzy Delphi and Best-Worst Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Negin Salimi & Jafar Rezaei, 2016. "Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1911-1938, December.
    15. Chun-Chieh Tseng & Jun-Yi Zeng & Min-Liang Hsieh & Chih-Hung Hsu, 2022. "Analysis of Innovation Drivers of New and Old Kinetic Energy Conversion Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Chinese Case," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(20), pages 1-25, October.
    16. Tavana, Madjid & Khalili Nasr, Arash & Mina, Hassan & Michnik, Jerzy, 2022. "A private sustainable partner selection model for green public-private partnerships and regional economic development," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    17. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Vineet Kaushik & Ashwani Kumar & Himanshu Gupta & Gaurav Dixit, 2022. "Modelling and prioritizing the factors for online apparel return using BWM approach," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 843-873, September.
    19. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2022. "An extended best–worst multiple reference point method: application in the assessment of non-life insurance companies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 5323-5362, November.
    20. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.

    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:10:y:2022:i:18:p:3230-:d:907925. 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.