IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i13p3704-d246118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Integrated Multi-Attribute Model for Evaluation of Sustainable Mobile Phone

Author

Listed:
  • Morteza Yazdani

    (Department of Management, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, 41014 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Prasenjit Chatterjee

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, MCKV Institute of Engineering, Howrah 711204, India)

  • Maria Jose Montero-Simo

    (Department of Management, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, 41014 Sevilla, Spain)

  • Rafael A. Araque-Padilla

    (Department of Management, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, 41014 Sevilla, Spain)

Abstract

Consumer preferences in sustaining and designing a product are a vital driver in a company’s long-term strategy. In a supply chain management (SCM), realizing, configuring and analyzing consumer point of view and making sure the product is highly fitted to the consumer dimensions are essential responsibilities. For this purpose, a sustainable supply chain (SSC) can define a platform in order to reach consumer satisfaction. This paper examines the utility and factors related to the use of a phone in the market incorporating sustainable attributes. We firstly identify main factors and indicators that influence the selection of a sustainable phone. Thereafter, we propose decision analysis tools as decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for the realization of the cause, effect, and interrelation of the indicators. The comparisons between them report a high similarity while best and worst indicators are in the same positions. Best worst method (BWM) is then formulated in order to achieve optimal ranking and to express the importance. Counting on this information is of special relevance in marketing decision-making, where companies must look for competitive advantages prioritizing its product attributes, attending both to resources and to consumer preferences. For this project, we invited six experts in various areas (information science, consumer organizations, fair trade, public administration-cooperation office and telecommunication) to participate and fill the questionnaires. The results are analyzed by market experts in terms of comparison and conformity.

Suggested Citation

  • Morteza Yazdani & Prasenjit Chatterjee & Maria Jose Montero-Simo & Rafael A. Araque-Padilla, 2019. "An Integrated Multi-Attribute Model for Evaluation of Sustainable Mobile Phone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:13:p:3704-:d:246118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/13/3704/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/13/3704/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gupta, Himanshu, 2018. "Evaluating service quality of airline industry using hybrid best worst method and VIKOR," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 35-47.
    2. Jasneet Kaur & Ramneet Sidhu & Anjali Awasthi & Satyaveer Chauhan & Suresh Goyal, 2018. "A DEMATEL based approach for investigating barriers in green supply chain management in Canadian manufacturing firms," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1-2), pages 312-332, January.
    3. Nastaran Chitsaz & Ali Azarnivand, 2017. "Water Scarcity Management in Arid Regions Based on an Extended Multiple Criteria Technique," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(1), pages 233-250, January.
    4. Yi-Fen Chen & Bi-Chu Chen & Wen-Yu Chen & Chia-Wen Tsai & Wei-Hung Lin, 2012. "Optimal Strategy for the Smartphone Industry in Taiwan: HTC Case Study," International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies (IJIIT), IGI Global, vol. 8(4), pages 62-79, October.
    5. Alireza Tajbakhsh & Elkafi Hassini, 2015. "Performance measurement of sustainable supply chains: a review and research questions," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 64(6), pages 744-783, July.
    6. Kuo, Ting, 2017. "A modified TOPSIS with a different ranking index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 152-160.
    7. Maria Berrittella & A. Certa & M. Enea & P. Zito, 2007. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process for The Evaluation of Transport Policies to Reduce Climate Change Impacts," Working Papers 2007.12, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Lebeau, Philippe & Macharis, Cathy & Van Mierlo, Joeri, 2016. "Exploring the choice of battery electric vehicles in city logistics: A conjoint-based choice analysis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 245-258.
    10. Webb, Deborah J. & Mohr, Lois A. & Harris, Katherine E., 2008. "A re-examination of socially responsible consumption and its measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 91-98, February.
    11. Iraj Mahdavi & Hamed Fazlollahtabar & Ellieh Mozaffari & Morvarid Heidari & Nezam Mahdavi-Amiri, 2008. "Data envelopment analysis based comparison of two hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approaches for mobile phone selection: a case study in Iranian telecommunication environment," International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(2), pages 194-220.
    12. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    13. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    14. Berrittella, Maria & Certa, Antonella & Enea, Mario & Zito, Pietro, 2007. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process for The Evaluation of Transport Policies to Reduce Climate Change Impacts," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 10264, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    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. Jie Yang & Fu Gu & Jianfeng Guo & Bin Chen, 2019. "Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Mobile Power Banks with Lithium-Ion Battery and Lithium-Ion Polymer Battery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Yazdani, Morteza & Pamucar, Dragan & Erdmann, Anett & Toro-Dupouy, Luis, 2023. "Resilient sustainable investment in digital education technology: A stakeholder-centric decision support model under uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Shankha Shubhra Goswami & Dhiren Kumar Behera, 2021. "Evaluation of the best smartphone model in the market by integrating fuzzy-AHP and PROMETHEE decision-making approach," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 48(1), pages 71-96, 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. Amin Vafadarnikjoo & Madjid Tavana & Tiago Botelho & Konstantinos Chalvatzis, 2020. "A neutrosophic enhanced best–worst method for considering decision-makers’ confidence in the best and worst criteria," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 289(2), pages 391-418, June.
    2. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    3. van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    4. Tabasam Rashid & Asif Ali & Yu-Ming Chu, 2021. "Hybrid BW-EDAS MCDM methodology for optimal industrial robot selection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Haoran Zhao & Sen Guo & Huiru Zhao, 2018. "Selecting the Optimal Micro-Grid Planning Program Using a Novel Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model Based on Grey Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, July.
    6. Haoran Zhao & Huiru Zhao & Sen Guo, 2018. "Comprehensive Performance Evaluation of Electricity Grid Corporations Employing a Novel MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Michailidou, Alexandra V. & Vlachokostas, Christos & Moussiopoulos, Νicolas, 2016. "Interactions between climate change and the tourism sector: Multiple-criteria decision analysis to assess mitigation and adaptation options in tourism areas," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Nzotcha, Urbain & Kenfack, Joseph & Blanche Manjia, Marceline, 2019. "Integrated multi-criteria decision making methodology for pumped hydro-energy storage plant site selection from a sustainable development perspective with an application," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 930-947.
    9. Hosseinpur, Zahra & Menhaj, Mohammad Hossein & Kavoosi-Kalashami, Mohammad, 2016. "Assessment Improving and Organizing Mechanism of Water Users Cooperatives Using AHP Method in Esfarayen County, Iran," International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD), Iranian Association of Agricultural Economics, vol. 6(3), September.
    10. Milad Kolagar & Seyed Mohammad Hassan Hosseini & Ramin Felegari & Parviz Fattahi, 2020. "Policy-making for renewable energy sources in search of sustainable development: a hybrid DEA-FBWM approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 485-509, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Thomopoulos, N. & Grant-Muller, S. & Tight, M.R., 2009. "Incorporating equity considerations in transport infrastructure evaluation: Current practice and a proposed methodology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 351-359, November.
    13. Yiğit Kazançoğlu & Muhittin Sağnak & Çisem Lafcı & Sunil Luthra & Anil Kumar & Caner Taçoğlu, 2021. "Big Data-Enabled Solutions Framework to Overcoming the Barriers to Circular Economy Initiatives in Healthcare Sector," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-21, July.
    14. K. Koppiahraj & S. Bathrinath & V. G. Venkatesh & Venkatesh Mani & Yangyan Shi, 2023. "Optimal sustainability assessment method selection: a practitioner perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 324(1), pages 629-662, May.
    15. Macharis, Cathy & De Witte, Astrid & Turcksin, Laurence, 2010. "The Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) application in the Flemish long-term decision making process on mobility and logistics," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 303-311, September.
    16. Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Gupta, Himanshu & Kunc, Martin, 2021. "Risks associated with the implementation of big data analytics in sustainable supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    17. Jian Wang & Jin-Chun Huang & Shan-Lin Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Ting Zhu, 2021. "Improvement Path for Resource-Constrained Cities Identified Using an Environmental Co-Governance Assessment Framework Based on BWM-mV Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-30, May.
    18. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Kazim Topuz & Ali Dag & Asil Oztekin, 2019. "An AHP-IFT Integrated Model for Performance Evaluation of E-Commerce Web Sites," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1345-1355, December.
    19. Lo, Huai-Wei & Liou, James J.H. & Huang, Chun-Nen & Chuang, Yen-Ching, 2019. "A novel failure mode and effect analysis model for machine tool risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 173-183.
    20. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:13:p:3704-:d:246118. 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.