發展混合式多評準決策方法改善TFT-LCD產業之綠色供應商績效

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	崔哲偉 Tsui, Che-Wei
論文名稱：	發展混合式多評準決策方法改善TFT-LCD產業之綠色供應商績效 Developing Hybrid MCDM Approaches for Improving the Performance of Green Suppliers in the TFT-LCD Industry
指導教授：	溫于平 Wen, Ue-Pyng
口試委員:	王小璠 Wang Hsiao-Fan 黎漢林 Li Han-Lin 時序時 Shih Hsu-Shih 張炳騰 Chang Ping-Teng
學位類別：	博士 Doctor
系所名稱：	工學院 - 工業工程與工程管理學系 Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
論文出版年：	2015
畢業學年度：	103
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	109
中文關鍵詞：	薄膜電晶體液晶顯示器、綠色供應商評選、優勢排序法、多評準決策、影響網路關係圖、多元企業功能
外文關鍵詞：	Thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD), Green supplier evaluation/selection, Outranking methods, Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM), Influential network relation map (INRM), Multiple business-function perspectives
相關次數：	點閱：3 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

近二十年以來，隨著環境保護與企業永續經營意識抬頭，在薄膜電晶體液晶顯示器產業中，綠色供應商評選議題著重在考慮環境準則於評選過程中，並強調薄膜電晶體液晶顯示器製造商如何在有限資源下協助改善其供應商之績效。然而當代綠色供應商評選議題需要進一步思考如何使企業與其供應商維持長期合作關係，藉以提升整體供應鏈之競爭力。本研究目的為發展以優勢排序法為主的混合多評準決策方法，用以評估與改善綠色供應商的績效。綠色供應商評選流程的改善在本研究中分為三階段。在第一階段，本研究依據文獻回顧與個案公司之供應商稽核表單建立階層式決策架構，然後提出一套混合多評準決策方法評估綠色供應商績效，並呈現各部門對於評選過程中持有不同的改善觀點。其次，本研究在第二階段進一步依據影響網路關係圖建立網路決策架構，考慮各準則之影響權重，並導入渴望水準的概念於評估方法，計算各供應商在各個準則的績效值與渴望水準之間的差距。在第三階段，本研究更進一步提出兩項管理指標：(1) 立即改善指標；(2) 追求渴望水準指標，用以協助企業改善其供應商之績效。本研究於此階段所提出的方法可協助薄膜電晶體液晶顯示器製造商與其供應商共同設定長期策略目標，並以網路影響關係圖協助供應商進行改善與追求各準則之績效達到渴望水準。研究結果所呈現出的改善策略除了包括評選結果之外，本研究也針對各供應商的優勢與弱勢進行分析，並依據多元企業功能的層面決定改善方向的優先順序。此外，在綠色供應商評選過程中，本研究發現個案公司的管理者較重視「綠色管理」、「技術」與「組織」層面的績效。本研究進一步以改善該製造商之子供應商績效為目標，研究結果顯示該供應商現階段應立即提出如何提升其研發技術能力之規劃。從長期發展來看，該個案公司應協助其子供應商改善「健康安全」、「綠色產品」、「交期」、「技術能力」、「品質控制」之績效，而子供應商的研發技術能力也會因此進而提升績效。

The awareness of environmental protection/conservation and sustainable development has increased in the last two decades. In the competitive thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) industry, green supplier evaluation/selection involves environmental criteria in the traditional evaluation process and emphasizes that TFT-LCD manufacturers should improve the performance of their suppliers with limited resources. In addition, the modern green supplier evaluation/selection further focuses on how to maintain long-term relationships between a company and its suppliers. The purpose of this dissertation is to develop a hybrid multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods with outranking methods to evaluate and improve the performance of green suppliers in the TFT-LCD industry. The procedure of green supplier evaluation/selection can be divided into three stages. In the first stage, a hierarchy decision framework for green supplier evaluation/selection is developed based on literatures and supplier audit forms provided by an anonymous flat panel display manufacturer in Taiwan. Then, we proposed a hybrid MCDM method to evaluate green suppliers and provided final ranking results and different opinions from each department. In the second stage, the proposed evaluation procedure is as follows: (1) to develop a decision framework by an influential network relation map (INRM); (2) to obtain the influential weights of the criteria; (3) to involve the concept of aspiration levels into the proposed methods; and (4) to evaluate and reduce the gaps of suppliers in each criterion. In the third stage, we further develop two managerial indexes: “immediate improvement degree” and “aspiration level gap” for achieving aspiration levels. Subsequently, the proposed procedure can assist the TFT-LCD manufacturer and its subsidiary to set and improve joint long-term strategic goals for achieving aspiration levels for each criterion based on the INRM. The improvement strategy includes the ranking results as well as the suppliers’ strength/weakness and the improvement priority with integrating multiple business-function perspectives. In the evaluation procedure, the managers place importance on “green management”, “technology” and “organization” aspects. This dissertation examines a subsidiary supplier of the TFT-LCD manufacturer in real-world case, and the results indicate the subsidiary supplier should improve its R&D capability immediately. Then, for the long-term perspective, the TFT-LCD manufacturer may plan to assist its subsidiary to improve the performance of health and safety, green product, delivery, current capability and quality control. Besides, its R&D capability will also subsequently be enhanced.

Contents
摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝辭 iii
Contents v
List of Tables vii
List of Figures ix
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background and motivation 1
1.2 Research objectives 7
1.3 Framework of the dissertation 8
Chapter 2 Literature Review 10
2.1 Methods for green supplier selection 10
2.2 The hierarchy decision framework for green supplier evaluation/selection 13
2.3 The network-relationship decision framework for green supplier evaluation/selection 15
2.4 Case background descriptions 18
Chapter 3 A Hybrid MCDM Model for Green Supplier Evaluation/Selection with the Hierarchy Decision Framework 24
3.1 The model for the hierarchy decision framework 24
3.1.1 The AHP method for determining the subjective weights 25
3.1.2 The entropy method for determining objective weights 26
3.1.3 The ELECTRE III method to evaluate the performance of suppliers 27
3.1.4 The LAM for integrating ranking results of decision-makers     29
3.2 Empirical results 30
3.3 Discussions and implications 36
3.4 Concluding remarks 39
Chapter 4 A Hybrid MCDM Model for Green Supplier Evaluation/Selection with a Network-Relationship Decision Framework 42
4.1 The model for the network-relationship decision framework 43
4.2 Empirical results 50
4.3 Discussions and implications 60
4.4 Concluding remarks 61
Chapter 5 A Hybrid MCDM Model for Green Supplier Evaluation/Selection with Multiple Business-Function Perspectives 64
5.1 The model with multiple business-function perspectives 64
5.2 Empirical results 74
5.3 Discussions and implications 87
5.4 Concluding remarks 89
Chapter 6 Summary and Future Research 92
References 95
Appendix A 104
Appendix B 107
Appendix C 108
Appendix D 109

List of Tables
Table 2.1 The literature analysis of methods for green supplier selection. 12
Table 2.2 The criteria of the green supplier evaluation/selection. 15
Table 2.3 The definitions of each criterion based on supplier audit forms. 20
Table 3.1 Subjective weight of each criterion for decision-makers. 31
Table 3.2 Objective weights of each criterion for individual decision-maker. 32
Table 3.3 Compromised weights of each criterion for decision-makers. 33
Table 3.4 Outranking degrees of each decision-maker. 34
Table 3.5 Overall outranking degree of each decision-maker. 35
Table 3.6 Rejecting degree for alternative 2 to alternative 1 from d6 manager. 35
Table 3.7 Initial evaluation of individual decision-maker. 35
Table 3.8 The worst performing criteria of each alternative. 38
Table 3.9 Comparison of ranking results for the proposed method with other methods. 39
Table 4.1 The initial influence matrix. 51
Table 4.2 The normalized initial direct influence matrix. 52
Table 4.3 The total influence matrix of criteria. 52
Table 4.4 The total-influential matrix of aspects. 53
Table 4.5 The sum of influences given and received on dimensions and criteria. 53
Table 4.6 The matrix obtained by normalizing total influence matrix of criteria. 56
Table 4.7 The un-weighted super-matrix. 57
Table 4.8 The matrix obtained by normalizing total influence matrix of aspects. 57
Table 4.9 Weighting the un-weighted super-matrix based on total influence normalized matrix. 57
Table 4.10 The worst level, aspiration level and influential weights of criteria and four suppliers’ performance. 58
Table 4.11 Results for preference indices, leaving flows, entering flows, net flows. 59
Table 4.12 The gaps of four polarizer suppliers for striving toward aspiration levels. 60
Table 5.1 The influential weights of criteria for GPM, MM, RD and SQM departments. 80
Table 5.2 The worst and aspiration levels of criteria and four suppliers’ performance. 81
Table 5.3 Outranking degrees of the GPM, MM, RD and SQM departments. 82
Table 5.4 Overall outranking degrees of the GPM, MM, RD and SQM departments. 82
Table 5.5 Initial evaluations of the GPM, MM, RD and SQM departments. 85
Table 5.6 Sensitivity analysis of the weight for each departmental group. 86
Table 5.7 Four scenarios for LAM. 87
Table A.1 Summary of notations. 104

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 The network-relationship decision framework of green supplier evaluation/selection for the TFT-LCD industry. 19
Figure 2.2 Two-stage decision procedure for evaluating green suppliers at Y-TECH. 22
Figure 4.1 The influential network relation map of 15 criteria within 6 aspects. 55
Figure 4.2 The ranking results of DANPROMETHEE I & II and original PROMETHEE I & II methods. 59
Figure 5.1 The INRM of six aspects for each departmental group. 77
Figure 5.2 Overall improvement strategy of subsidiary supplier (a2) for individual department. 78

                                

Akyuz, G.A., and Erkan, T.E., 2010. “Supply chain performance measurement: a literature review.” International Journal of Production Research 48 (17), 5137-5155.
Amindoust, A., Ahmed, S., Saghafinia, A., and Bahreininejad, A., 2012. “Sustainable supplier selection: A ranking model based on fuzzy inference system.” Applied Soft Computing 12 (6), 1668-1677.
Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S.S., and Goyal, S.K., 2010. “A fuzzy multicriteria approach for evaluating environmental performance of suppliers.” International Journal of Production Economics 126 (2), 370-378.
Bai, C., and Sarkis, J., 2010. “Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies.” International Journal of Production Economics 124 (1), 252-264.
Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R.B., Albadvi, A., and Aghdasi, M., 2010. “PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications.” European Journal of Operational Research 200 (1), 198-215.
Belton, V., and Stewart, T.J., 2002. “Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach.” Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA.
Bernardo, J.J., and Blin, J.M., 1977. “A programming model of consumer choice among multi-attributed brands.” Journal of Consumer Research 4 (2), 111–118.
Brans, J.P., and Vincke, Ph., 1985. “A preference ranking organisation method.” Management Science 31 (6), 647-656.
Büyüközkan, G., 2012. “An integrated fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making approach for green supplier evaluation.” International Journal of Production Research 50 (11), 2892-2909.
Büyüközkan, G., and Çifçi, G., 2011. “A novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for sustainable supplier selection with incomplete information.” Computers in Industry 62 (2), 164-174.
Büyüközkan, G., and Çifçi, G., 2012. “A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers.” Expert Systems with Applications 39 (3), 3000-3011.
Chai, J., Liu, J.N.K., and Ngai, E.W.T., 2013. “Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature.” Expert Systems with applications 40 (10), 3872-3885.
Chang, B., Chang, C.W., and Wu, C.H., 2011. “Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria.” Expert Systems with Applications 38 (3), 1850–1858.
Chen, T., and Freeman, J., 2014. “Using AHP-Entropy weight and TOPSIS methodology in green supplier selection.” In Proceedings of the European Operations Management Association Conference (EurOMA ’14), Palermo, Italy, 20-25 June.
Chiou, T.Y., Chan, H.K., Lettice, F., and Chung, S.H., 2011. “The influence of greening the suppliers and green innovation on environmental performance and competitive advantage in Taiwan.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 47 (6), 822–836.
Chiu, W.Y., Tzeng, G.H., and Li, H.L., 2013. “A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business.” Knowledge-Based System 37 (1), 48-61.
Escobar, M.T., and Jimenez, J.M., 2007. “Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in AHP-Group Decision Making.” Group Decision and Negotiation 16, 287-301.
Figueira, J., Greco, S., and Ehrgott, M., 2005. “Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys.” Springer Science, Boston, USA.
Florez-Lopez R., 2007. “Strategic supplier selection in the added-value perspective: A CI approach.” Information Sciences 177 (5), 1169-1179.
Fu, X., Zhu, Q., and Sarkis, J., 2012. “Evaluating green supplier development programs at a telecommunications systems provider.” International Journal of Production Economics 140 (1), 357–367.
Genovese, A., Koh, S.C., Bruno, G., and Esposito, E., 2013. “Greener supplier selection: state of the art and some empirical evidence.” International Journal of Production Research 51 (10), 2868-2886.
Global Sources. 2013, October 16th. Chinese panel industry will continue to expand and highly compete with Korea and Taiwan. Available: http://www.eettaiwan. com/ART_8800690923_480702_NT_0e5e0ad9.HTM.
Global Sources. 2014, January 10th. “Global optoelectronics industry continues to grow.” Available: http://www.eettaiwan.com/ART_8800693966_480702_NT _d28cbdb3.HTM.
Govindan, K., et al., Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review, Journal of Cleaner Production (2013a), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.046
Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., and Jafarian, A., 2013b. “A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach.” Journal of Cleaner Production 47, 345-354.
Herva, M., and Roca, E., 2013. “Review of combined approaches and multi-criteria analysis for corporate environmental evaluation.” Journal of Cleaner Production 39, 355-371.
Ho, W., Xu, X., and Dey, P.K., 2010. “Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review.” European Journal of Operational Research 202 (1), 16-24.
Hokkanen, J., and Salminen, P., 1997. “Choosing a soild waste management system using multicriteria decision analysis.” European Journal of Operational Research 98 (1), 19-36.
Hsu, C.H., Wang, F.K., and Tzeng, G.H., 2012. “The best vendor selection for conducting the recycled material based on a hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 66, 95-111.
Hu, S.K., Lu, M.T., and Tzeng, G.H., 2014. “Exploring smart phone improvements based on a hybrid MCDM model.” Expert Systems with Applications 41 (9), 4401-4413.
Humphreys, P.K., Wong, Y.K., and Chan, F.T.S., 2003. “Integrating environmental criteria into the supplier selection process.” Journal of Materials Processing Technology 138 (1–3), 349–356.
Hung, S., 2006. “Competitive strategies for Taiwan’s thin film transistor-liquid crystal display (tft-lcd) industry.” Technology in Society 28 (3), 349-361.
Hwang, C.L., and Yoon, K., 1981. “Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey.” Springer, New York, USA.
Igarashi, M., De Boer, L., and Fet, A.M., 2013. “What is required for greener supplier selection? A literature review and conceptual model development.” Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 19 (4), 247-263.
Industrial Economics and Knowledge Center (IEK). 2014, January 20th. “The new industry trends in 2014.” Available: http://edm.itri.org.tw/enews/epaper/10301/ a01.htm.
Kannan, D., Jabbour, A.B.L.D.S., and Jabbour, C.J.C., 2014. “Selecting green suppliers based on GSCM practices: using fuzzy TOPSIS applied to a Brazilian electronics company.” European Journal of Operational Research 233 (2), 432–447.
Ko, Y.C., Fujita, H., and Tzeng, G.H., 2013. “A fuzzy integral fusion approach in analyzing competitiveness patterns from WCY2010.” Knowledge-Based Systems 49, 1-9.
Kuan, M.J., Tzeng, G.H., and Hsiang, C.C., 2012. “Exploring the quality assessmentsystem for new product development process by combining DANP with MCDM model.” International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control 8 (8), 5745-5762.
Kuo, R.J., Wang, Y.C., and Tien, F.C., 2010. “Integration of artiﬁcial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection.” Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (12), 1161-1170.
Lee, A.H.I., Kang, H.Y., Hsu, C.F., and Hung, H.C., 2009. “A green supplier selection model for high-tech industry.” Expert Systems with Applications 36 (4), 7917-7927.
Lee, H.S., Tzeng, G.H., Yeih, W., Wang, Y.J., and Yang, S.C., 2013. “Revised DEMATEL: Resolving the Infeasibility of DEMATEL.” Applied Mathematical Modelling 37 (10–11), 6746-6757.
Lin, R.J., 2013. “Using fuzzy DEMATEL to evaluate the green supply chain management practices.” Journal of Cleaner Production 40, 32-39.
Liou, J.J.H., and Tzeng, G.H., 2012. “Comments on “Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview”.” Technological and Economic Development of Economy 18 (4), 675-695.
Liou, J.J.H., 2013. “New concepts and trends of MCDM for tomorrow – In honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on the occasion of his 70th birthday.” Technological and Economic Development of Economy 19 (2), 367–375.
Liu, P., and Zhang, X., 2011. “Research on the supplier selection of a supply chain based on entropy weight and improved ELECTRE-III method.” International Journal of Production Research 49 (3), 637-646.
Liu, C.H., Tzeng, G.H., and Lee, M.H., 2012. “Improving tourism policy implementation - the use of hybrid MCDM models.” Tourism Management 33 (2), 239-488.
Liu, C.H., Tzeng, G.H., and Lee, M.H., 2013a. “Strategies for improving cruise product sales in the travel agency- using hybrid MCDM models.” Service Industry Journal 33 (5), 542-563.
Liu, C.H., Tzeng, G.H., Lee, M.H., and Lee, P.Y., 2013b. “Improving metro–airport connection service for tourism development: Using hybrid MCDM models.” Tourism Management Perspectives 6 (1), 95-107.
Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K., and Verbeke, A., 2004. “PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis. Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP.” European Journal of Operational Research 153 (2), 307-317.
Ou Yang, Y.P., Shieh, H.M., and Tzeng, G.H., 2012. “A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for information security risk control assessment.” Information Sciences 232, 482-500.
Peng, K.H., and Tzeng, G.H., 2013. “A hybrid dynamic MADM model for problems-improvement in economics and business.” Technological and Economic Development of Economy 19 (4), 638-660.
Punniyamoorthy, M., Mathiyalagan, P., and Parthiban, P., 2011. “A strategic model using structural equation modeling and fuzzy logic in supplier selection,” Expert Systems with Applications 38 (1), 458-474.
Rogers, M., and Bruen, M., 2000a. “Using ELECTRE III to choose route for Dublin Port motorway.” Journal of Transportation Engineering 126 (4), 313–323.
Rogers, M., and Bruen, M., 2000b. “ELECTRE and Decision Support: Methods and Applications in Engineering and Infrastructure Investment.” Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA.
Roy, B., 1978. “ELECTRE III: un algorithme de classements fond´e sur une repr´e sentation floue des pr´ef´erences en pr´eferences en presence de crit´eres multiples.” Cahiers du Centre d’Etudes de Recherche Op´erationnelle 20 (1), 3–24.
Roy, B., 1991. “The outranking approach and the foundation of ELECTRE methods.” Theory and Decision 31 (1), 49-73.
Roy, B., Present, M., and Silhol, D., 1986. “A programming method doe determining which pairs metro stations should be renovated.” European Journal of Operational Research 24 (2), 318-334.
Saaty, T. L., 1977. “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures.” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15 (3), 234–281.
Saaty, T. L., 1980. “The Analytic Hierarchy Process.” McGraw-Hill, New-York, USA.
Seuring, S., and Müller, M., 2008. “From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management.” Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (15), 1699-1710.
Seuring, S., 2013. “A review of modeling approaches for sustainable supply chain management.” Decision Support Systems 54 (4), 1513-1520.
Shaw, K., Shankar, R., Yadav, S.S., and Thakur, L.S., 2012. “Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy multi-objective linear programming for developing low carbon supply chain.” Expert Systems with Applications 39 (9), 8182–8192.
Shen, C.Y., and Yu, K.T., 2012. “An integrated fuzzy strategic supplier selection approach for considering the supplier integration spectrum.” International Journal of Production Research 50 (3), 817-829.
Shen, L., Olfat, L., Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., and Diabat, A., 2013. “A fuzzy multi criteria approach for evaluating green supplier’s performance in green supply chain with linguistic preferences.” Resources, Conservation and Recycling 74, 170-179.
Simon, H.A., 1955. “A behavioral model of rational choice.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69 (1), 99-118.
Simon, H.A., 1972. “Theories of bounded rationality (Chapter 8)”, in C.B. McGuire and Roy Radner (eds), Decision and Organization, North-Holland Publishing Company.
Spekman, R.E., 1988. “Strategic supplier selection: Understanding long-term buyer relationships.” Business Horizons 31 (4), 75-81.
Srivastava, S.K., 2007. “Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review.” International Journal of Management Reviews 9 (1), 53-80.
Taiwan Stock Exchange, 2013. February. “Industry analysis: The flat panel display Industry.” Available: http://www.twse.com.tw/ch/products/publication/essay.php.
Tseng, M.L., and Chiu, A.S.F., 2013. “Evaluating firm’s green supply chain management in linguistic preferences.” Journal of Cleaner Production 40, 22-31.
Tsyganok, V., 2010. “Investigation of the aggregation effectiveness of expert estimates obtained by the pairwise comparison method.” Mathematical and Computer Modelling 52 (3-4), 538-544.
Tzeng, G.H., Chiang, C.H., and Li, C.W., 2007. “Evaluating intertwined effects in E-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL.” Expert Systems with Applications 32 (4), 1028-1044.
Tzeng, G.H., and Huang J.J., 2011. “Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications.” Taylor & Francis Group, FL, USA.
Tzeng, G.H., and Huang, C.Y., 2012. “Combined DEMATEL technique with hybrid MCDM methods for creating the aspired intelligent global manufacturing & logistics systems.” Annals of Operations Research 197 (1), 159-190.
Vincke, P., 1992. “Multiple Criteria Decision-Aid.” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
Wang, Y.L., and Tzeng, G.H., 2012. “Brand marketing for creating brand value based on a MCDM model combining DEMATEL with ANP and VIKOR methods.” Expert Systems with Applications 39 (5), 5600-5615.
Yazdani, M., 2014. “An integrated MCDM approach to green supplier selection.” International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations 5 (3), 443–458.
Zeleny, M., 1982. “Multiple Criteria Decision Making.” McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
Zhao, H., and Guo, S., 2014. “Selecting green supplier of thermal power equipment by using a Hybrid MCDM Method for sustainability.” Sustainability 6 (1), 217–235.

全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校內網路)
全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校外網路)

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文