Supplier selection through multicriteria analysis in a pharmacy network
Fernanda CavicchioliZola
Academic Department of Humanities, Federal Technological University of Paraná, Apucarana Campus, 80230-901, Brazil
Jonathan
Department Industrial Engineering, Federal Technological University of Paraná, Ponta Grossa Campus, 84017-220, Brazil
Guilherme MatheusJesus
Academic Department of Textile Engineering, Federal Technological University of Paraná, Apucarana Campus, 80230-901, Brazil
Franciely VelozoAragão
Textile Engineering Department, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Blumenau 89036-002, Brazil
Thallita PuziFerrassa
Graduate Program in Urban Engineering, State University of Maringá, Maringá, 87020-900, Brazil
Letícia Idalgo
Graduate Program in Urban Engineering, State University of Maringá, Maringá, 87020-900, Brazil
Daiane
Academic Department of Textile Engineering, Federal Technological University of Paraná, Apucarana Campus, 80230-901, Brazil Graduate Program in Urban Engineering, State University of Maringá, Maringá, 87020-900, Brazil
DOI: https://doi.org/ima.v2i2.7673
Keywords: Supplier Selection; TOPSIS; BWM; Supplier selection through multicriteria analysis
Abstract
The effective management of pharmaceutical supply chains is essential for ensuring the availability of critical products, such as medicines, which are directly linked to public health. Supplier selection plays a pivotal role in maintaining a stable supply chain, requiring an evaluation framework that balances multiple, often conflicting, criteria. This paper addresses three research questions: (RQ1) How can a multicriteria decision-making framework effectively prioritize suppliers in a dynamic and competitive supply chain context? (RQ2) What are the critical factors influencing supplier evaluation in the pharmacy industry, and how can their relative importance be quantified? (RQ3) How robust is the proposed methodology when subjected to sensitivity analyses across varying criteria weights? To answer these questions, we propose a multicriteria decision-making approach for ranking suppliers within a pharmacy network to enhance decision-making and foster strategic partnerships. The study focused on five suppliers of a pharmacy network operating in the state of Paraná, Brazil. The Best-Worst Method (BWM) was used to determine the weights of the criteria and subcriteria, while the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) ranked the suppliers. The criteria related to economic efficiency and delivery reliability were given the highest weights, as they are critical to ensuring the stability of the pharmaceutical supply chain. The analysis of the suppliers showed that Supplier 3 consistently ranked first, with Supplier 1 and Supplier 2 completing the top three. Despite differences in their performance across various criteria, the results highlight the importance of using robust multicriteria frameworks to identify supplier strengths and weaknesses, mitigate supply chain risks, and support more informed and strategic decision-making processes.
References
1.Nag, K., & Helal, M. (2016, December). A Fuzzy TOPSIS approach in multi-criteria decision making for supplier selection in a pharmaceutical distributor. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM) (pp. 1126-1130). IEEE.
2.Sun, S. Y., Hsu, M. H., & Hwang, W. J. (2009). The impact of alignment between supply chain strategy and environmental uncertainty on SCM performance. Supply chain management: An international journal, 14(3), 201-212.
3.Abdulla, A., Baryannis, G., & Badi, I. (2023). An integrated machine learning and MARCOS method for supplier evaluation and selection. Decision Analytics Journal, 9, 100342.
4.Aragão, F. V., Chiroli, D. M. D. G., Zola, F. C., Aragão, E. V., Marinho, L. H. N., Correa, A. L. C., & Colmenero, J. C. (2023). Smart cities maturity model—A multicriteria approach. Sustainability, 15(8), 6695.
5.Carvalho, N. M., de Oliveira Gomes, P. F., Briesemeister, R., & de Genaro Chiroli, D. M. (2024). Humanitarian logistics: A multicriteria decision approach for venezuelan refugee resettlement process. Decision Making and Analysis, 41-57.
6.Rezaei, J., Nispeling, T., Sarkis, J., & Tavasszy, L. (2016). A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method. Journal of cleaner production, 135, 577-588.
7.Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation research part E: logistics and transportation review, 125, 285-307.
8.Lima-Junior, F. R., & Carpinetti, L. C. R. (2016). A multicriteria approach based on fuzzy QFD for choosing criteria for supplier selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 269-285.
9.Ocampo, L. A., Abad, G. K. M., Cabusas, K. G. L., Padon, M. L. A., & Sevilla, N. C. (2018). Recent approaches to supplier selection: a review of literature within 2006-2016. International Journal of Integrated Supply Management, 12(1-2), 22-68.
10.Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, R., Zaied, A. E. N. H., & Smarandache, F. (2019). A hybrid plithogenic decision-making approach with quality function deployment for selecting supply chain sustainability metrics. Symmetry, 11(7), 903.
11.Gunduz, M. A., Demir, S., & Paksoy, T. (2021). Matching functions of supply chain management with smart and sustainable Tools: A novel hybrid BWM-QFD based method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 162, 107676.
12.Rahimi, A., Raad, A., Alem Tabriz, A., & Motameni, A. (2020). Providing an interpretive structural model of agile supply chain practices. Journal of Modelling in Management, 15(2), 661-684.
13.Ahmadini, A. A. H., Modibbo, U. M., Shaikh, A. A., & Ali, I. (2021). Multi-objective optimization modelling of sustainable green supply chain in inventory and production management. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 60(6), 5129-5146.
14.Dickson, G. W. (1966). An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Journal of purchasing, 2(1), 5-17.
15.Lo, H. W. (2023). A data-driven decision support system for sustainable supplier evaluation in the Industry 5.0 era: A case study for medical equipment manufacturing. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 56, 101998.
16.Monczka, Robert M. & Handfield, Robert B. & Giunipero, Larry C. & Pattersson, James L. 2011. Purchasing and supply management. 5th edition. South-Western, Mason.
17.Ramos, M. O., Silva, E. M. D., & Lima-Júnior, F. R. (2020). A fuzzy AHP approach to select suppliers in the Brazilian food supply chain. Production, 30, e20200013.
18.Zhang, N., Zheng, S., Tian, L., & Wei, G. (2023). Study the supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain disruption risk based on regret theory and VIKOR method. Kybernetes.
19.MERLI, G. (1998). Comakership: A nova estratégia para suprimentos. Qualitymark.
20.Ho, W., Xu, X., & 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.
21.Ghorbani, M., Mohammad Arabzad, S., & Shahin, A. (2013). A novel approach for supplier selection based on the Kano model and fuzzy MCDM. International Journal of Production Research, 51(18), 5469-5484.
22.Wind, Y., & Robinson, P. J. (1968). The determinants of vendor selection: the evaluation function approach. Journal of purchasing, 4(3), 29-42.
23.Lehmann, D. R., & O'shaughnessy, J. (1974). Difference in Attribute Importance for Different Industrial Products: A bi-national study analyzes how industrial buyers evaluate different product categories. Journal of Marketing, 38(2), 36-42.
24.Perreault Jr, W. D., & Russ, F. A. (1976). Physical distribution service in industrial purchase decisions: A survey of industrial purchasing managers reveals that physical distribution service rates second only to product quality in influencing industrial purchase decisions. Journal of marketing, 40(2), 3-10.
25.Abratt, R. (1986). Industrial buying in high-tech markets. Industrial marketing management, 15(4), 293-298.
26.Billesbach, T. J., Harrison, A., & Croom‐Morgan, S. (1991). Supplier performance measures and practices in JIT companies in the US and the UK. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 27(4), 24-28.
27.Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., & Benton, W. C. (1991). Vendor selection criteria and methods. European journal of operational research, 50(1), 2-18.
28.Min, H., & Galle, W. P. (1999). Electronic commerce usage in business‐to‐business purchasing. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(9), 909-921.
29.Stavropolous, N. (2000). Suppliers In The New Economy Issues confronting suppliers in the B2B e-procurement segment. Telecommunication Journal of Australia, 50(4), 27-30.
30.Pi, W. N., & Low, C. (2006). Supplier evaluation and selection via Taguchi loss functions and an AHP. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 27, 625-630.
31.Teeravaraprug, J. (2008). Outsourcing and vendor selection model based on Taguchi loss function. Songklanakarin Journal of Science & Technology, 30(4).
32.Parthiban, P., Zubar, H. A., & Garge, C. P. (2012). A multi criteria decision making approach for suppliers selection. Procedia Engineering, 38, 2312-2328.
33.Peng, J. (2012). Selection of logistics outsourcing service suppliers based on AHP. Energy Procedia, 17, 595-601.
34.Liao, Y., Hong, P., & Rao, S. S. (2010). Supply management, supply flexibility and performance outcomes: an empirical investigation of manufacturing firms. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46(3), 6-22.
35.Özkan, B., Başlıgil, H., & Şahin, N. (2011, July). Supplier selection using analytic hierarchy process: an application from Turkey. In Proceedings of the world congress on engineering (Vol. 2, pp. 6-8).
36.Mehralian, G., Gatari, A. R., Morakabati, M., & Vatanpour, H. (2012). Developing a suitable model for supplier selection based on supply chain risks: an empirical study from Iranian pharmaceutical companies. Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research: IJPR, 11(1), 209.
37.MOHAMMAD, A. (2013). A Review of Quality Criteria Supporting Supplier Selection. Journal of Quality and Reliability Engineering, Volume 2013, Article ID 621073, 9 pages.
38.Sanayei, A., Mousavi, S. F., Abdi, M. R., & Mohaghar, A. (2008). An integrated group decision-making process for supplier selection and order allocation using multi-attribute utility theory and linear programming. Journal of the Franklin institute, 345(7), 731-747.
39.Tektas, A., & Aytekin, A. (2011). Supplier selection in the international environment: a comparative case of a Turkish and an Australian company. IBIMA Business Review.
40.Teeravaraprug, J. (2008). Outsourcing and vendor selection model based on Taguchi loss function. Songklanakarin Journal of Science & Technology, 30(4).
41.Gomes, C. F. S., Costa, H. G., & de Barros, A. P. (2017). Sensibility analysis of MCDA using prospective in Brazilian energy sector. Journal of Modelling in Management, 12(3), 475-497.
42.VINCKE, P., BRANS, J. P., & MARESCHAL, B. (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis – state of the art. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
43.Finger, G. S. W., & Lima-Junior, F. R. (2022). A hesitant fuzzy linguistic QFD approach for formulating sustainable supplier development programs. International Journal of Production Economics, 247, 108428.
44.Qi, W., Yang, X., Park, J. H., Cao, J., & Cheng, J. (2021). Fuzzy SMC for quantized nonlinear stochastic switching systems with semi-Markovian process and application. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 52(9), 9316-9325.
45.Song, X., Sun, P., Song, S., & Stojanovic, V. (2022). Event-driven NN adaptive fixed-time control for nonlinear systems with guaranteed performance. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 359(9), 4138-4159.
46.Zhang, S., Zhang, C., Zhang, S., & Zhang, M. (2018). Discrete switched model and fuzzy robust control of dynamic supply chain network. Complexity, 2018(1), 3495096.
47.Aslam, M. S., Bilal, H., Band, S. S., & Ghasemi, P. (2024). Modeling of nonlinear supply chain management with lead-times based on Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy control model. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 133, 108131.
48.Zhang, Song-ta. (2014). Robust control of uncertain supply chain network with lead times. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems.
49.Spiegler, V. L., Naim, M. M., & Syntetos, A. (2015). On the analysis of lead-time disturbances in production and inventory control models.
50.Huang, B., Miao, J., & Li, Q. (2022). A Vetoed Multi-objective Grey Target Decision Model with Application in Supplier Choice. Journal of Grey System, 34(4).
51.Diao, Y., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Optimization of Management Mode of Small‐and Medium‐Sized Enterprises Based on Decision Tree Model. Journal of Mathematics, 2021(1), 2815086.
52.Zhang, S., & Zhang, M. (2020). Mitigation of Bullwhip Effect in Closed‐Loop Supply Chain Based on Fuzzy Robust Control Approach. Complexity, 2020(1), 1085870.
53.Sahoo, D., Tripathy, A. K., Pati, J. K., & Parida, P. K. (2023). A selection of level of supplier in supply chain management using binary coded genetic algorithm with a case study towards Pareto optimality. Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, 3(1), 90-104.
54.Kizielewicz, B., & Sałabun, W. (2024). SITW method: A new approach to re-identifying multi-criteria weights in complex decision analysis. Spectrum of Mechanical Engineering and Operational Research, 1(1), 215-226.
55.KROHLING, R. A. (2011). Dois exemplos da aplicação da técnica TOPSIS para Tomada de Decisão. Revista de Sistema de Informação da FSMA, p. 31-35.
56.Osiro, L., Lima-Junior, F. R., & Carpinetti, L. C. R. (2014). A fuzzy logic approach to supplier evaluation for development. International Journal of Production Economics, 153, 95-112.
57.Tešić, D., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2024). Development of the rough Defining Interrelationships Between Ranked criteria II method and its application in the MCDM model. Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, 4(1), 153-164.
58.Zola, F. C., Colmenero, J. C., Aragão, F. V., Rodrigues, T., & Junior, A. B. (2020). Multicriterial model for selecting a charcoal kiln. Energy, 190, 116377.