外文資料翻譯--運用灰色關系分析選擇供營商的聯合方法

1、<p><b>　　中文3146字</b></p><p>　　畢業(yè)設計(論文)外文資料翻譯</p><p>　　學 院： 經濟管理學院 </p><p>　　專 業(yè)： 國際經濟與貿易 </p><p>　　姓 名：

2、 </p><p>　　學 號： </p><p>　　外文出處： World Scientific </p><p>　　www.worldscientific.com </p><p>

3、　　附 件： 1.外文資料翻譯譯文；2.外文原文。 </p><p>　　附件1：外文資料翻譯譯文</p><p>　　運用灰色關系分析選擇供營商的聯合方法</p><p>　　摘要：本文使用一種灰色關系分析(GRA)聯合方法與向前供應鏈模型(FSCM)中的分析階層過程(AHP)為評估和選擇供營商開發(fā)出一個新的模型。文章旨在展示該模型在實踐中如何為問題的解決提

4、供幫助。同時也檢驗了決定階層的結構，該模型是否可能真正地代表供營商選擇決定，以及是否包括影響供營商選擇的所有關鍵因素。GRA模型的有效性通過印度南部的原始設備制造業(yè)(OEM)產業(yè)來說明，GRA的分析結果通過AHP得到的結果得到證實。本文所提出的模型可以幫助相關產業(yè)有效地選擇供營商。</p><p>　　關鍵詞： 供營商選擇; 向前供應鏈模型(FSCM); 原始設備制造業(yè)(OEM); 灰色關系分析(GRA); 分析

5、階層過程(AHP)。</p><p><b>　　1. 引言</b></p><p>　　當前，產業(yè)傾向于僅集中精力在他們的核心業(yè)務上，相比從前他們越來越多地外購部分生產職能。反過來，這實踐創(chuàng)造了更大和更加復雜的供應鏈。對這些供應鏈的成功管理是公司保持競爭力的基石之一。</p><p>　　基本上產業(yè)組織按照有效作用的不同被劃分為例如營銷、計劃

6、，生產，購買，財務等等。供應鏈是集上述功能于一體為這些組織活動創(chuàng)造了一個一般計劃的戰(zhàn)略手段，該供應鏈滿足服務政策的要求，保持他們身處存在信譽風險的競爭環(huán)境中的最低的可能費用水平。供應鏈是部門網絡，包含在從原材料采購到最終產品至消費者手中的產品的制造過程中。購買在多數生產組織中占據重要地位，因為購買的零件、組成部分及各種元件一般能占最終產品總值的40-60%。這意味著從原材料購買的相對較小成本降低中獲取的收益會比用于生產組織中的其他銷售區(qū)

7、域的同等費用降低對贏利的有更大的影響。</p><p>　　供應商的選擇旨在選出能夠持續(xù)滿足消費者需求和成本合理的最具潛力的供營商。選擇是使用共同標準和方法對供營商進行廣泛的比較。然而，為審查潛在供營商所使用的具體方法根據顧客需要的不同而不同。選擇的總體目標是確認高潛力的供營商。</p><p>　　為選擇合適的供營商，顧客使用選擇標準和正確的方法來判斷每個供營商的能力是否能一貫而有效地滿

8、足他們的需要。這些標準和措施被用來考察所有被考慮的供營商以及反應顧客的需要與它的供應和技術戰(zhàn)略。把它的需要轉換成有用的標準可能是不容易的，因為需要經常被表達成一般的定性概念，而標準則應該是可以定量地被評估的具體要求。 </p><p>　　顧客可以在選擇標準不斷發(fā)展變化中自己選擇標準和措施以保證對自己的適用性。通常，發(fā)展中的標準和方法往往與下一個階段收集信息的標準重疊。收集信息可使對評價所需要的標準的數量和類型具

9、有洞察力也可獲得可利用的數據的種類。然而，收集信息如果沒有到位的具體標準和措施就可能徒勞無功。 </p><p>　　購買作用的角色和結構在九十年代發(fā)生了演變。采購包含了購買原材料、組織的組成部分和供營商。與此相關的活動包括選擇和判斷合格的供營商、估計供營商的表現、談判合同、比較價格、質量和服務、源頭物品和服務，分期付款購買、售貨條款、達成的評估價值、預期的價格、服務和有時的需求改變，確定物品被接受的形式等等。

10、</p><p>　　供營商選擇過程的宗旨是為買家減少風險并使總價值最大化，這一過程需要考慮一系列戰(zhàn)略上的變化。這些變化中包括：供營商關系的時間表、國內和國際供營商的選擇、供營商的數量即一個或多個采購渠道與產品種類之間的選擇。 </p><p>　　本文使用灰色關系分析(GRA)和向前供應鏈模型(FSCM)中的分析階層過程(AHP) 為位于印度南部的生產橡膠產品的原始器材制造者(OEM)產

11、業(yè)的評估供營商選擇提出一個結構模型。本文組織如下：第2部分是學術研究回顧。第3部分問題的提出。第4部分提出問題的解答方法。第5部分是使用AHP和GRA提出的聯合方法。在第6部分中討論模型(案件例證)的應用。第7部分和第8部分提出案件例證與本文結論的結果比較。</p><p><b>　　2.學術研究回顧 </b></p><p>　　供營商選擇決定的復雜使得在作出決定

12、的過程中必須考慮各種各樣的標準。60年代以來這些標準和衡量供營商表現的分析便引起了許多科學家和購買實踐者的關注。許多論文和研究也都致力于這個問題。這個部分簡要地概述了供營商選擇問題的研究結果和現有的學術成就。 </p><p>　　早在1966年Dickson1就提出了評估供營商的23個不同標準。在這些標準中，他闡明，成本、質量和交貨時間處于供營商選擇的最重要的工作指標之中。從那以后，許多論文主要從三個角度援引他

13、的供營商選擇問題研究方法：概念，經驗和數學。 </p><p>　　在供營商選擇的經驗方面，Weber et al.對涉及供應商選擇中最重要標準的學術研究做了全面回顧和調查。根據他們的調查，價格是選擇過程中最重要的因素，訂貨交貨的時間其次，質量因素居后。Jiuh-Biing提出他的研究方法，該研究方法可能刺激與全球性物流相關的領域的研究，也許能幫助有關全球性物流操作的不確定性和復雜性問題的解決。 </p&g

14、t;<p>　　Chan和Chung，開發(fā)出多重標準的基因優(yōu)化方法以解決供應鏈管理中的分布式網絡問題。在該工作中他們以基因算法結合分析階層過程以獲取可以減少計算時間的多重標準決策制定的能力。Vaidya和Kumar，回顧了分析階層過程(AHP)應用方面的學術研究并且提出AHP作為一個多重標準決策制定工具的各種應用領域。 </p><p>　　Handeld et al.在AHP幫助下在他們的供應商評

15、估決定方面提出集成環(huán)境問題。Liu et al.和Weber et al.為一個多宗旨的供營商選擇問題(VSP)提出了數據包封分析方法。</p><p>　　Vanegas和Labib，提出按顧客要求確定重量的方法，該方法使用“模糊的線段”的概念通過把重量從AHP轉換成模糊的數字來實現。Maggie和Tummala在他們的論文中對有關電信系統(tǒng)選擇供營商的問題進行論述并將上述模型建立在選擇供應商所節(jié)省的時間上。&l

16、t;/p><p>　　上述研究表明在供營商的選擇方面，先前的多數研究者只考慮了三個主要因素(質量、服務和價格)和大約15個次級因素。本文描述五個主要因素(質量，交付，設計能力、服務和價格)和供營商選擇的21個次級因素。 </p><p><b>　　3. 問題闡述</b></p><p>　　此次研究選擇的公司計劃為它的橡膠制造業(yè)產品打造一條供應鏈

17、。當前，公司正面對著有關生產產品的質量的很多問題。在經過由包括從產業(yè)界到學術界的研究專家組成的研究小組長期研究之后，發(fā)現了質量問題，質量問題的出現是由于從單一供營商購買原材料，且不經過質量測試。所以，公司計劃通過從由三個供選擇的供營商挑選的最佳供營商那里購買原料來改進產品的質量，不妨假設供營商1，供營商2和供營商3是可選擇的供應商。 </p><p>　　現在要考慮的問題是哪些供營商將被選擇。主要因素和次要因素應

18、該是供營商選擇過程中最先考慮的和重要的。選擇供營商過程中選擇可能的主要因素和次要因素由一個決定制定組完成，該小組包括了從產業(yè)界 (購買主管、采購主管、銷售主管、產品主管、質量主管和生產主管) 到學術界的專家。有關供營商選擇的主要因素和次要因素已經通過調查作出了選擇。包含這些要素的該研究的調查表已經設計出來。從直接介入由供應商提供原材料的原始設備制造商的不同功能區(qū)域隨機地選擇被調查者?；谠擁椪{查，與選擇供應商有關的主要影響要素和次要要素

19、如表1 所示。 </p><p>　　選擇的最佳供營商分成四個層次。第1級代表最佳供營商的選擇目標; 第2級代表五種要素：質量(Q)，交付(D)，設計或者技術能力(E)，服務(S)和價格(R); 第3級代表21種次級要素;第4級代表供營商的數量。</p><p><b>　　4. 解決方法 </b></p><p>　　這個環(huán)節(jié)，在選擇主要要素

20、和次要要素以后，我們采取多重標準決策制定工具例如AHP和GRA來解決供營商選擇問題。第一個部分使用AHP研究方法，因為它融定性和定量標準于一體是解決當前問題的適當方法。GRA研究方法在第二部分中使用，因為其中的計算方法比應用AHP更快速和簡便。下面將論述AHP和GRA方法的概要。</p><p>　　4.1. AHP概要 </p><p>　　AHP12是為解決一些應用領域復雜的多重標準問

21、題而設計出的決策制定方法。這個方法被證明是考慮復雜和無特定結構的決定的一種有效和實用方法。該研究運用AHP來處理影響供營商選擇決定的有形和無形的因素以及次級因素。方法的選擇是根據問題的特點和其他方法的優(yōu)缺點來確定的。決策者通過成對地比較以判斷每個標準的重要性。AHP的結果是每個決定選擇被給予優(yōu)先的等級或分量。本文的研究集中于通過公式化的AHP和基于GRA的聯合方法為橡膠制造工廠選擇一個最佳的供營商。 基本上，運用AHP方法考慮決策問題有

22、三步： 構建層次; 比較評斷; 并且優(yōu)先權綜合，如下描述。 </p><p><b>　　附件2：外文原文</b></p><p>　　AN INTEGRATED APPROACH FOR SELECTING A VENDOR USING GREY RELATIONAL ANALYSIS</p><p>　　This paper develop

23、s a new model for evaluating and selecting the vendor using an integrated approach of Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) along with an Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in a Forward Supply Chain Model (FSCM). The paper aims

24、 to demonstrate how the model can help in solving such decisions in practice. It also examines the structure of the decision hierarchy, whether it can represent vendor selection decisions in reality and whether it covers

25、 all key factors affecting vendor selectio</p><p>　　Keywords: Vendor selection; Forward Supply Chain Model (FSCM); Original Equipment Manufacturing (OEM); Grey Relational Analysis (GRA); Analytical Hierarchy

26、 Process (AHP).</p><p>　　1. Introduction</p><p>　　At present, industries tend to focus only on their core business and resort more and more to outsourcing several of their production functions t

27、han in the recent past. In turn, this practice has created larger and more complex supply chains. The successful management of these chains is one of the cornerstones for companies to stay competitive.</p><p&g

28、t;　　Basically industrial organizations have been divided in operative functions such as marketing, planning, production, purchasing, finance, etc. Supply chain is a strategy that integrates these functions creating a gen

29、eral plan for the organization, which satisfies the service policy, maintaining the lowest possible cost level due to the incredible competition environment that they are exposed to. A supply chain is a network of depart

30、ments, which is involved in the manufacturing of a product from </p><p>　　The objective of vendor selection is to identify vendors with the highest potential for meeting customers’ needs consistently and at

31、an acceptable cost. Selection is a broad comparison of vendors using a common set of criteria and measures. However, the level of detail used for examining potential vendors may vary depending on customers needs. The ove

32、rall goal of selection is to identify high potential vendors.</p><p>　　To select likely vendors, the customer judges each vendor’s ability to meet consistently and cost-effectively its needs using selection

33、criteria and right measures. Criteria and measures are developed to be applicable to all the vendors being considered and to reflect the customer’s needs and its supply and technology strategy. It may not be easy to conv

34、ert its needs into useful criteria, because needs are often expressed as general qualitative concepts while criteria should be specific requirem</p><p>　　The customer can set measures while it is developing

35、selection criteria to ensure that the criteria will be practical to use. Often, developing criteria and measures overlaps with the next step, gathering information. Gathering information may offer insight into the number

36、 and type of criteria that will be required for the evaluation and the type of data that is available. However, gathering information without specific criteria and measures in place can lead to extraneous effort. </p&

37、gt;<p>　　There has been an evolution in the role and structure of the purchasing function through the 90s. Purchasing involves buying the raw materials, vendors and components for the organization. The activities

38、associated with it include selecting and qualifying vendor, rating vendor performance, negotiating contracts, comparing price, quality and service, sourcing goods and service, timing purchases, selling terms of sale, eva

39、luating the value received, predicting price, service, and sometimes demand </p><p>　　The objective of the vendor selection process is to reduce risk and maximize the total value for the buyer, and it involv

40、es considering a series of strategic variables. Among these variables is the time frame of the relationship with vendors, the choice between domestic and international vendors, and the number of vendors, that is, choosin

41、g between single or multiple sourcing and the type of product. </p><p>　　This paper presents a structured model for evaluating the vendor selection for the original equipment manufacturers (OEM) industry pro

42、ducing rubber products located at the southern part of India using the Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in a Forward Supply Chain Model (FSCM). This paper is organized as follows: In

43、Sec. 2, a literature review is provided. Section 3 describes the problem. Section 4 presents the solution methodology. Section 5 presents the prop</p><p>　　2. Literature Review </p><p>　　Vendor

44、selection decisions are complicated by the fact that various criteria must be considered in decisions making process. The analysis of such criteria and measuring the performances of vendors have been the focus of many sc

45、ientists and purchasing practitioners since the 1960s. Many papers and researches were dedicated to this problem. This section briefly summarizes the literature of existing approaches and results obtained for the vendor

46、selection problem. </p><p>　　Early in 1966, Dickson1 reports 23 different criteria for vendors’ evaluation. Of these criteria, he states that cost, quality, and delivery times are among the most important pe

47、rformance measures in the selection of vendors. Since that time, numerous papers have cited his work approaching the vendor selection problem mainly from three perspectives; conceptual, empirical, and mathematical. </

48、p><p>　　In the empirical area of the vendor selection, Weber et al.3 present a comprehensive review of the literature providing the most important criteria in the choice of suppliers. According to their investi

49、gation, they rank price as the most important factor in the selection process followed by lead-time and quality factors. Jiuh-Biing, proposed a methodology in his research that would stimulate research in the related fie

50、lds of global logistics, and may help address issues regarding the uncertainty</p><p>　　Chan and Chung,5 develop a multi-criterion genetic optimization for solving distribution network problems in supply cha

51、in management. In this work they combine analytic hierarchy processes with genetic algorithms to capture the capability of multi-criterion decision-making which will reduce the computation time. Vaidya and Kumar, present

52、s a literature review of the applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and also provided the various application area where the AHP is used as a multiple </p><p>　　Handeld et al., in their work integr

53、ate environmental issues in their supplier assessment decisions with the help of AHP. Liu et al., and Weber et al presented a data envelopment analysis method for a Vendor Selection Problem (VSP) with multiple objectives

54、. </p><p>　　Vanegas and Labib, proposed a method to determine the weights for the customer requirements by converting the weights from the AHP into fuzzy numbers using the concept of a “fuzzy line segment”.

55、Maggie and Tummala, in their paper discussed about the vendor selection for the telecommunication systems and based on the proposed model the time taken to select the vendor has been reduced. </p><p>　　The a

56、bove literature reveals that for selection of vendors, most previous researchers have considered only three main factors (quality, service and price) and about 15 sub-factors. This paper describes five main factors (qual

57、ity, delivery, engineering capability, service and price) and 21 sub-factors for the vendor selection. </p><p>　　3. Problem Description</p><p>　　The company chosen for this work plans to build a

58、 supply chain for its rubber manufacturing product. At present, the company is facing a lot of problems regarding the quality of products manufactured. After the long study done by the research team comprising of experts

59、 from industry and academia, it was found that the quality problems have risen because of the raw materials purchased from the single vendor without testing the quality. So, the company has planned to improve the quality

60、 of the pro</p><p>　　Among the questions that arise is which vendors are to be selected. The attributes and the sub-attributes have to be most prevalent and important in the vendor selection process. Choosin

61、g the possible attributes and sub-attributes for the vendor selection involves a decision making team which includes experts from the industry side (purchasing director, purchasing manager, sales manager, product manager

62、, quality manager and production manager) and the academic side. The attributes and sub-attrib</p><p>　　It comprises of four levels for selecting the best vendor. Level 1 represents the goal i.e. selection o

63、f best vendor; Level 2 represents the five attributes, Quality (Q), Delivery (D), Engineering/technical capability (E), Service (S) and Price (R); Level 3 represents 21 sub-attributes; and Level 4 represents the number o

64、f vendors.</p><p>　　4. Solution Methodology </p><p>　　In this work, the multi criteria decision-making tools such as AHP and GRA are adopted to solve the vendor selection problem after selecting

65、 attributes and sub-attributes. In the first part, the AHP approach is used, since it can combine both qualitative and quantitative criteria making it an appropriate approach for solving the current problem. GRA approach

66、 is used in the second part because the calculations involved are faster and simpler than in AHP. The overview of AHP and GRA approaches are</p><p>　　4.1. Overview of AHP </p><p>　　The AHP12 is

67、a decision making approach designed to aid in the solution of complex multiple criteria problems in a number of application domains. This method has been found to be an effective and practical approach that can consider

68、complex and unstructured decisions. The AHP is proposed in this research in order to handle both tangible and intangible factors and sub-factors affecting vendor selection decisions. The selection of the methodology is b

69、ased on the characteristics of the problem and </p><p>　　4.1.1. Establishment of a structural hierarchy </p><p>　　This step allows a complex decision to be structured into a hierarchy descending

70、 from an overall objective to various ‘attributes’, ‘sub-attributes’, and so on until the lowest level. The objective or the overall goal of the decision is represented at the top level of the hierarchy. The attributes a

71、nd sub-attributes contributing to the decision are represented at the intermediate levels. Finally, the decision alternatives or selection choices are laid down at the last level of the hierarchy. Acc</p><p>

72、;　　Also, the number of the levels in a hierarchy depends on the complexity of the problem being analyzed and the degree of detail of the problem that an analyst requires to solve. As such, the hierarchical representation