• Hızlı Erişim
  • Duyurular
  • Dergi Park

    Değerli Yazarlarımız ve Hakemlerimiz

    Süreçlerimiz 03.05.2017 Tarihinden itibaren Dergipark sistemi üzerinden devam edecektir. Değerlendirilmesini istediğiniz çalışmalarınızı http://dergipark.gov.tr/ckuiibfd adresinden dergimize iletebilirsiniz.

     

    Makale Kabul

    Dergimizin 2018 için makale kabul edilmektedir.


Özet


A Service Quality Application Focusing on the Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

1. Introduction

Decision simply refers to making a based on certain criteria. For the decisions related to a company or a group other than the individual ones, it is a must that the decisions should be based on scientific ground instead of intuitional aspects. This obligation also requires acting logically for rationality and effectiveness in the process of the decision making.

There have been several classical and fuzzy logic based methods in the literature for the solution of the multi-criteria decision making (MCDM), referring to the situations that require inclusion of several criteria from several options. As the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) provides considerable easiness in terms of the accountability and the intelligibility, it is highly preferred among these methods. Just as AHP, which is used for the problems of MCDM alone, they are often used together with different methods. In such situations the weights generally obtained by using AHP, are transferred to the other methods as an input. Therefore, Fuzzy AHP has a similar function as AHP. However, Fuzzy AHP relatively increases the mathematical transactions and makes them difficult in comparison to AHP.

In this study, it is aimed to find an answer to the question whether the ranking between decision points and the selection changes or not under conditions where criterion weights obtained from AHP and Fuzzy AHP are used with different methods as an input. For this purpose, it has been investigated whether there has been a differentiation in the results over the problem of MCDM in evaluating the service quality of the mobile phone brands.

2. Method

In this study, four rival mobile phone brands, with no names revealed, have been specified and the quality of the service they offer has been evaluated by using “AHP+TOPSIS”, “Fuzzy AHP+TOPSIS”, “AHP+VIKOR” and “Fuzzy AHP+VIKOR” methods.

Among the aforementioned methods AHP is a multiple-criteria decision-making means “which can make pair-wise comparisons using eigenvalue approach between the criteria and carry out the calibration of the numerical scale used in the measurement of the quantitative and the qualitative performance” (Yıldırım ve Önder, 2014, 22). On the other hand, Fuzzy AHP is a decision making technique in which fuzzy logic is used together with the AHP method. TOPSIS was developed by Hwong and Yoon in 1981. This method is based on the determination of the distance of decision points from the positive and negative ideal solution and ranking the decision points (Chen, 2000, 2). VIKOR provides maximum group benefit and also aims to reach a consensus that guarantees minimum individual regret (Opricovic ve Tzeng, 2004, 447).

Field work for the relevant problem was performed in the province of Giresun and 12 experts in mobile phone industry, were specified to identify the weights of the criteria. To evaluate the service quality of four phone brands, encoded as A1, A2, A3 and A4, 385 people have been surveyed. For determining the criteria, “quality of service model” developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985) has been utilized; 22 inferior decision criteria gathered under 5 main criteria have been designated. The weights of criteria have been determined with AHP and Fuzzy AHP; they have been transferred from here to TOPSIS and VIKOR methods as input. All calculations have been done on Microsoft Office Excel 2013 software. 

3. Results and Discussion

Firstly, AHP has been used to determine the weights of decision-making for the solution of MCDM problem handled. In this stage, firstly, pair-wise comparison matrixes have been created and the consistency rates of all matrixes have been calculated. These calculations relevant to all matrixes have suggested that inconsistency is within the acceptable limits. The findings obtained have shown that according to AHP method,  the important main criterion reliance is 0,3163 and respectively it is followed by  reliability with 0,2800, eagerness with 0,1501, the physical features with 0,1487, and empathy, the main criterion with 0,1048.

At the next stage, the weights of the criteria have been calculated by means of using Fuzzy AHP. The triangular fuzzy numbers have been used to make the matrixes fuzzy. Then, the weights have been calculated by using Chang’s order analysis. According to Fuzzy AHP, the main criteria are as follows: the reliance is 0,2711; the reliability is 0,2461, the physical features and eagerness are 0,1717 and  the empathy is 0,1394. In terms of the importance weight of the sub-criteria, Fuzzy AHP has given the same results. Even if the weight of the criteria differentiates according to the method selected, no significant changes have taken place in the order of importance.

After the weights have been calculated, base MCDM problem has been solved separately by using respectively “AHP+TOPSIS”, “Fuzzy AHP+TOPSIS”, “AHP+VIKOR” and “Fuzzy AHP+VIKOR” methods together. Obtained results reveal that whichever method is chosen, gradation among alternatives does not change; alternatives are arranged as A2> A1> A3> A4 consistently and A2 alternative displays the best performance in terms of service quality.

4. Conclusion

In this study, it has been investigated whether the weights obtained through AHP and Fuzzy AHP have made a change on the final results in the case AHP and Fuzzy AHP methods are used in combination with different decision making methods. In the study, all methods have been examined in detail and a considerable importance has been placed on their mathematical displays. Through this method, it is aimed to clearly show the differences and similarities between the algorithms of the methods.

Although the results indicate that the weights obtained according to AHP and Fuzzy AHP change, it has been understood that the order and the final result have not changed between the alternatives by using the methods of TOPSIS and VIKOR methods. In other words, they tolerated the differentiated weights in TOPSIS and VIKOR, AHP and Fuzzy AHP. Thus, it is understood that the use of fuzzy AHP does not go beyond increasing the number of mathematical transactions when compared to AHP and relatively extending the duration of the final result in Excel program.



Anahtar Kelimeler
A Service Quality Application Focusing on the Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods

Kaynakça

Adres :Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Uluyazı Kampüsü, Merkez-ÇANKIRI/TÜRKİYE
Telefon :+90 (376) 218 95 45 Faks :+90 (376) 218 95 46
Eposta :iibfdergi@karatekin.edu.tr

Web Yazılım & Programlama Han Yazılım Bilişim Hizmetleri