Dragan Pamučar, Mališa Žižović, Sanjib Biswas, Darko Božanić

DOI Number
First page
Last page


Logistics management has been playing a significant role in ensuring competitive growth of industries and nations. This study proposes a new Multi-Criteria Decision-making (MCDM) framework for evaluating operational efficiency of logistics service provider (LSP). We present a case study of comparative analysis of six leading LSPs in India using our proposed framework. We consider three operational metrics such as annual overhead expense (OE), annual fuel consumption (FC) and cost of delay (CoD, two qualitative indicators such as innovativeness (IN) which basically indicates process innovation and average customer rating (CR)and one outcome variable such as turnover (TO) as the criteria for comparative analysis. The result shows that the final ranking is a combined effect of all criteria. However, it is evident that IN largely influences the ranking. We carry out a comparative analysis of the results obtained from our proposed method with that derived by using existing established frameworks. We find that our method provides consistent results; it is more stable and does not suffer from rank reversal problem.


Logarithm Methodology of Additive Weights (LMAW), Bonferroni Aggregator, Operational Performance, Logistics Service Providers, Rank Reversal, Sensitivity Analysis

Full Text:



Biswas, S., Anand, O.P., 2020, Logistics Competitiveness Index-Based Comparison of BRICS and G7 Countries: An Integrated PSI-PIV Approach, IUP Journal of Supply Chain Management, 17(2), pp. 32-57.

Tanyaş, M., Serdar, S., 2003, A comparison of quality performance criteria of logistics service providers and those of their customers, Proc. of the International logistics Congress, Istanbul, Turkey.

Yan, J., Chaudhry, P.E., Chaudhry, S.S., 2003, A model of a decision support system based on case based reasoning for third party logistics evaluation, Expert Systems, 20(4), pp. 196-207.

Deloitte Report, 2018, India - On the Cusp of a Logistics Revolution, Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/public-sector/in-ps-india-on-cusp-of-a-logistics-revolution-noexp.pdf (last access: 03.02.2021)

https://www.reportlinker.com/p05878611/Indian-Logistics-Industry-Outlook.html?utm_source=GNW (last access: 02.02.2021)

Liu, C.L., Lyons, A.C., 2011, An analysis of third-party logistics performance and service provision, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 47(4), pp. 547-570.

Rashidi, K., Cullinane, K., 2019, Evaluating the sustainability of national logistics performance using Data Envelopment Analysis, Transport Policy, 74, pp. 35-46.

Cakir, E., Tozan, H., Vayvay, O., 2009, A method for selecting third party logistic service provider using fuzzy AHP, Journal of Naval Science and Engineering, 5(3), pp. 38-54.

Meade, L., Sarkis, J., 2002, A conceptual model for selecting and evaluating third‐party reverse logistics providers, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 7(5), pp. 283-295.

Efendigil, T., Önüt, S., Kongar, E., 2008, A holistic approach for selecting a third-party reverse logistics provider in the presence of vagueness, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(2), pp. 269-287.

Chen, K.Y., Wu, W.T., 2011, Applying analytic network process in Logistics service provider selection-A case study of the Industry Investing in Southeast Asia, International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 9(1), pp. 24-36.

Aguezzoul, A., 2014, Third-party logistics selection problem: A literature review on criteria and methods, Omega, 49, pp. 69-78.

Guarnieri, P., Sobreiro, V.A., Nagano, M.S., Serrano, A.L.M., 2015, The challenge of selecting and evaluating third-party reverse logistics providers in a multi-criteria perspective: a Brazilian case, Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, pp. 209-219.

Yu, M.C., Wang, C.N., Ho, N.N.Y., 2016, A grey forecasting approach for the sustainability performance of logistics companies, Sustainability, 8(9), 866.

Sremac, S., Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Arsić, M., Matić, B., 2018, Evaluation of a third-party logistics (3PL) provider using a rough SWARA–WASPAS model based on a new rough dombi aggregator, Symmetry, 10(8), 305.

Zarbakhshnia, N., Soleimani, H., Ghaderi, H., 2018, Sustainable third-party reverse logistics provider evaluation and selection using fuzzy SWARA and developed fuzzy COPRAS in the presence of risk criteria, Applied Soft Computing, 65, pp. 307-319.

Li, Y.L., Ying, C.S., Chin, K.S., Yang, H.T., Xu, J., 2018, Third-party reverse logistics provider selection approach based on hybrid-information MCDM and cumulative prospect theory, Journal of Cleaner Production, 195, pp. 573-584.

Jovčić, S., Průša, P., Dobrodolac, M., Švadlenka, L., 2019, A proposal for a decision-making tool in third-party logistics (3PL) provider selection based on multi-criteria analysis and the fuzzy approach, Sustainability, 11(15), 4236.

Bajec, P., Tuljak-Suban, D., 2019, An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria, Sustainability, 11(8), 2330.

Yannis, G., Kopsacheili, A., Dragomanovits, A., Petraki, V., 2020, State-of-the-art review on multi-criteria decision-making in the transport sector, Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 7(4), pp. 413-431.

Ha, M.H., Yang, Z., Lam, J.S.L., 2019, Port performance in container transport logistics: A multi-stakeholder perspective, Transport Policy, 73, pp. 25-40.

Wang, H., Jiang, Z., Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Yang, Y., Li, Y., 2019, An integrated MCDM approach considering demands-matching for reverse logistics, Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, pp. 199-210.

Biswas, S., Pamucar, D., 2020, Facility location selection for B-schools in Indian context: A multi-criteria group decision based analysis, Axioms, 9(3), 77.

Ghosh, I., Biswas, S., 2017, A novel framework of ERP implementation in Indian SMEs: Kernel principal component analysis and intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS driven approach, Accounting, 3(2), pp. 107-118.

Ghosh, I., Biswas, S., 2016. A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision models for ERP package selection for improving supply chain performance, Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 12(3-4), pp. 250-270.

Biswas, S., 2020, Measuring performance of healthcare supply chains in India: A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods, Decision-making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 3(2), pp. 162-189.

Biswas, S., Bandyopadhyay, G., Guha, B., Bhattacharjee, M., 2019. An ensemble approach for portfolio selection in a multi-criteria decision-making framework. Decision-making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 2(2), pp. 138-158.

Zolfani, S., Yazdani, M., Pamucar, D., Zarate, P., 2020, A VIKOR and TOPSIS focused reanalysis of the MADM methods based on logarithmic normalization, Facta Universitatis-Series Mechanical Engineering, 18(3), pp. 341-355.

MacCrimmon, K.R., 1968. Decisionmaking among multiple-attribute alternatives: a survey and consolidated approach, Rand Corp Santa Monica Ca.

Roy, B., 1968, Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples, Revue française d'informatique et de recherche opérationnelle, 2(8), pp. 57-75.

Saaty, T.L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA.

Duckstein, L., Opricovic, S., 1980, Multiobjective optimization in river basin development, Water resources research, 16(1), pp. 14-20.

Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H., 2004, Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), pp. 445-455.

Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981, Multiple Attribute Decision-making: Methods and Applications, Springer: New York, NY, USA.

Brans, J.P., 1982, L'ingénierie de la décision: l'élaboration d'instruments d'aide a la decision, Université Laval, Faculté des sciences de l'administration, Canada.

Brans, J.P., Mareschal, B., 1992, PROMETHEE V: MCDM problems with segmentation constraints, INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 30(2), pp. 85-96.

Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H., Meyer, R.F., 1993, Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs, Cambridge university press.

Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A., Sarka, V., 1994, The new method of multi-criteria complex proportional assessment of projects, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 1(3), pp. 131-139.

Saaty, R.W., 2003, Decision-making in Complex Environment: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for Decision-making and the Analytic Network Process (ANP) for Decision-making with Dependence and Feedback, Super Decisions, Pittsburgh, USA.

Brauers, W.K., Zavadskas, E.K., 2006, The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy, Control and cybernetics, 35, pp. 445-469.

Brauers, W.K.M., Zavadskas, E.K., 2010, Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), pp. 5-24.

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., 2010, A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), pp. 159-172.

Keršuliene, V., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., 2010, Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step‐wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA), Journal of business economics and management, 11(2), pp. 243-258.

Das, M.C., Sarkar, B., Ray, S., 2012, Decision-making under conflicting environment: a new MCDM method, International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences, 5(2), pp. 142-162.

Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., Zakarevicius, A., 2012, Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment, Elektronika ir elektrotechnika, 122(6), pp. 3-6.

Krylovas, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Kosareva, N., Dadelo, S., 2014, New KEMIRA method for determining criteria priority and weights in solving MCDM problem, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision-making, 13(06), pp. 1119-1133.

Pamučar, D., Ćirović, G., 2015, The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC), Expert systems with applications, 42(6), pp. 3016-3028.

Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E.K., Olfat, L., Turskis, Z., 2015, Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS). Informatica, 26(3), pp. 435-451.

Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., 2016, A new combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) method for multi-criteria decision-making, Economic Computation & Economic Cybernetics Studies & Research, 50(3), pp. 25-44.

Stanujkic, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Karabasevic, D., Smarandache, F., Turskis, Z. (2017), The Use Of The Pivot Pairwise Relative Criteria Importance Assessment Method For Determining The Weights Of Criteria, Journal for Economic Forecasting, 4, pp. 116-133.

Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., Sremac, S., 2018, A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in mcdm models: Full consistency method (FUCOM), Symmetry, 10(9), 393.

Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z., 2019, A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems, Management Decision, 57(9), pp. 2501-2519.

Žižović, M., Pamucar, D., 2019, New model for determining criteria weights: Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) model, Decision-making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 2(2), pp. 126-137.

Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., Chatterjee, P., 2020, Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS), Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140, 106231.

Žižović, M., Pamučar, D., Albijanić, M., Chatterjee, P., Pribićević, I., 2020, Eliminating Rank Reversal Problem Using a New Multi-Attribute Model—The RAFSI Method, Mathematics, 8(6), 1015.

Jharkharia, S., Shankar, R., 2007, Selection of logistics service provider: An analytic network process (ANP) approach, Omega, 35(3), pp. 274-289.

Qureshi, M.N., Kumar, D., Kumar, P., 2007, Performance evaluation of 3PL Services provider using AHP and TOPSIS: a case study, The ICFAI Journal of Supply Chain Management, 4(3), pp. 20-38.

Hamdan, A., Rogers, K.J., 2008, Evaluating the efficiency of 3PL logistics operations, International Journal of Production Economics, 113(1), pp. 235-244.

Sheng, X.H., Yang, W.P., Chen, L.H., Yang, H.Y., 2012, Research on the choice of the third-party reverse logistics enterprise based on the method of AHP and Goal Programming, Advanced Materials Research, 452-453, pp. 581-585.

Andrejić, M.M., 2013,, Measuring efficiency in logistics, Military Technical Courier, 61(2), pp. 84-104.

Wong, J.T., 2012, DSS for 3PL provider selection in global supply chain: combining the multi-objective optimization model with experts’ opinions, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 23(3), pp. 599-614.

Senthil, S., Srirangacharyulu, B., Ramesh, A., 2014, A robust hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology for contractor evaluation and selection in third-party reverse logistics, Expert Systems with Applications, 41(1), pp. 50-58.

Işıklar, G., Alptekin, E., Büyüközkan, G., 2007, Application of a hybrid intelligent decision support model in logistics outsourcing, Computers & Operations Research, 34(12), pp. 3701-3714.

Liu, H.T., Wang, W.K., 2009, An integrated fuzzy approach for provider evaluation and selection in third-party logistics, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), pp. 4387-4398.

Kannan, G., Pokharel, S., Kumar, P.S., 2009, A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider, Resources, conservation and recycling, 54(1), pp. 28-36.

Akman, G., Baynal, K., 2014, Logistics service provider selection through an integrated fuzzy multicriteria decision-making approach, Journal of industrial Engineering, 2014, 794918.

Prakash, C., Barua, M.K., 2016, A combined MCDM approach for evaluation and selection of third-party reverse logistics partner for Indian electronics industry, Sustainable Production and Consumption, 7, pp. 66-78.

Liu, Y., Zhou, P., Li, L., Zhu, F., 2020, An interactive decision-making method for third-party logistics provider selection under hybrid multi-criteria, Symmetry, 12(5), 729.

Pamucar, D., Chatterjee, K., Zavadskas, E.K., 2019, Assessment of third-party logistics provider using multi-criteria decision-making approach based on interval rough numbers, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, pp. 383-407.

Chithambaranathan, P., Subramanian, N., Gunasekaran, A., Palaniappan, P.K., 2015, Service supply chain environmental performance evaluation using grey based hybrid MCDM approach, International Journal of Production Economics, 166, pp. 163-176.

Julong, D., 1982, Control problems of grey systems, Systems & control letters, 1(5), pp. 288-294.

Julong, D., 1989, Introduction to grey system theory, The Journal of grey system, 1(1), pp. 1-24.

Mercangoz, B.A., Yildirim, B.F., Yildirim, S.K., 2020, Time period based COPRAS-G method: application on the Logistics Performance Index, LogForum, 16(2), pp. 239-250.

Zavadskas, E.K., Kaklauskas, A., Turskis, Z., Tamošaitien, J., 2008, Selection of the effective dwelling house walls by applying attributes values determined at intervals, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 14, pp. 85-93.

Pamucar, D., Božanić, D., Ranđelović, A., 2017, Multi-criteria decision-making: An example of sensitivity analysis, Serbian journal of management, 11(1), pp. 1-27.

Mukhametzyanov, I., Pamucar, D., 2018, A sensitivity analysis in MCDM problems: A statistical approach, Decision-making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 1(2), pp. 51-80.

Bobar, Z., Božanić, D., Đurić-Atanasievski, K., Pamučar, D., 2020, Ranking and Assessment of the Efficiency of Social Media using the Fuzzy AHP-Z Number Model - Fuzzy MABAC, Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 17(3), pp. 43-70.

Pamučar D., Božanić D., Kurtov D., 2016, Fuzzification of the Saaty’s scale and a presentation of the hybrid fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS model: an example of the selection of a Brigade Artillery Group firing position in a defensive operation, Military Technical Courier, 64(4), pp. 966-986.

Pamučar, D., Ćirović, G., Božanić, D., 2019, Application of interval valued fuzzy-rough numbers in multi-criteria decision-making: The IVFRN-MAIRCA model, Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 29(2), pp. 221-247.

Belton, V., Gear, T., 1985, The legitimacy of rank reversal--A comment, Omega, 13(3), pp. 143-144.

Ecer, F., Pamucar, D., 2020, Sustainable supplier selection: A novel integrated fuzzy best worst method (F-BWM) and fuzzy CoCoSo with Bonferroni (CoCoSo'B) multi-criteria model, Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 121981.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210214031P


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN: 0354-2025 (Print)

ISSN: 2335-0164 (Online)

COBISS.SR-ID 98732551

ZDB-ID: 2766459-4