COMBINING THE SUITABILITY-FEASIBILITY-ACCEPTABILITY (SFA) STRATEGY WITH THE MCDM APPROACH

Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani, Ramin Bazrafshan, Parnian Akaberi, Morteza Yazdani, Fatih Ecer

DOI Number
10.22190/FUME210711062Z
First page
579
Last page
600

Abstract


Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability (SFA) is a fundamental tool for the development and selection of strategy. Any type of decision-making problem can be resolved by Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods. In this research, we explore the complexity of determining the proper goal market for the Chilean fish market. This study proposed a combined approach of SFA with MCDM methods in a real case study. The proposed structure helps to assign the best market for Chilean export fish to West Asia. Three countries (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman) are selected as a target market in this region, and then related criteria are obtained from various sources. In order to develop a new market for the Chilean fishery industry, five major criteria, including the potential of a target market, region's economic attractiveness, consumption of the seafood, location, cost of transportation, and country risks, were selected based on the SFA framework. Calculating the criteria weights is performed by the Best-Worst (BWM) method, and ordering the alternatives is operated by Measurement Alternatives and Ranking according to compromise Solution (MARCOS) methods. The results showed that Oman is the best destination (importer) for the Chilean fish market (Salmon fish as the case).


Keywords

International Markets, Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), Suitability-Feasibility-Acceptability (SFA) Method, Export

Full Text:

PDF

References


Durmaz, Y., Düşün, Z., 2016, Importance of Strategic Management in Business, Expert Journal of Business and Management, 4(1), pp. 38-45.

FMVA, 2021, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/strategy/strategic-planning/ [Last access: 11. July 2020]

Downey, J. Cimaglobal, https://www.cimaglobal.com/. [Last access: 13 February 2008].

Lee, T., Shin, J., Kim J., Singh, V., 2020, Stochastic simulation on reproducing long-term memory of hydroclimatological variables using deep learning model, Journal of Hydrology, 582, pp. 124-540.

Sahani, N., 2021, Application of hybrid SWOT-AHP-FuzzyAHP model for formulation and prioritization of ecotourism strategies in Western Himalaya, India, International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, doi: 10.1016/j.ijgeop.2021.08.001.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K., Whittington, R., 1998, Exploring corporate Strategy, Fifth ed., London: the Prentice Hall imprint of pearson education.

Zavadskas, E., Antucheviciene, J., Chatterjee, P., 2019, Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Techniques for Business Processes Information Management, MDPI Books, p. 320.

Mehrjerdi, Z., 2014, Strategic system selection with linguistic preferences and grey information using MCDM, Applied Soft Computing, 18, pp. 323-337.

Shyur, H., Shih, H., 2006, A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 44(7-8), pp. 749-761.

Banihabib, M.E., Hashemi-Madani, F.-S, Forghani, A., 2017, Comparison of Compensatory and non-Compensatory Multi Criteria Decision Making Models in Water Resources Strategic Management, European Water Resources Association (EWRA), 31(12), pp. 3745-3759.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Ebadi Torkayesh, A., Ecer, F., Turskis, Z., Šaparauskas, J., 2021, International market selection: a MABA based EDAS analysis framework, Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(1), pp. 99-124.

Georgise, F., Mindaye, A., 2020, Kaizen implementation in industries of Southern Ethiopia: Challenges and feasibility, Cogent Engineering, 7, 1823157.

Čirjevskis, A., Novikova, J., 2012, Commercial Viability of Strategic Choice on Green Business: Hydro Power versus Wind Power (Latvian case), AASRI Procedia, 2, pp. 44-49.

Alimardani, M., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Aghdaie, M., Tamošaitienė, J., 2013, A novel hybrid SWARA and VIKOR methodology for supplier selection in an agile environment, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 19(3), pp. 533-548.

Broniewicz, E., Ogrodnik, K., 2012, A Comparative Evaluation of Multi-Criteria Analysis Methods for Sustainable Transport, Energies, 14, 5100.

Mehrjerdi, Z., 2014, Strategic system selection with linguistic preferences and grey information using MCDM, Applied Soft Computing, 18, pp. 323-337.

Ullah, Z., Jehangir, M., Iqbal, J., 2016, Potential for Community Based Ecotourism (CBE) along Balochistan Coast, Pakistan, Global Regional Review, 1, pp. 178-192.

Puška, A., Stojanovic, I., Maksimović, A., Osmanovic, N., 2020, Project meanagment software evaluation by using the measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) method, Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 3(1), pp. 89-102.

Pamučar, D., Savin, L., 2020, Multiple-criteria model for optimal off-road vehicle selection for passenger transportation: BWM-COPRAS model, Vojnotehnički glasnik/Military Technical Courier, 68(1), pp. 28-64.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Torkayesh, A., Bazrafshan, R., 2021, Vision-based weighting system (VIWES) in prospective MADM, Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications, 4(2), pp. 140-150.

Hasheminasab, H., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Zavadskas, E., Kharrazi, M., Skare, M., 2021,. A circular economy model for fossil fuel sustainable decisions based on MADM techniques, EconomicResearch-EkonomskaIstraživanja, doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2021.1926305.

Behzad, M., Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Pamucar, D., Behzad, M., A comparative assessment of solid waste management performance in the Nordic countries based on BWM-EDAS, Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 122008.

Hashemi, A., Dowlatshahi, M., Nezamabadi-pour, H., 2020, MFS-MCDM: Multi-label feature selection using multi-criteria decision making, Knowledge-Based Systems, 206, 106365.

Child, J., 1972, Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice, Sociology, 6(1), pp. 1-22.

Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Scholes, K., 2011, Exploring Strategy, 9th ed., Pearson, London.

Rezaei, J., 2015, Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method, Omega, 53, pp. 49-57.

Torkayesh, A., Zolfani, S.H., Khavand, M., Khazaelpour, P., 2021, Landfill location selection for healthcare waste of urban areas using hybrid BWM-grey MARCOS model based on GIS, Sustainable Cities and Society, 67, 102712.

Pamučar, D., Ecer, F., Cirovic, G., Arlasheedi, M., 2020, Application of improved best worst method (BWM) in real-world problems, Mathematics, 8(8), pp. 13-42.

Ecer, F., 2021, Sustainability assessment of existing onshore wind plants in the context of triple bottom line: a best-worst method (BWM) based MCDM framework, Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, pp. 19677–19693.

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.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Mosharafiandehkordi, S.. Kutut, V., 2019, A pre-planning for hotel locating according to the sustainability perspective based on BWM-WASPAS approach, International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 23(6), pp. 405-419.

Gupta, H., Barua, M., 2017, Supplier selection among SMEs on the basis of their green innovation ability using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS, Journal of Clear Production, 152, pp. 242-258.

Rahimi, S., Hafezalkotob, A., Monavari, S.M., Hafezalkotob, A., Rahimi, R., 2020, Sustainable landfill site selection for municipal solid waste based on a hybrid decision-making approach: Fuzzy group BWM-MULTIMOORA-GIS, Cleaner Production, 248, pp. 119-186.

Yadav, G., Mangla, S.K., Luthra, S., Jakhar, S., 2018, Hybrid BWM-ELECTRE-based decision framework for effective offshore outsourcing adoption: a case study, International Journal of Production Research, 56(18), pp. 6259-6278.

Moslem, S., Farooq, D., Ghorbanzadeh, O., Blaschke, T., 2020, Application of the AHP-BWM model for evaluating driver behavior factors related to road safety: A case study for Budapest, Symmetry, 12(2), 243.

Stević, Ž., Brković, N., 2020, A novel integrated FUCOM-MARCOS model for evaluation of human resources in a transport company, Logistics, 4(1), 4.

Ecer, F., Pamucar, D., 2021, MARCOS technique under intuitionistic fuzzy environment for determining the COVID-19 pandemic performance of insurance companies in terms of healthcare services, Applied Soft Computing, 104, 107199.

Chakraborty, S., Chattopadhyay, R., Chakraborty, S., 2020, An integrated D-MARCOS method for supplier selection in an iron and steel industry, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 3(2), pp. 49-69.

Uluts, A., Karabasecic, D., Popovic, G., Stanujkic, D., Nguyen, P.T., Karakoy, C., 2020. Development of a novel integrated CCSD-ITARA-MARCOS decision-making approach for stackers selection in a logistics system, Mathematics, 8(10), 1672.

Stevic, Z., Brkovic, N., 2020, A novel integrated FUCOM-MARCOS model for evaluation of human resources in a transport company, Logistics, 4(1), 4.

Stankovic, M., Stevic, Z., Das, D.K., Pamucar, D., 2020, A new fuzzy MARCOS method for road traffic risk analysis, Mathematics, 8(3), 457.

Stević, Z., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., Chatterjee, P., 2019, Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement Alternatives and Ranking according to COmpromise Solution (MARCOS), Computers & Industrial Engineering,140, pp. 106-231.

Ecer, F., 2021, A consolidated MCDM framework for performance assessment of battery electric vehicles based on ranking strategies, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 143, 110916.

Boral, S., Chaturvedi, S., Howard, I., McKee, K., Naikan, V., 2020, An Integrated Approach for Fuzzy Failure Mode and Effect Analysis Using Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy MARCOS, 2020 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Singapore, doi: 10.1109/IEEM45057.2020.9309790.

FAO, 2021, Optimism persists in farmed salmon sector despite price lull, http://www.fao.org/in-action/globefish/market-reports/resource-detail/en/c/1263849/, USA (last access: 15. June 2021).

FAO, 2011, Fisheries balance, 2011, Available: http://www.fao.org/in-action/globefish/fishery-information/resource-detail/zh/c/338542/, (last access: 15. January 2012)

Department of Civil Aviation_Dubai, 2017, United Arab Emirates Passenger Traffic: Dubai International Airport: Annual,. [Online]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/united-arab-emirates/air-transport-passenger-traffic/passenger-traffic-dubai-international-airport-annual (last access: 15. June 2021)

The Emirates Group, 2021, https://www.emirates.com/media-centre/emirates-group-announces-half-year-performance-for-2020-21/. (last access: 15. June 2021)

Annual International Trade Statistics by Country, 2021, https://trendeconomy.com. (last access: 15. June 2021)

Riadh, B., fdiattractiveness, 2020, http://www.fdiattractiveness.com/ranking-2020/. (last access: 15. June 2021)

Ourworldindata, Fish and seafood consumption per capita, 1961 to 2017, 2017, https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fish-and-seafood-consumption-percapita?tab=chart&time=1961..latest&region=Asia&country=SAU~ARE~OMN, (last access: 15. June 2021)

FAO, 1980, Available: http://www.fao.org/3/af000e/AF000E03.htm, (last access: 15. June 2021)

The Fish site, Transporting Fish, 2006, https://thefishsite.com/articles/transporting-fish, (last access: 15. June 2021)

Travel_math, 2021, https://www.travelmath.com/distance/from/Chile/to/, (last access: 15. June 2021)

Hermese, E., 2019 Global Business Monitor, 2019, https://www.eulerhermes.com/en_global/news-insights/economic-insights/2019-Global-Business-Monitor.html, (last access: 15. June 2021)

Euler Hermes global, Economic research, Country Risk, 2019, https://www.eulerhermes.com, (last access: 15. June 2021)

Li, T., Li, A., Guo, X., 2020, The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry - a comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods, Energy, 212, 118694.

Li, H., Horan, P., Luther, M., Ahmed, T., 2019, Informed decision making of battery storage for solar-PV homes using smart meter data, Energy & Buildings, 198, pp. 491-502.

Li, X., Tian, P., Leung, S., 2010, Vehicle routing problems with time windows and stochastic travel and service times: Models and algorithm, International Journal of Production Economics, 125(1), pp. 137-145.

Zavadskas, E., 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.

Zavadskas, E., Kaklauskas, A., 1996, Determination of an efficient contractor by using the new method of multicriteria assessment, in Langford, D.A., Retik, A. (Eds.), Managing the Construction Project and Managing Risk, vol. 65, London, UK, Weinheim, Germany; New York, NY, USA; Tokyo, Japan; Melbourne, Australia; Madras, India; E and FN SPON: London, UK, In International Symposium for “The Organisation and Management of Construction”, Shaping Theory and Practice 2, pp. 94-104.

Zavadskas, E., Turskis, Z., Vilutiene, T., 2010, Multiple criteria analysis of foundation instalment alternatives by applying additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng, 10(3), pp. 123-141.

Zavadskas, E., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., Zakarevicius, A., 2012, Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment, Electron. Electr. Eng, 122(6), pp. 3-6.

Hashemkhani, S., Zavadskas, E., Khazaelpour, P., Cavallaro, F., 2018, The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment, Sustainability, 10(12), 4451.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Masaeli, R., 2020, From Past to Present and into the Sustainable Future. PMADM Approach in Shaping Regulatory Policies of the Medical Device Industry in the New Sanction Period, Sustainability Modeling in Engineering, 2019, pp. 73-95.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Derakhti, A., 2020, Synergies of Text Mining and Multiple Attribute Decision Making: A Criteria Selection and Weighting System in a Prospective MADM Outline, Symmetry, 12(5), 868.

Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Maknoon, R., Zavadskas, E., 2016, An introduction to prospective multiple attribute decision making (PMADM), Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 22(2), pp. 309-326.

Johnson, D., McGeoch, L., Glover, F., Rego, C., 2000, The Traveling Salesman Problem, in 8th DIMACS Implementation Challenge, http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/archive/Challenges/TSP/about.html.

Torkayesh, S.E., Amiri, A., Iranizad, A., Torkayesh, A.E., Entropy based EDAS decision making model for neighborhood selection: A case study in Istanbul, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Decision Making, 1(1), pp. 1-11, 2020.

Pamucar, 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.

Ecer, F., 2018, Third-party logistics (3PLs) provider selection via Fuzzy AHP and EDAS integrated model, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(2), pp. 615-634.

Yadav, S., Bajpai, U., 2018, Performance evaluation of a rooftop solar photovoltaic power plant in Northern India, Energy for Sustainable Development, 43, pp. 130-138.

Sotoudeh-Anvari, A., Sadjadi, S., Molana, S., & Sadi-Nezhad, S. 2018, A new MCDM-based approach using BWM and SAW for optimal search model. Decision Science Letters, 7(4), pp. 395-404.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210711062Z

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0354-2025 (Print)

ISSN: 2335-0164 (Online)

COBISS.SR-ID 98732551

ZDB-ID: 2766459-4