Affiliation:
1. PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Abstract
In order to survive in the rapidly changing sector dynamism and increasing competition environment, textile companies should both make the right decision for the products they will produce and provide the cost, raw material supply, capacity occupancy and error rate criteria under optimum conditions. In this study, the ideal product group to be produced for a textile company was determined by using MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique) and fuzzy MARCOS (Measurement Alternatives and Ranking according to the COmpromise Solution) methods, which are among the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods. The MACBETH method was used to determine the weights of the cost, raw material supply, capacity occupancy and error rate criteria, which are considered in the selection of the ideal product group to be produced. The fuzzy MARCOS method was used in the evaluation of the four product group alternatives that the company produces intensively, and the most suitable product group was determined for the optimal management of production parameters in the textile company.
Reference32 articles.
1. Ayçin, E., ve Çakın, E. (2019). Kobi’lerin finansal performansının MACBETH-COPRAS bütünleşik yaklaşımıyla değerlendirilmesi. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi, 14(55), 251-265.
2. Badi, I. &Pamucar, D., (2020). Supplier selection for steelmaking company by using combined GreyMARCOS methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 3(2), 37-48.
3. Bana e Costa, C A, De Corte, J. M.&Vansnick, J. C. (2012). MACBETH. International Journal of Information Tecnology&Decision Making, 11, 2, 359-387.
4. Bana e Costa, C.A.&Correa, E.C. (2000). Construction of a Total Quality Index Using a Multicriteria Approach: The case of Lisbon Gas Company. Research Paper10/2000, CEG-IST, Technical University of Lisbon.
5. Bana e Costa, C A, (2002). Issues in Facilitating Bid Evalution in Public Call for Tenders, Ed. Khosrowshahi, F, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Decision Making in Urban and Civil Engineering pp. 703–709, London.