Compatibility between suppliers is an effective approach to managing the dependencies between members of the supply chain. These members often try to achieve their respective goal, disregarding the goal of the complete supply chain for a new product development and eventually the supply chain converges to higher supply chain costs, longer lead times and a large gap between supply and demand. Based on literature survey, compatibility between suppliers can be defined as the joint efforts of the suppliers towards mutually defined goals.
Therefore, in this thesis, an attempt has been made to identify various mechanisms of compatibility between suppliers.
List of Tables
Introduction
- Suppliers involvement in new product development
- Supplier-supplier relationship and compatibility between suppliers
- Motivation
- Objective
Wang and Zhao (2008) clearly explain the need for supplier support in terms of information technology and human resources during NPD. In this way we can conclude that the early involvement of suppliers in NPD is an important issue for improving product quality. Compatibility facilitates work culture and provides a platform for creating long-term relationships between suppliers (Qureshi et al. 2008).
To improve the personal situation of suppliers. 2012) consider a supplier selection of compatible components considering different alternatives of design variables.
Literature survey
- Supplier selection in new product development
- Supplier-supplier relationship
- Decision factors for compatible supplier selection
- Technology aspects
- Culture aspects
- Communication quality
- Management
The extent of diffusion of newly developed cutting edge technology depends primarily on the available arrangement between suppliers (Marton 1986). It is based on the weight age of the suppliers in the collaboration (Brown et al. It is based on the suppliers' identifications and involvement with other suppliers (Brown et al.
In general, there is a positive correlation between extensive supplier support and the degree of perceived supplier commitment (Au and Enderwick 2000). We know very well that communication plays a very important role between suppliers, so communication is the basic requirement for clear and effective compliance flow between suppliers. 2008) observed that effective communication ensures compatibility between suppliers. During the initial phase of NPD, frequent communication between suppliers involves initial supplier ideas (Hartley et al 1997).
Pruitt (1981) defined that trust is correlated with the organization's ability to work together. At low levels of trust, interpersonal relationships interfere with the sensitivity of the problem. The supply chain management defines the domain of each compatible supplier (Mabert and Venkataramanan 1998).
They also define the importance of supply chain management in obtaining a better assessment of the performance of the compliant supplier under the scope of the associated managerial function. The first phase of the framework gives us the idea of how to evaluate the compatible supplier based on the various architectural decisions involved in creating an NPD.
Compatibility measurement for supplier selection 1 Background
- Compatibility measurement between suppliers
In general, some intra-organizational compatibility factors such as resource availability, management support, and technological capabilities influence an organization's decision to implement and integrate information systems with supply chain partners (Lee and Lim 2005). The factors and sub-factors for supplier selection from the point of view of compatibility/incompatibility are shown in Table 3.1. In general, the concept of supply chain management is that the degree to which each member (supplier) sees the other (supplier) as essential to the success of the venture and recognizes that each supply chain partner (supplier) is dependent on the other (supplier).
Criticality is based on the idea of high recognized interdependence, where one supply chain partner (supplier) will not act in its own interest at the expense of the supply chain. Measuring compatibility between suppliers is a crucial step in the supplier selection process and is a challenging task for practitioners and scientists. To assess the compatible supplier, it is necessary to give weight to factors and sub-factors that play an important role in the selection of compatible suppliers.
Therefore, in this research work we have given some weight to various compatibility factors and sub-factors (see Table 3.3). Figure 3.2 shows four factors and twelve sub-factors for compatible supplier selection, based on extensive evaluations and interviews with practitioners. In the compatible supplier selection criteria, quality, service and cost are usually the most common factors.
The scope of our problem in selecting a compatible supplier is identified at the first level. The lowest level of the hierarchy contains the alternatives, namely the different supplier to be evaluated in order to select the best compatible supplier.
Configuration of compatible suppliers 1 Supplier configuration
To deal with the situation of choosing among a variety of options (alternatives), especially when those choices/options/alternatives are technically interdependent, the task of exploring the field of possibilities is complex. In this thesis, the idea of a 'strategy graph' consisting of n points, cij, representing decision areas, and line segments representing the technical interdependencies of pairs of decision areas, is shown in Figure 4.2. A binary matrix Aij is introduced to delineate the compatibility of each of the ni options in ci with each of the ni options in ci for all decision areas ci and cj that are adjacent in the strategy graph.
When these choices/options/alternatives are technically interdependent, the task of exploring the field of possibilities is complex. In what follows, the general considerations will be referred to as "decision areas", and within each of these decision areas there are mutually exclusive "options". A binary matrix Aij is introduced to delineate the compatibility of each option not in vi with each option not in vi for all decision domains vi and vj.
Given that there is a numerical 'cost' associated with each option, what is the total cost of each of the α combinations. It can be shown that any strategy graph can be expressed in the form of a complete graph (in which every pair of points are adjacent) by introducing universal compatibility matrices between decision areas that were not previously adjacent, of the form Uij with all entries. which has the value 1. Graph theory and matrix methods consist of digraphic representation, matrix representation, and continuous function representation.
In this step, all factors and sub-factors that influence supplier compatibility are examined using literature research. This can be done by examining the factors and sub-factors that influence supplier compatibility.
To determine alternative suppliers. All potential suppliers for the project are identified
The elements of V are called the vertices of graph (G), and E are known as the edges of G. The vertex set of a graph G is denoted by VG and its edge set by EG. Graphs with weights are known as weighted graphs, and they (weighted graph) are used to represent structures in which pairwise connections are assigned certain numerical values.
The advanced theory of graphs is well documented in Rao's book ``Decision making in the manufacturing environment: using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods''. In this book, the author presented a graph theory based method for solving any complicated graph network. The matrix converts the digraph into mathematical form, and the permanent function is a mathematical representation that helps determine the numerical index.
Obtaining compatibility criteria function for the matrix. The permanent of this matrix, is defined as the compatibility criteria function
Evaluation and ranking of the compatibility factors
- The selection procedure of compatible suppliers
- Conclusion and future work
The problem formulation in finding the most compatible supplier selection can be mapped to both graph theory and the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). In this example, we considered three sets of compatible vendor selection criteria and each set contains two subsets. In this example, we considered four sets of compatible vendor selection criteria and each set contains two subsets.
Finally, a graph theory-based supplier selection model has been proposed to identify the compatibility among suppliers. Although various procedures for a supplier selection have been useful in practice, such as AHP, linear programming, neuro-fuzzy, etc. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: First, the graph theoretic method has been proposed in the context of supplier selection with the aim of extending the current literature in this area.
Second, this article provides a robust literature survey from the perspective of compatibility for supplier selection. Fourth, this paper presents an application of the proposed method to a real supplier selection system. Fifth, using a graph theory-based methodology for supplier selection from the perspective of supplier compatibility helps to better assess the compatibility factors and sub-factors with their relative importance.
Sixth, the proposed methodology based on graph theory is a general method and can simultaneously include any number of quantitative and qualitative factors of supplier selection. The background of the proposed solution methodology is based on the fact that as one set of compatibility factors less constrains (with a set of global supplier selection constraints) the preferred region within the local supplier selection domain, the result of another set of compatibility factors and vice versa.
The impact of purchasing and supplier involvement on strategic purchasing and its impact on company performance. 2012). New challenges and opportunities in flexible and robust supply chain forecasting systems. 2002) Supplier-supplier relationships and their implications for the buyer-supplier relationship. 1996). 1965) Analysis of interconnected decision areas: an algorithm for project development. 2004) Effects of supplier trust on the performance of cooperative supplier relationships. 2002).
1997) Critical elements in supplier development, the buying firm perspective. 2006) Analysis of supplier involvement in the development and launch of new products. 1996) Supplier involvement in product development in the United States and Japan: Evidence for set-based concurrent engineering. 1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as a basis for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. 1997) Determinants of New Product Designers. 2014) Adoption of green supply chain management practices and their impact on performance: an exploratory study of Indian manufacturing firms.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 2005a) Supplier integration in new product development: Coordination of product, process and supply chain design. An integrated model to identify and classify key criteria and their role in evaluating 3PL service providers. 1997) Success factors for supplier integration in new product development. An information systems perspective of supply chain tool compatibility: The roles of technology fit and relationships.
Wide range of process designs and compatibility between operations. 2002) Supply chains and compatibility between components in product design. 2008) Supplier involvement and success with radical new product development in new ventures. 1996). 1999) Supplier managed inventory in the retail supply chain. 2008) Decision making of supplier involved in new product development with method of gray incidence analysis.
Acknowledgment
