Trade-off among lean, agile, resilient and green paradigms: an empirical study on pharmaceutical industry in Jordan using a TOPSIS-entropy method

Abstract

This study proposes an integrated multi-criteria decision analysis method (MCDM) to analyse trade-offs among different supply chain management (SCM) paradigms associated with competitive priorities. The study employs the entropy method to derive the alternative weights of the evaluation criteria. The study also employs the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) to rank feasible alternatives in order of preference, and then measure trade-offs among the conflicting objectives. A sensitivity analysis is performed to confirm the robustness of the proposed model. An empirical study approach is used to identify the trade-offs in the pharmaceutical supply chains context. The results indicate that the TOPSIS and entropy methods can be utilised in a multi-decision analysis process in which SCM paradigms should be implemented in order to positively influence the competitive position. The findings also reveal that competitive priorities differ between each paradigm. For the pharmaceutical industry of Jordan, the sequence of competitive priorities that arise from this study is thus: first 'quality' should be developed, then 'know-how', 'flexibility', 'delivery', 'customer focus', 'innovation', and finally, 'cost'. This finding represents that, the competitive priority that is most affected by the SCM paradigms is the 'quality' priority.

Closed loop supply chain mathematical modeling considering lean agile resilient and green strategies

“…Suifan et al [16] propose an integrated multi-criteria decision method to analyze trade-offs among lean, agile, resilient and green paradigms in supply chain management associated with competitive priorities. They employ the entropy method to derive the alternative weights of the evaluation criteria, and then use TOSIS technique to rank feasible alternatives in order of preference, and finally measure trade-offs among the conflicting objectives.…”