operations management literature review

• DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2019.1651459
• Corpus ID: 202099935

A review of operations management literature: a data-driven approach

• A. Manikas , Lynn Boyd , +1 author Kyle Hoskins
• Published in International Journal of… 13 August 2019
• Business, Engineering

12 Citations

Learning from the past to shape the future: a comprehensive text mining analysis of or/ms reviews, data-driven operations and supply chain management: established research clusters from 2000 to early 2020, setup improvement review and trend, project transitions—navigating across strategy, delivery, use, and decommissioning, production quality and operation management as a sustainable tool for advance development of the food and beverages manufacturing industry in nigeria, optimizing medical enterprise’s operations management considering corporate social responsibility under industry 5.0, assessment of smart transformation in the manufacturing process of aerospace components through a data-driven approach, joint reserve stock and just-in-time inventory under regular preventive maintenance and random disruptions, quality management in humanitarian operations and disaster relief management: a review and future research directions, an integrated method for variation pattern recognition of biw ocmm online measurement data, 143 references, the international journal of production research at 55: a content-driven review and analysis.

• Highly Influential

Alternative research paradigms in operations

A content analysis of research in quality management and a proposed agenda for future research, project management topic coverage in journals, national culture and operations management: a structured literature review, trends and topics in ijpr from 1961 to 2017: a statistical history, information systems for supply chain management: a systematic literature analysis, evolution of quality: first fifty issues of production and operations management, across the great divide: a literature review of management accounting and operations management at the shop floor, an analysis of research methods in ijpr since inception, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

A review of operations management literature: a data-driven approach

• Author & abstract
• 1 Citations
• Related works & more

Corrections

• Andrew Manikas
• Jian (Jeff) Guan
• Kyle Hoskins

Suggested Citation

Download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

A review of operations management literature: a data-driven approach

Chat with Paper

From Words To Numbers Narrative Data And Social Science

Joint reserve stock and just-in-time inventory under regular preventive maintenance and random disruptions, strategy formulation and service operations in the big data age: the essentialness of technology, people, and ethics, an integrated method for variation pattern recognition of biw ocmm online measurement data, setup improvement review and trend, machine that changed the world, big data analytics, commissioned paper: capacity management, investment, and hedging: review and recent developments, researchers' perspectives on supply chain risk management, configurations in manufacturing strategy: a review and directions for future research, related papers (5), an analysis of research methods in ijpr since inception, operations management and operations research: a historical and relational perspective, production/operations management—a key discipline and area for research, preface---new directions for operations management research, maintenance management practices: a retrospective and literature review.

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, theoretical perspectives in operations management: an analysis of the literature.

International Journal of Operations & Production Management

ISSN : 0144-3577

Article publication date: 3 August 2015

It is important to advance operations management (OM) knowledge while being mindful of the theoretical developments of the discipline. The purpose of this paper is to explore which theoretical perspectives have dominated the OM field. This analysis allows the authors to identify theory trends and gaps in the literature and to identify fruitful areas for future research. A reflection on theory is also practical, given that it guides research toward important questions and enlightens OM practitioners.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors provide an analysis of OM theory developments in the last 30 years. The study encompasses three decades of OM publications across three OM journals and contains an analysis of over 3,000 articles so as to identify which theories, over time, have been adopted by authors in order to understand OM topics.

The authors find that the majority of studies are atheoretical, empirical, and focussed upon theory testing rather than on theory development. Some theories, such as the resource-based view and contingency theory, have an enduring relevance within OM. The authors also identify theories from psychology, economics, sociology, and organizational behavior that may, in the future, have salience to explain burgeoning OM research areas such as servitization and sustainability.

Research limitations/implications

The study makes a novel contribution by exploring which main theories have been adopted or developed in OM, doing so by systematically analyzing articles from the three main journals in the field (the Journal of Operations Management, Production and Operations Management , and the International Journal of Operations and Production Management ), which encompass three decades of OM publications. In order to focus the study, the authors may have missed important OM articles in other journals.

Practical implications

A reflection on theories is important because theories inform how a researcher or practicing manager interprets and solves OM problems. This study allows the authors to reflect on the collective OM journey to date, to spot trends and gaps in the literature, and to identify fruitful areas for future research.

Originality/value

As far as the authors are aware, there has not been an assessment of the main theoretical perspectives in OM. The research also identifies which topics are published in OM journals, and which theories are adopted to investigate them. The authors also reflect on whether the most cited papers and those winning best paper awards are theoretical. This gives the authors a richer understanding of the current state of OM research.

• Operations management
• Literature review

Walker, H. , Chicksand, D. , Radnor, Z. and Watson, G. (2015), "Theoretical perspectives in operations management: an analysis of the literature", International Journal of Operations & Production Management , Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 1182-1206. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2014-0089

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2015, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

• Advanced Search

Artificial intelligence for production, operations and logistics management in modular construction industry: : A systematic literature review

New citation alert added.

This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:

You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.

To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.

New Citation Alert!

Please log in to your account

Information & Contributors

Bibliometrics & citations, view options, recommendations, cognitive and artificial intelligence system for logistics industry.

Artificial intelligence is an important branch of cognitive science. Artificial intelligence has been applied to medical, education, logistics and other industries, which has broad prospects for development. Hotel logistics industry uses artificial ...

Research on the Artificial Intelligence Applied in Logistics Warehousing

Artificial intelligence is changing the world. The application of the artificial intelligence in logistics has brought a significant reduction in labor costs and huge increase in logistics efficiency. Artificial intelligence will lead the logistics ...

Artificial Intelligence in Knowledge Management

Artificial Intelligence in Knowledge Management: Overview and TrendsArtificial intelligence techniques offer powerful tools for the development of knowledge management systems. Since the early 2000s, no survey describing the use of artificial ...

Information

Published in.

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Author tags.

• Literature review
• Bibliometric analysis
• Production management
• Operations management
• Logistics management
• Artificial intelligence
• Modular construction industry
• Research-article

Contributors

Other metrics, bibliometrics, article metrics.

• 0 Total Citations
• 0 Total Downloads
• Downloads (Last 12 months) 0
• Downloads (Last 6 weeks) 0

View options

Login options.

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Share this publication link.

Copying failed.

Share on social media

Affiliations, export citations.

• Please download or close your previous search result export first before starting a new bulk export. Preview is not available. By clicking download, a status dialog will open to start the export process. The process may take a few minutes but once it finishes a file will be downloadable from your browser. You may continue to browse the DL while the export process is in progress. Download
• Download citation
• Copy citation

We are preparing your search results for download ...

We will inform you here when the file is ready.

Your file of search results citations is now ready.

Your search export query has expired. Please try again.

• < Previous

Home > Academic Affairs > COB > MANAGEMENT > MANJOU > 46

Management Department Faculty Journal Articles

Operations management curricula: literature review and analysis.

John K. Visich , Bryant University Basheer M. Khumawala , University of Houston

Document Type

Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2006, pp. 661-687.

Published version of this article may be found here .

Operations Management; Curriculum Development; Education; Course Surveys

Taylor & Francis

Publication Source

Journal of Statistics and Management Systems

A review and analysis of studies on the interface between Operations Management (OM) academicians and industry practitioners indicate the existence of a persistent gap between what is being taught and what is relevant to practitioners in their daily jobs. The majority of practitioner studies have been directed at upper management levels, yet academia typically educates students for entry level or management trainee (undergraduate) and mid-management (MBA) positions. A recurring finding was that academicians prefer to teach quantitative techniques while practitioners favor qualitative concepts. The OM curricula literature shows some disagreements between academicians concerning subject matter, and a wide variety of teaching opinions. This paper provides an extensive analytical review of OM curricula literature along with their respective authors’ conclusions. From this analysis we suggest a customer-focused business plan to close the gap between industry and academia. This plan can be modified to account for faculty teaching and research interests, local industry requirements and institution specific factors such as class sizes and resources.

Since February 22, 2015

• To view the content in your browser, please download Abobe Reader or, alternately,
• you may Download the file to your hard drive.

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines
• The Douglas and Judith Krupp Library
• Bryant University
• Helin Digital Commons

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement | Land Acknowledgment

Privacy Copyright

Optimizing construction supplier selection in conflict-affected regions: a hybrid multi-criteria framework

• Open access
• Published: 17 July 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Jamil Hallak   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5975-4075 1  

44 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Conflicts and wars profoundly impact infrastructure, exacerbating the adversity already caused by natural disasters. Therefore, it is imperative that the reconstruction process be both effective and efficient to expedite a return to normalcy. This study aims to enhance the efficacy of reconstruction efforts through improved construction supplier evaluation and selection. It introduces an innovative hybrid multi-objective decision-making model that integrates a broad spectrum of economic, technical, and humanitarian criteria. The model is designed to optimally select and assign construction suppliers in regions affected by human and natural conflicts and crises. Fifteen criteria have been incorporated into the evaluation process to validate its effectiveness and maximize its contribution to local communities. This methodology streamlines decision-making and enhances transparency in conflict zones, aligning with the interests of all stakeholders. The study incorporates advanced methodologies, including Fuzzy Goal Programming (F-GP), Geographic Information System (GIS)-based Risk Assessment, and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (F-AHP), leveraging real-world data and a case study. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis examines the impact of varying inputs on the model's output. The findings attest to the model's utility in conflict-affected regions and its potential applicability in stable settings.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

In the wake of conflicts and crises, the efficient and effective reconstruction of infrastructure is crucial. The supplier evaluation and allocation process play a critical role in this context, yet traditional procurement methods often fail to meet the dynamic and complex needs of post-conflict environments (Khaled et al. 2011 ; Pal et al. 2013 ). Various multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods have been used in different industries such as food, automotive, healthcare, and petrochemical; however, research on the construction industry in conflict areas is rare (Tushar et al. 2022 ). To address this gap, the research is structured around the following central research questions (CRQs):

CRQ1: What supplier selection criteria are considered important for the construction industry in conflict areas? CRQ2: How can we best incorporate the identified supplier selection criteria into a supplier selection process in conflict areas? CRQ3: How can we best conduct a risk analysis in conflict areas based on GIS? CRQ4: How does the integration of multiple evaluation criteria and GIS-based risk analysis into the supplier evaluation and allocation process utilizing fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making affect the efficiency and outcomes of construction projects in conflict zones?

We hypothesize that incorporating various humanitarian, economic, and technical criteria into the evaluation process will make it more comprehensive. Utilizing GIS-based risk analysis will lead to a more realistic assessment of risks in conflict areas. Employing fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making (incorporating humanitarian, economic, technical, and risk criteria) will result in more effective and transparent supplier evaluations and allocations, thereby enhancing project success in these environments.

To address these CRQs, this study develops a structured hybrid fuzzy MCDM framework based on GIS-based risk assessment, F-AHP, and F-GP to tackle the supplier evaluation and allocation problem in the construction industry of northern Syria, a conflict area.

Motivated by the significant impact that procurement efficiency has on rehabilitation efforts, this research seeks to refine the procurement process in conflict-affected regions. Current methods often fall short due to the unpredictable nature of supply chains and the pressing needs of these areas (Sarkis and Talluri 2002 ; Christopher 2016 ). By developing a robust supplier evaluation and allocation model that accounts for a broad spectrum of criteria, this study aims to significantly improve transparency and effectiveness, impacting the success of reconstruction projects and the effective utilization of funds.

This study is significant as it addresses a notable gap in the literature concerning the application of fuzzy multi-objective decision-making models in post-conflict supplier selection (Ghodsypour and O’Brien 2001 ). The study aims to achieve the following main research objectives (MROs):

MRO1: Identify the supplier selection criteria relevant for the construction industry in conflict areas. MRO2: Calculate weights of identified construction supplier selection criteria using the F-AHP method. MRO3: Conduct GIS-based risk analysis in conflict areas. MRO4: Evaluate and allocate construction suppliers using mathematical fuzzy goal programming. MRO5: Discuss the implications of the proposed research.

This research contributes to the theoretical and practical understanding of procurement challenges and evaluation processes in conflict zones. It boosts transparency in the multi-criteria selection process, leading to a comprehensive framework, sustainability, and effective resource utilization, accelerating the return to normal life for affected populations, and contributing to the wider goal of effective reconstruction after crises. The findings are particularly relevant for non-governmental organizations, donors, local authorities, and other stakeholders engaged in reconstruction, offering them a novel approach that can lead to more informed and strategic decisions in construction supplier evaluation and allocation.

The paper is organized as follows: The literature review section outlines current methodologies and identifies their limitations. The methodology section introduces our innovative approach to supplier evaluation and allocation, while the application of this model is demonstrated through a detailed case study in section four. The final section discusses the implications of our findings and suggests potential avenues for future research.

2 Literature review

2.1 mcdm in supplier evaluation.

MCDM represents a methodical process aimed at identifying the most favorable option among various feasible alternatives based on a set of defined criteria or attributes (Garg 2016a , b , 2017 ; Hallak et al. 2019 , 2021 ; Hallak and Polat 2021 ). Selecting the correct supplier can significantly lower purchase costs and enhance an enterprise’s competitiveness, illustrating why many researchers believe that selecting a supplier is one of the most important activities of the purchasing department (Ghodsypour and O’Brien 2001 ).

In recent years, several supplier selection and evaluation methods have been developed. A number of MCDM methods have been employed in this research area: the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) (Etlanda and Sutawidjaya 2022 ); the fuzzy technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (FTOPSIS) (Cakar and Çavuş 2021 ); the best–worst method (BWM) (Amiri et al. 2020 ); the fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (FDEMATEL) (Giri et al. 2022 ); and the multi-criteria optimization and compromise solution (VIKOR) (Gupta and Kumar 2022 ). To maximize the advantages and minimize the weaknesses of specific MCDM methods, researchers often integrate two or more MCDM methods into a hybrid method (Govindan et al. 2020 ). The literature related to supplier selection is dominated by these hybrid MCDM approaches. Further, researchers have begun employing combinations of more than two MCDM methods, such as F-AHP, F-TOPSIS and Fuzzy inference systems (FIS) (Mina et al. 2021 ), and integrating F-AHP with PROMETHEE II for selecting suppliers based on circular economy principles (Tushar et al. 2022 ).

This research follows a novel approach by surveying the affected population to define criteria, using F-AHP to calculate weights, and implementing GIS-based risk assessments to evaluate risks associated with each supplier. Finally, all parameters are integrated into fuzzy goal programming to optimally evaluate and allocate construction suppliers for projects in the area.

2.2 Criteria used in the supplier evaluation

Although supplier selection criteria often differ from industry to industry, surveys of the literature show that criteria related to delivery, quality, and price are commonly considered across various sectors. The quality of materials and services has been a focal point in several studies (Dickson 1966 ; WEBER et al. 1991 ; Tam 2001 ; Chan and Kumar 2007 ; Gencer and Guerpinar 2007 ; Guo et al. 2009 ; Wang 2010 ; Balezentis and Balezentis 2011 ; Zeydan et al. 2011 ; Kilic 2013 ; Cristea and Cristea 2017 ; Tamosaitiene et al. 2017 ; Wang et al. 2017 ; Fallahpour et al. 2017 ), while aspects such as total price and delivery time have been emphasized by others (Dickson 1966 ; Weber et al. 1991 ; Tam 2001 ; Chan and Kumar 2007 ; Gencer and Guerpinar 2007 ; Lee 2009 ; Guo et al. 2009 ; Lam et al. 2010 ; Wang 2010 ; Balezentis and Balezentis 2011 ; Kilic 2013 ; Hruska et al. 2014 ; Cristea and Cristea 2017 ; Wang et al. 2017 ; Buyukozkan and Gocer 2017 ; Fallahpour et al. 2017 ). Certifications of products and materials (Ting and Cho 2008 ; Hudymacova et al. 2010 ; Cristea and Cristea 2017 ), supplier reputation (Lin and Chang 2008 ; Rezaei et al. 2014 ), and warranty periods post-delivery have also been considered key factors in supplier evaluations (Cristea and Cristea 2017 ; Wang 2010 ). Consistent performance and reliability are crucial, as emphasized in the literature (Wang et al. 2004 ; Chan and Kumar 2007 ; Gencer and Guerpinar 2007 ; Lee 2009 ; Cristea and Cristea 2017 ). Despite the evolving landscape and increasing emphasis on qualitative criteria, financial parameters, delivery, and quality consistently emerge as core criteria in nearly all research on supplier selection. This trend is affirmed by the aforementioned studies, which significantly influence decision-making in the supplier evaluation process.

In this study, related literature served as the primary source for identifying supplier selection criteria, supplemented by feedback from surveying 32 NGOs implementing construction projects in Syria. These surveys focused more on risk and humanitarian factors in supplier evaluation in conflict areas, whereas previous studies often concentrated on stable communities and regions. Most earlier research predominantly relied on criteria weights determined through AHP, MCDM, and/or TOPSIS under normal and stable conditions. However, there has been a notable lack of research focused on developing optimal strategies for evaluating and allocating construction suppliers in crisis areas, especially considering humanitarian and risk factors assessed through GIS. This study extends existing methodologies by identifying and weighting criteria using F-AHP, performing GIS-based risk assessments, and deriving a risk value for each supplier. These values are integrated into a mathematical model that employs fuzzy goal programming to optimally allocate construction suppliers to projects. This approach aims to provide a robust framework for supplier selection in challenging environments, ensuring that projects are equipped with the best possible resources under demanding conditions.

3 Methodology

A novel hybrid approach has been introduced to address the complexities of this multi-criteria problem. To begin, a GIS-based risk assessment methodology was employed. This entailed determining the risk values associated with each potential construction supplier within the conflict-affected region through the integration of spatial analysis. Subsequently, a multi-criteria technique was applied utilizing F-GP to effectively solve the model and identify the optimal solution. Within this framework, particular emphasis was placed on the assignment of construction suppliers to the required projects that best align with a spectrum of goals encompassing financial, technical, spatial, humanitarian, environmental, and risk considerations. The ensuing sections provide a meticulous delineation of the steps and procedures undertaken in this approach, as shown in Fig.  1 :

Dual-Pronged Data Collection: This involves two methods, surveys and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs).

➢Surveys: We collected responses from 32 NGOs to obtain a broad perspective on different practices and standards in the field. These surveys provided quantifiable and comparable data about the NGOs' methods for evaluating suppliers and criteria utilized.

The proposed methodology to solve the supplier problem

We employed a purposive sampling approach to select NGOs for our survey. Around 40 active local NGOs that conduct construction projects were invited to participate in the surveys, but 32 NGOs responded. This approach ensured that all participants were actively engaged in construction projects within Syria, allowing for a focused examination of construction supplier evaluation practices in this specific context. This method facilitated access to targeted insights into the challenges and practices peculiar to NGOs operating in conflict-affected regions.

Survey Validation: To ensure the reliability and relevance of our questionnaire for surveying NGOs, we implemented a validation process with input from both academic researchers and donors experienced in construction projects in Syria. The validation process included:

• Expert Selection: Two academics specializing in construction supplier evaluation, two experts from local NGOs, and two donors involved in construction project funding were selected for their extensive knowledge and field experience, as detailed in Table  1 .

• Review Process: Experts reviewed the draft questionnaire, assessing clarity, relevance to our objectives, and comprehensiveness in covering the NGO supplier evaluation process in conflict zones.

• Criteria for Validation:

(I) Clarity: Questions were designed to be clear and unambiguous.

(II) Relevance: All questions directly related to construction supplier selection and evaluation practices.

(III) Comprehensiveness: The questionnaire comprehensively covered all aspects critical to NGO decision-making in supplier evaluation and selection.

• Feedback and Revisions: Experts provided structured feedback suggesting necessary revisions to improve question focus. These changes were incorporated to enhance the supplier evaluation process.

• Final Validation: The revised questionnaire underwent a final review to confirm all modifications were effectively integrated. Approval from all experts confirmed the questionnaire was validated and ready for deployment. The whole survey is provided in Appendix 1 .

➢ FGDs: FGDs serve as a pivotal tool for delving deeper into issues initially highlighted through surveys. These discussions enable a nuanced exploration of the perspectives and practices of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), facilitating the identification of both common themes and divergent viewpoints. This process is crucial for developing a robust evaluation framework. For instance, when surveys reveal a lack of consensus on specific points, FGDs are instrumental in fostering collective agreement. Through FGDs, it was determined that the maximum acceptable distance for allocating a supplier to a construction project is 100 km. This limit is based on experiences showing that greater distances complicate project execution and increase logistical challenges. Similarly, it was established that suppliers within this region could be allocated to a maximum of three construction projects. This restriction reflects the administrative capacities of local suppliers who often lack the robust administrative structures necessary to manage multiple projects effectively. These conclusions are drawn from the practical insights and experiences of humanitarian actors and donors who have implemented construction projects in the region.

Prioritizing the criteria: Utilizing the F-AHP, a decision-making framework that allows for the incorporation of human judgment and uncertainty. It is used to determine the relative importance of a set of criteria that NGOs consider when evaluating suppliers. The "fuzzy" aspect allows it to handle imprecision, which is often the case in a crisis environment.

GIS Spatial Analysis: Geographic Information System (GIS) is a tool used to capture, store, manipulate, analyze, manage, and present spatial or geographic data. In this context, it helps in identifying and visualizing risks associated with different geographical locations where suppliers might operate, contributing to a comprehensive risk map. Two risks are defined: the first is the frontline risk, and the second is the hard access areas risk.

Building the Fuzzy Model: This involves creating a model based on fuzzy goal programming. This model can handle the complexity and ambiguity of real-world desired targets in each objective, making it suitable for evaluating suppliers where information may be incomplete or uncertain.

Model Validation: Before using the model for decision-making, it is critical to ensure that it accurately reflects the real-world scenario it's intended to represent. This involves testing the model against numerical examples to confirm its reliability.

Solving the model: The model is solved using GAMS, a high-level modeling system for mathematical programming problems. It is used to find the best solution or the most optimal supplier according to the criteria and data fed into the fuzzy model.

Sensitivity Analysis: After determining the optimal supplier, a sensitivity analysis is performed. This process involves changing one or more parameters in the model to see how these changes affect the outcome.

3.1 Building the model

3.1.1 model parameters.

Set of tenders; i ϵ I

Set of candidate construction suppliers; j ϵ J

Set of targeted objectives; n ϵ N

Distance between candidate construction supplier j and another (acquired from building road network dataset by GIS)

Submission matrix for tender i by each construction supplier j (not all supplier is submitting their offers to all tenders)

Financial offer submitted by supplier j for each tender i

Total value of previous contracts for each candidate supplier j.

Risk at each candidate location of Candidate supplier j in terms of proximity to frontlines.

Risk at each candidate location of Candidate supplier j in terms of hard access areas.

Quality of materials submitted by candidate supplier j for each tender.

Staff experience for Candidate supplier j.

Delivery time submitted by candidate supplier j for each tender.

Promptness response of quality and delivery issues for Candidate supplier j.

Capacity of each Candidate supplier j.

managemental capacity of each Candidate supplier j.

Financial capacity of each Candidate supplier j.

Recommendation letter submitted by third party for each Candidate supplier j.

Child labor involvement for each Candidate supplier j.

Commitment to humanitarian principles for each Candidate supplier j.

Commitment to environmental regulation and compliance for each Candidate supplier j.

Weights of each fuzzy goal n.

Aspiration level for each fuzzy goal n.

Maximum allowable deviation for each fuzzy goal n

3.1.2 Model decision variables

Amount of an overachieved for each fuzzy goal n

Amount of an underachieved for each fuzzy goal n

Degree of membership for each fuzzy goal n

3.1.3 Objective functions

Equations ( 1 ) to ( 2 ) delineate the objectives of the proposed model. Equation ( 1 ) is designed to maximize the overall quality of materials submitted by candidate suppliers. In contrast, Eq. ( 2 ) focuses on minimizing the financial bids tendered by the construction suppliers to conduct the construction works in the area. Equation ( 3 ) seeks to maximize the aggregate value of previous contracts held by the chosen suppliers, while Eq. ( 4 ) aims to enhance the cumulative experience of their staff. Equation ( 5 ) is intended to minimize the total delivery time for completing the construction projects as proposed by the suppliers.

Subsequent equations, namely Eqs. ( 6 ) through ( 7 ), are directed towards maximizing various operational capacities of the selected suppliers. These include promptness in response (Eq.  6 ), equipment capacity (Eq.  7 ), managerial capacity (Eq.  8 ), financial stability (Eq.  9 ), and the quantity of recommendation letters (Eq.  10 ). Equation ( 11 ) is oriented towards minimizing the incidence of child labor among the selected suppliers.

Equation ( 12 ) addresses the commitment of suppliers to humanitarian principles, aiming for its maximization. Equations ( 13 ) and ( 14 ) target risk minimization related to the proximity of suppliers to frontlines and hard-to-access areas. Lastly, Eq. ( 15 ) is dedicated to maximizing adherence to environmental regulations by the selected construction suppliers.

Subject to:

The hard constraints of this model are encapsulated in Eqs. ( 16 ) to ( 20 ). Equation ( 16 ) mandates that each construction sub-project is to be allocated to only one supplier. Equation ( 17 ) specifies that a project can only be assigned to candidate suppliers who have submitted an offer for that particular project, as indicated by the submission matrix. Equation ( 18 ) limits the assignment of each construction supplier to a maximum of three projects. Equation ( 19 ) imposes a geographical constraint, ensuring that the projects assigned to a supplier are within a maximum distance of 100 km. Finally, Eq. ( 20 ) defines the binary variables associated with the selection of suppliers.

In existing literature, a variety of methods have been proposed to address multi-objective problems (Ulungu et al. 1994 ; Aiello et al. 2006 ; Ye and Zhou 2007 ; Singh and Singh 2011 ; Xu and Li 2012 ; Hathhorn et al. 2013 ; Emami and Nookabadi 2013 ; Xu et al. 2016 ; Li et al. 2017 ) In this particular study, the problem was addressed using fuzzy goal programming, F-AHP, GIS-based risk assessment, humanitarian and environmental context of the Syrian crisis.

3.2 Fuzzy goal programming

Goal programming is an approach used for solving multi-objective optimization problems that balances trade-offs in conflicting objectives. It allows for balancing all desired objectives (from Eq.  1 ) to Eq.  15 through direct trade-offs between all unwanted deviational variables by placing them in a normalized single-achievement function that includes all the objective deviations in just one equation (Jones and Tamiz 2010 ). In this study, a fuzzy goal programming model has been utilized because it provides a more realistic approximation to real case studies. This model was presented by Yaghoobi et al. ( 2008 ). The model consolidates all the objective functions into a single objective function, as formulated in Eq.  21 , where efforts are made to minimize the deviations from the desired goal values in each goal, taking into account the weight of each objective function.

Consecutively, we have converted each objective function into soft constraints by adding the deviations \({O}_{n}\) ​ for those objective functions that we are striving to minimize, and \({U}_{n}\) ​ ffor those objective functions that we are striving to maximize. The soft constraints are formulated in Eqs.  22 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 30 , 32 , 34 , 36 , 38 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 46 , 48 , and 50 , while Eqs.  23 , 25 , 27 , 29 , 31 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 39 , 41 , 43 , 45 , 47 , 49 , and 51 are constraints that ensure the sum of the normalized negative deviations, normalized positive deviations, and the membership variable \({\mu }_{\text{n}}\) ​ equals one. The fuzzy model is presented and validated by the Yaghoobi model (Yaghoobi et al. 2008 ).

3.3 Model validation

In the scholarly exposition of the case study, the validation of the proposed allocation model is meticulously articulated through a two-pronged data analysis approach. Initial validation is undertaken via synthetically constructed datasets, derived post-consultation with domain experts. This preliminary phase encompasses two distinct numerical examples: the first involving 10 construction projects and 20 potential suppliers, and the second encompassing 20 construction projects paired with 30 candidate suppliers. These scenarios are rigorously tested against varied weight assignments, prioritizing the dual objectives of optimizing material quality and minimizing project costs. The detailed datasets and the resultant computational outcomes are systematically documented in Appendix 2 .

To elucidate the model's operational efficacy, Fig.  2 is presented, delineating a comparative analysis of the synthetic datasets. This visual representation accentuates the model's capacity to negotiate between the competing objectives of material quality and cost-efficiency. Notably, the graphic illustrations within Fig.  2 delineate a positive correlation between the assigned weight to material quality and the model's propensity to enhance this particular objective. Conversely, an augmented emphasis on cost reduction is reciprocated by the model's inclination to curtail financial expenditures. Collectively, these outcomes substantiate the model's robustness and its capability to deliver balanced solutions within the complex operational landscape of Northern Syria's reconstruction endeavors.

Model validation results ( a , b , c , d )

Subsequent to the synthetic trials, the model's validity is further corroborated through empirical data amassed from field surveys and focus group discussions within the specific contexts of Al-Bab and Ar-Ra'ee, Syria. The integration of real-world data provides a pragmatic dimension to the model's applicability, with a sensitivity analysis cementing its relevance. The congruence between the model's outcomes and the practical requirements observed in the field serves as a testament to its validity and effectiveness.

4 Results and discussions

4.1 case study.

In the midst of ongoing crises in Northern Syria, the tendering process for construction projects has evolved into a multifaceted challenge. Various suppliers, eager to contribute to the rebuilding efforts, have submitted proposals to undertake one or multiple projects dispersed across the northern region of Syria in two sub-districts (AlBab and Ar-Ra'ee). An NGO, acting as the steward of these efforts, is tasked with the rigorous evaluation of these proposals against a comprehensive set of criteria. These criteria span humanitarian considerations, risk assessment considerations, environmental impact, ensuring sustainability amidst reconstruction, and technical and financial competencies, alongside the capacity to effectively deliver on project commitments.

The evaluation matrix is composed of fifteen distinct criteria, carefully designed to holistically assess each supplier's offer based on data collected from stakeholders in the area. This systematic approach aims to align the selection process with overarching objectives by proposing a novel hybrid fuzzy model. As a result, this study strives to promote equitable development and adherence to environmental and humanitarian standards, achieving a transparent framework for all stakeholders in the crisis region.

The NGO will allocate each project to the supplier that demonstrates the highest congruence with the defined criteria described in Table  2 , thus ensuring the optimal alignment of project needs with supplier capabilities. It is stipulated that a single supplier may be awarded a maximum of three projects, with the stipulation that the geographical distance of these projects does not exceed 100 km for one supplier. This constraint is imposed to ensure logistical feasibility and effective project oversight, as lessons learned from previous projects as a result of FGDs.

Through this case study, the article elucidates the operational complexities and the intricate decision-making processes involved in post-conflict reconstruction. The narrative underscores the necessity of a transparent, balanced, and multi-objective approach that interweaves diverse evaluation criteria to foster comprehensive development and stability in crisis-afflicted regions.

4.1.1 Environmental regulation and compliance

Four factors were considered during the visits to each construction supplier, as shown in Fig.  3 :

Water Conservation: Using water-efficient construction techniques, as water resources might be scarce or contaminated in crisis regions.

Low-Impact Materials: Choosing construction materials that have minimal environmental impact, such as locally sourced materials, to reduce transportation emissions and support the local economy.

Waste Reduction: Implementing strategies to minimize construction waste and ensure proper disposal, as waste management systems in crisis areas might be compromised.

Energy Efficiency: Incorporating energy-efficient designs in construction to reduce the long-term environmental footprint, considering the limited energy resources in such areas or utilizing photovoltaic energy to produce electricity.

Factor considered in the process of Environmental Regulation and Compliance

4.2 Findings

In this section, we present the results from applying the proposed hybrid methodology. We extracted the risk value for each candidate supplier by creating risk maps according to each criterion and its location on the related risk map, as shown in Fig.  4 .

Risk values in the target area

After calculating the risk value for each candidate supplier, we integrated this value into the mathematical fuzzy goal programming model as previously described. We solved the model using the software package, incorporating all fifteen goals to determine the optimal solution for the entire problem.

The inclusion of more criteria in the model enhances its transparency for the affected populations and suppliers within the humanitarian context and yields more varied values. This results in a marked variance between the values of candidate suppliers, which facilitates the selection process for decision-makers.

The results obtained from solving the proposed hybrid fuzzy model revealed the optimal solution achieved for each goal. We have presented these in Table  3 to compare the actual values against the planned values (identified by three dedicated experts considering humanitarian aspects and similar previous projects in northern Syria). Additionally, we depict the results in Fig.  5 , showcasing the actual achieved values for each objective as a percentage and obtained value.

Planned goals vs actual

For example, our cost target was approximately $300,000, but the actual value achieved was $321,526, reflecting an increase of 7%, which is considered relatively satisfactory as we strive to minimize this goal. While our aim was to reach a material quality scale of 66, we achieved a higher scale number of 94, which is approximately 44% higher. Our target for allocating suppliers with previous contracts was around $1,200,000, but after running the model, we achieved a very close value of $1,276,414. Throughout the model, we aimed to achieve 66 for staff experience, 150 for total delivery time to complete the projects, and scales of 66 for promptness response, equipment capacity, managerial capacity, financial capacity, recommendation letters, 40 for child labor involvement, 60 for commitment to humanitarian principles, 30 for risks related to frontlines, 30 for risks related to hard-to-access areas, and 60 for commitment to environmental regulations. In the results, we obtained 67, 260, 66, 67, 66, 94, 78, 44, 71, 26, 35, and 61, respectively.

The potential reasons for obtaining values that deviate significantly from the target values can be described as follows:

The decision-makers in the target area consider previous projects as a baseline and attempt to predict optimistic targets for this project based on that baseline.

Occasionally, the model may have already achieved the optimal values related to a specific criterion, indicating that there is no further possibility to improve the solution.

The model consistently strives to balance the achievement of goals according to weights determined by the F-AHP and does not focus on any single criterion in isolation.

4.3 Sensitivity analysis

4.3.1 scenario 1: financial offers changing.

In this Scenario, adjustments were made to the financial offers in response to the unstable market conditions in the area. Starting with a planned value of $300,000, the model endeavored to minimize this financial goal. A resultant value of $305,449.7 was obtained at a -5% change, as illustrated in Fig.  6 . When transitioning from a 0% to a 5% change, there was an observed increase in the financial offers. However, this increase still remained less than the 5% threshold relative to the 0% change scenario. This indicates that the model consistently prioritizes minimizing financial costs while simultaneously considering the fulfillment of other objectives.

Changes of financial offer

4.3.2 Scenario 2: some projects and suppliers are outside the calculation because of its location withing the frontline region

In this scenario, stakeholders acknowledge the possibility that some areas on the frontlines may become uncontrollable. This implies that construction projects and suppliers in these areas would be excluded from consideration, necessitating a resolution of the problem without their involvement. In this case, the projects and suppliers in the frontline area can be characterized as follows:

The construction suppliers: S4, which was not selected under normal circumstances, and S5, S6, and S7, which were selected in the normal situation.

Project P3 is also excluded from consideration.

The results obtained after solving the model under these conditions are presented in Table  4 . It is observed that each project is allocated once, and the selected suppliers are assigned to a maximum of two construction projects each. In Table  5 , the achieved goals are compared against the planned values. The solution in this altered scenario is less favorable compared with the normal situation, particularly concerning the first three most critical factors (G1, G2, G3). This outcome is expected due to the exclusion of three suppliers initially chosen in the normal situation from Case 2.

4.4 Implications for theory and practice

4.4.1 theoretical implications.

This research enriches the theoretical landscape by blending diverse methodologies, notably integrating Fuzzy Goal Programming, GIS-based risk assessment, and the F-AHP. This multifaceted approach not only advances the understanding of MCDM but also tailors it specifically to the nuanced requirements of post-conflict reconstruction scenarios. This result is supported by Govindan et al. ( 2020 ), who emphasized the importance of using multiple methodologies to enhance decision-making processes. Such a synthesis is pivotal in offering a comprehensive framework that not only addresses but also adapts to the evolving complexities inherent in construction supplier evaluation within such zones. Additionally, the incorporation of real-world data and case studies enhances the theoretical relevance of the model, grounding abstract concepts in tangible scenarios that reflect the current challenges faced in supply chain management within conflict-impacted environments.

4.4.2 Managerial implications

From a practical standpoint, this study provides robust tools for improving decision-making in crisis situations. By systematizing the evaluation and allocation of suppliers to construction projects, the model underscores the critical importance of integrating risk and humanitarian considerations into procurement strategies. Such insights are invaluable for NGOs, donors, and local authorities engaged in reconstruction efforts, offering them a methodologically sound approach to enhance their operations. The application of this model not only promises enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in project implementations but also fosters greater transparency and accountability in environments that traditionally suffer from high uncertainty and risk.

Furthermore, the strategic recommendations outlined in this study serve as a guiding framework for entities involved in reconstruction efforts. By adopting the proposed methodologies, these organizations can better navigate the complexities of supplier selection and project allocation in ways that align with both immediate project goals and long-term developmental objectives. This dual focus on operational efficiency and strategic foresight exemplifies the practical applications of the research, providing a scalable and adaptable solution that can be customized for various conflict-affected regions worldwide.

5 Conclusion

This study has developed an innovative hybrid methodology aimed at optimizing supplier selection and assignment for construction projects critical to the reconstruction efforts in Syria post-crisis and following the February 2023 earthquake. By integrating Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and the F-AHP, the approach effectively identifies the risk values associated with each potential supplier, facilitating the selection of the most suitable entities. The subsequent application of fuzzy goal programming ensures that the selection and assignment processes are guided by a robust multi-objective optimization framework, which incorporates a comprehensive set of criteria covering technical, financial, humanitarian, and risk aspects.

The findings of this research significantly contribute to both theoretical understanding and practical applications in the field of crisis management and reconstruction. Theoretically, it bridges the gap in multi-criteria decision-making models by incorporating complex and dynamic environments such as conflict zones. Practically, it offers a transparent, systematic framework that enhances decision-making in supplier selection and project assignments, which is critical for effective reconstruction efforts. The real-case application using data collected from northern Syria not only demonstrates the methodology’s applicability and effectiveness but also its adaptability to other conflict-affected regions globally.

Addressing the research questions posed at the outset, the study highlights that a diverse array of supplier selection criteria, previously under-considered in conflict zones, are indeed crucial for the construction industry. The integration of GIS-based risk analysis and multi-criteria decision-making tools like F-AHP has proven effective in enhancing the efficiency and outcomes of construction projects in such challenging environments. These methodologies allow for a nuanced consideration of various risk factors and ensure that the most capable suppliers are selected and assigned to projects that they are best suited for.

Despite its innovative approach and contributions, the study acknowledges certain limitations, such as its focus on a relatively small geographic area and the omission of some potential risk factors. Future research could address these limitations by expanding the geographical scope of the study and incorporating more dynamic models that account for additional risk factors and real-time data. This would not only enhance the robustness of the model but also its applicability to a wider array of scenarios in conflict-affected regions.

In conclusion, this study not only enhances our understanding of supplier evaluation in post-conflict reconstruction but also contributes to more effective resource utilization, transparency in decision-making, and ultimately, the speedy recovery of affected communities. By continuing to refine and adapt this approach, it holds significant promise for aiding reconstruction efforts not just in Syria, but in any region emerging from crisis.

Data Availability

The data that support the findings is provided upon reasonable request to the first author.

Aiello G, Enea M, Galante G (2006) A multi-objective approach to facility layout problem by genetic search algorithm and Electre method. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 22:447–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2005.11.002

Article   Google Scholar  

Amiri M, Hashemi-Tabatabaei M, Ghahremanloo M et al (2020) A new fuzzy BWM approach for evaluating and selecting a sustainable supplier in supply chain management. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2020.1793424

Balezentis A, Balezentis T (2011) An innovative multi-criteria supplier selection based on two-tuple MULTIMOORA and hybrid data. Econ Comput Econ Cybern Stud Res 45:37–56

Google Scholar  

Buyukozkan G, Gocer F (2017) Application of a new combined intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach based on axiomatic design methodology for the supplier selection problem. Appl Soft Comput 52:1222–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2016.08.051

Cakar T, Çavuş B (2021) Supplier selection process in dairy industry using fuzzy topsis method. Oper Res Eng Sci: Theory Appl 4:82–98. https://doi.org/10.31181/ORESTA2040182C

Chan FTS, Kumar N (2007) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega-Int J Manage Sci 35:417–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.08.004

Christopher M (2016) Logistics and supply chain management: logistics & supply chain management. Pearson UK

Cristea C, Cristea M (2017) A multi-criteria decision making approach for supplier selection in the flexible packaging industry. In: Oancea G, Dragoi M V (eds) 4TH International Conference on Computing and Solutionsin Manufacturing Engineering 2016 - COSME’16. E D P Sciences, 17 AVE DU HOGGAR PARC D Activites Coutaboeuf BP 112, F-91944 Cedex A, France

Dickson G (1966) An analysis of vendor selection systems and decision. J Purch 2:257–267

Emami S, S. Nookabadi A, (2013) Managing a new multi-objective model for the dynamic facility layout problem. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68:2215–2228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-4820-5

Etlanda KA, Sutawidjaya AH (2022) Analysis of pump factory supplier selection criteria using AHP method (Pt. XYZ Jakarta). Eur J Innov Bus Manag Res 7:280–286. https://doi.org/10.24018/EJBMR.2022.7.1.1231

Fallahpour A, Olugu EU, Musa SN (2017) A hybrid model for supplier selection: integration of AHP and multi expression programming (MEP). Neural Comput Appl 28:499–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2078-6

Garg H (2016a) A new generalized improved score function of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and applications in expert systems. Appl Soft Comput 38:988–999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.10.040

Garg H (2016b) A novel accuracy function under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment for solving multicriteria decision making problem. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 31:529–540. https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-162165

Garg H (2017) Generalized Pythagorean Fuzzy Geometric Aggregation Operators Using Einstein t -Norm and t -Conorm for multicriteria decision-making process. Int J Intell Syst 32:597–630. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21860

Gencer C, Guerpinar D (2007) Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm. Appl Math Model 31:2475–2486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2006.10.002

Ghodsypour SH, O’Brien C (2001) The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria and capacity constraint. Int J Prod Econ 73:15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(01)00093-7

Giri BC, Molla MU, Biswas P (2022) Pythagorean fuzzy DEMATEL method for supplier selection in sustainable supply chain management. Expert Syst Appl. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.116396

Govindan K, Mina H, Esmaeili A, Gholami-Zanjani SM (2020) An integrated hybrid approach for circular supplier selection and closed loop supply chain network design under uncertainty. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.118317

Guo X, Yuan Z, Tian B (2009) Supplier selection based on hierarchical potential support vector machine. Expert Syst Appl 36:6978–6985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.08.074

Gupta R, Kumar S (2022) Intuitionistic fuzzy scale-invariant entropy with correlation coefficients-based VIKOR approach for multi-criteria decision-making. Granul Comput 7:77–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/S41066-020-00252-0

Hallak J, Polat EG (2021) A MCDM based on goal programming and GIS-based risk assessment for the evaluation of educational locations in conflict areas. Fund Computing Decis Sci. https://doi.org/10.2478/fcds-2021-0022

Hallak J, Koyuncu M, Miç P (2019) Determining shelter locations in conflict areas by multiobjective modeling: A case study in northern Syria. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101202

Hallak J, Koyuncu M, Miç P (2021) A GIS-based risk assessment approach for evaluating shelters in crisis areas: Case of Idleb/Syria. Eur J Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.1007768

Hathhorn J, Sisikoglu E, Sir MY (2013) A multi-objective mixed-integer programming model for a multi-floor facility layout. Int J Prod Res 51:4223–4239. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.753486

Hruska R, Prusa P, Babic D (2014) The use of AHP method for selection of supplier. Transport 29:195–203. https://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2014.930928

Hudymacova M, Benkova M, Pocsova J, Skovranek T (2010) Supplier selection based on multi-criterial AHP method. Acta Montan Slovaca 15:249–255

Jones D, Tamiz M (2010) Practical goal programming 141. Springer, New York

Kilic HS (2013) An integrated approach for supplier selection in multi-item/multi-supplier environment. Appl Math Model 37:7752–7763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.03.010

Lam K-C, Tao R, Lam MC-K (2010) A material supplier selection model for property developers using fuzzy principal component analysis. Autom Constr 19:608–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.02.007

Lee AHI (2009) A fuzzy supplier selection model with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. Expert Syst Appl 36:2879–2893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.01.045

Li H, Sun RJ, Dong KY et al (2017) Selecting China’s strategic petroleum reserve sites by multi-objective programming model. Pet Sci 14:622–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-017-0175-0

Lin H-T, Chang W-L (2008) Order selection and pricing methods using flexible quantity and fuzzy approach for buyer evaluation. Eur J Oper Res 187:415–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.03.003

Mina H, Kannan D, Gholami-Zanjani SM, Biuki M (2021) Transition towards circular supplier selection in petrochemical industry: A hybrid approach to achieve sustainable development goals. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.125273

Pal O, Gupta AK, Garg RK (2013) Supplier selection criteria and methods in supply chains : a review. Int J Soc Edu Econ Manag Eng 7:2668–2673

Khaled AA, Paul S, Chakraborty R, Ayuby S (2011) Selection of suppliers through different multi-criteria decision making techniques. Glob J Manag Bus Res 11:1–12

Rezaei J, Fahim PBM, Tavasszy L (2014) Supplier selection in the airline retail industry using a funnel methodology: Conjunctive screening method and fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst Appl 41:8165–8179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.005

Sarkis J, Talluri S (2002) A model for strategic supplier selection. J Supply Chain Manag. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2002.tb00117.x

Singh SP, Singh VK (2011) Three-level AHP-based heuristic approach for a multi-objective facility layout problem. Int J Prod Res 49:1105–1125. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540903536148

Tam MCY, VT, (2001) An application of the AHP in vendor selection of a telecommunication systems OMEGA. Int J Manag Sci 29:171–182

Tamosaitiene J, Zavadskas EK, Sileikaite I, Turskis Z (2017) A novel hybrid MCDM approach for complicated supply chain management problems in construction. In: Juozapaitis A, Daniunas A, Zavadskas EK (eds) Modern Building Materials, Structures and Techniques. Elsevier Science BV, Sara Burgerhartstraat 25, PO BOX 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp 1137–1145

Ting S-G, Cho DI (2008) An integrated approach for supplier selection and purchasing decisions. Supply Chain Manag Int J 13:116–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540810860958

Tushar ZN, Bari ABMM, Khan MA (2022) Circular supplier selection in the construction industry: A sustainability perspective for the emerging economies. Sustainable Manufacturing and Service Economics 1:10000. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SMSE.2022.100005

Ulungu EL, Teghem J, Wiley J (1994) Multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems: a survey. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 3:83–87

Wang W-P (2010) A fuzzy linguistic computing approach to supplier evaluation. Appl Math Model 34:3130–3141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2010.02.002

Wang G, Huang SH, Dismukes JP (2004) Product-driven supply chain selection using integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology. Int J Prod Econ 91:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00221-4

Wang T-K, Zhang Q, Chong H-Y, Wang X (2017) Integrated supplier selection framework in a resilient construction supply chain: An Approach via Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Grey Relational Analysis (GRA). Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020289

Weber CA, Current JR, Benton WC (1991) Vendor selection criteria and methods. Eur J Oper Res 50:2–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(91)90033-R

Xu J, Li Z (2012) Multi-objective dynamic construction site layout planning in fuzzy random environment. Autom Constr 27:155–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.05.017

Xu J, Liu Q, Lei X (2016) A fuzzy multi-objective model and application for the discrete dynamic temporary facilities location planning problem. J Civ Eng Manag 22:357–372. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2014.897974

Yaghoobi MA, Jones DF, Tamiz M (2008) Weighted additive models for solving fuzzy goal programming problems. Asia Pac J Oper Res 25:715–733

Ye M, Zhou G (2007) A local genetic approach to multi-objective, facility layout problems with fixed aisles. Int J Prod Res 45:5243–5264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540600818179

Zeydan M, Colpan C, Cobanoglu C (2011) A combined methodology for supplier selection and performance evaluation. Expert Syst Appl 38:2741–2751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.08.064

Download references

Open access funding provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hasan Kalyoncu University, Gaziantep, Türkiye

Jamil Hallak

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jamil Hallak .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

An ethics vote was not required for this work.

Conflict of interest

The author declare that he has no conflict of interest and no competing interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hallak, J. Optimizing construction supplier selection in conflict-affected regions: a hybrid multi-criteria framework. Oper Manag Res (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-024-00505-0

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2024

Revised : 25 June 2024

Accepted : 25 June 2024

Published : 17 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-024-00505-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Supplier selection
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research