Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Selection of Investment Projects in Air Defense Industry by Multi Criteria Decision Making and Goal Programming

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 39 - 63, 18.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.334675

Öz

The developments within defense industry and the investment expenditure
made in this region points out the situation of the countries’ defensive
status. Defense industry investment expenditure have an important share within
the
country's economy. Therefore, the choice of the most appropriate
investment project is also important in the investment determination process.
When a wrong desicion is choosed, the resources are wasted, and the foundations
have an attitude of loss. In this study, analytical hierarchy process and VIKOR
methods were used for multi-criteria decision-making methods for selection of
optimum investment projects among the projects that can be invested for the
company operating in aviation defense industry; Mathematical model was also
established with goal programming. In the selection of the investment project
budget, the number of personnel, dependency status, project duration, and
economy contribution criteria were included in the application. Ratio of
criteria and alternatives were obtained by the AHP method. The obtained ratio
was used for ranking in the VIKOR method. A mathematical model was also
established with goal programming. The ratio obtained in the AHP method and the
ranking values in the VIKOR method were used in the mathematical model. In
mathematical model, some constraints are solved. Different scenarios were used
on mathematical models. Thus, the decision maker was guided to the determinate
optimum projects among alternative investment projects.

Kaynakça

  • Aragones-Beltran, P., Chaparro-Gonzalez, F., Pastor-Fernando, J.P. ve Rodriguez-Pozo, F. (2010). An ANP-Based Approach For The Selection Of Photovoltaic Solar Power Plant Investment Projects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 249-264.
  • Aragones-Beltran, P., Chaparro-Gonzalez, F. ve Pastor-Fernando, J.P. (2014). An AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)/ANP (Analytic Network Process)-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Approach For The Selection Of Solar-Thermal Power Plant Investment Projects. Energy, 66, 222-238.
  • Aras, H., Erdoğmuş, Ş. ve Koç, E. (2004). Multi-Criteria Selection For A Wind Observation Station Location Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Renewable Energy, 29,1383-1392.
  • Aytürk, S. (2006). Askeri savunma sistemlerinde analitik hiyerarşi ve analitik şebeke prosesi ile hafif makineli tüfek seçimi. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Badri, M.A., Davis, D. ve Davis, D. (2001). A Comprehensive 0–1 Goal Programming Model For Project Selection. International Journal Of Project Management, 19, 243-252.
  • Bedir, N. ve Eren, T. (2015). AHP-PROMETHEE Yöntemleri Entegrasyonu ile Personel Seçim Problemi: Perakende Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Social Sciences Research Journal, 4, 46-58.
  • Bilgen, B. ve Şen, M. (2012). Project Selection Through Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and A Case Study On Six Sigma Implementation In An Automotive Industry. Production Planning and Control, 23 (1), 2-25.
  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. ve Ferguson, R. (1955). Optimal Estimation of Executive Compensation by Linear Programming. Management Science, 1, 138-151.
  • Charnes, A. ve Cooper, W.W. (1961). Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming. New York: Wiley.
  • Cheng, E.W.L. ve Li, H. (2005). Analytic Network Process Applied To Project Selection. J. Constr. Eng. Management, 131 (4), 459-466.
  • Cihan, Ş., Ayan, E., Eren, T., Topal, T. ve Yıldırım, E.K. (2017). Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Ekokardiyografi Cihazı Seçiminin Yapılması. HSP, 4 (1), 41-49.
  • Dimova, L., Sevastianov, P. Ve Sevastianov, D. (2006). MCDM In A Fuzzy Setting: Investment Projects Assessment Application. Int. J. Production Economics, 100, 10-29.
  • Dozic, S. ve Kalic, M. (2014). An AHP Approach To Aircraft Selection Process. Transportation Research Procedia, 3, 165-174.
  • Ebrahimnejad, S., Mousavi, S.M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Hashemi, H. ve Vahdani, B. (2012). A Novel Two-Phase Group Decision Making Approach For Construction Project Selection In A Fuzzy Environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36, 4197–4217.
  • Eren, T. ve Özder, E. H. (2016, November). Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri İle Bir İçecek Firması İçin Tedarikçi Seçimi. In 4th International Symposium on Innovative Technologies in Engineering and Science (ISITES2016) 3-5 Nov 2016 Alanya/Antalya-Turkey.
  • Göze, E.A. (2008). Analitik ağ süreci ile sürdürülebilir bir üçüncü parti lojistik servis sağlayıcı seçimi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • Gülenç, İ.F. ve Bilgin, G.A. (2010). Yatırım Kararları İçin Bir Model Önerisi. Öneri, 9 (34), 97-107. Hamurcu, M., & Eren, T. (2016). A Multicriteria Decision-Making for Monorail Route Selection in Ankara. International Journal of Industrial Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 4 (5), 121-125.
  • Ignizio, J.P. (1976). Goal Programming and Extensions, Lexington Mass: Heath. MA: Lexington Books.
  • Kaplan, S. ve Arıkan, F. (2012). Hava Savunma Sektörü Tezgah Yatırım Projelerinin Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi İle Değerlendirilmesi. Havacılık Ve Uzay Teknolojileri Dergisi, 5 (3), 23-33.
  • Karaman, B. ve Çerçioğlu, H. (2015). 0-1 Hedef Programlama Destekli Bütünleşik AHP– VIKOR Yöntemi: Hastane Yatırımı Projeleri Seçimi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 30 (4), 567-576.
  • Kim, G.C. ve Emery, J. (2000). An Application Of Zero–One Goal Programming in Project Selection and Resource Planning–A Case Study from the Woodward Governor Company. Computers & Operations Research, 27 (14), 1389-1408.
  • Kim, I., Shin, S., Choi, Y., Thang, N.M., Ramos, E.R. ve Hwang, W.J. (2009). Development Of A Project Selection Method On Information System Using ANP And Fuzzy Logic. International Journal of Computer, Electrical, Automation, Control and Information Engineering, 3 (5).
  • Kuru, A. ve Akın, B. (2012). Entegre Yönetim Sistemlerinde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Tekniklerinin Kullanımına Yönelik Yaklaşımlar ve Uygulamaları. Öneri, 10 (38), 129-144.
  • Lee, J.W. ve Kim, S.H. (2000). Using Analytic Network Process And Goal Programming For Interdependent Information System Project Selection. Computers and Operations Research, 27, 367-382.
  • Lee, S.M. (1972). Goal Programming for Decision Analysis. Philadelphia: Auerbach.
  • Liu, H. Ve Yan, T. (2007, August). Bidding-evaluation of construction projects based on VIKOR method. In Automation and Logistics, 2007 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 1778-1782). IEEE.
  • Mukherjee, K. Ve Bera, A. (1995). Application Of Goal Programming In Project Selection Decision-A Case Study From The Indian Coal Mining Industry. European Journal Of Operational Research, 82 (1), 18-25.
  • Nandi, S., Paul, S. ve Phadtare, M. (2011). An AHP-Based Construction Project Selection Method. Decision, 38 (1), 91-118.
  • Opriovic, S. ve Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Compromise Solution By MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis Of VIKOR And TOPSIS. European Journal Of Operational Research, 156, 445-455.
  • Opricovic, S. ve Tzeng, G.H. (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178, 514-529.
  • Pangsri, P. (2015). Application Of The Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods For Project Selection. Universal Journal Of Management, 3 (1), 15-20.
  • Partovi, F.Y. (1994). Determining What To Bechmark: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach. International Journal Of Operation And Production Management, 14 (6), 25-39.
  • Russell, R.S. ve Taylor, B.W. (2003). Operations Management 4th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  • Saaty, T.L. (1990). How To Make A Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 9-26.
  • Satty, T.L. (1994). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory With The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pitssburgh: RWS Publications.
  • Salehi, K. (2015). A Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Approach For Project Selection Problem. Decision Science Letters, 4, 109–116.
  • San Cristobal, J.R. (2011). Multi-Criteria Decision-Making In The Selection Of A Renewable Energy Project In Spain: The Vikor method. Renewable Energy, 36, 498-502.
  • Santhanamt, R. ve Kyparisis, J. (1995). A Multiple Criteria Decision Model For Information System Project Selection. Computers And Operations Research, 22 (8), 807-818.
  • Tamiz, M. ve Jones, D.F. (1997). Interactive Frameworks For Investigation Of Goal Programming Models: Theory and Practice. Journal Of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 6, 52-60.
  • Tripathy, B.B. ve Biswal, M.P. (2007). A Zero-One Goal Programming Approach For Project Selection. Journal Of Information And Optimization Sciences, 28 (4), 619-626.
  • Tzeng, G.H., Lin, C.W. ve Opricovic, S. (2005). Multi-Criteria Analysis of Alternative-Fuel Buses for Public Transportation. Energy Policy, 33, 1373-1383.
  • Weingartner, H.M. (1966). Criteria For Programming Investment Project Selection. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 15 (1), 65-76.
  • Yang, C. ve Wang, T. (2006). VIKOR Method Analysis of Interactive Trade in Policy-Making. The Business Review, 6 (2), 77-85.
  • Yavuz, S. ve Captain, T.A. (2002). Making Project Selection Decisions: A Multi-Period Capital Budgeting Problem. International Journal Of Industrial Engineering, 9 (3), 301-310.
  • Yılmaz, H. (2009). Ürün Tasarımında Kalite Fonksiyon Yayılımı (KFY) ve Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHS) Yöntemleriyle Ürün Optimizasyonu: Seramik Lavabo Örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İzmir Yüksek Teknoloji Enstitüsü, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Yu, P.L. (1973). A Class Of Solutions For Group Decision Problems. Management Science, 19, 936–946.
  • Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple Criteria Decision Making. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.

Hava Savunma Sanayinde Yatırım Projelerinin Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme ve Hedef Programlama ile Seçimi

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 39 - 63, 18.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.334675

Öz

Savunma sanayi alanındaki
gelişmeler ve bu doğrultuda yapılan yatırım harcamaları ülkelerin savunma
alanındaki konumunu göstermektedir. Ülke ekonomisi içerisinde savunma sanayi
yatırım harcamaları önemli bir paya sahiptir. Bu kapsamda yatırım kararı
sürecinde en uygun yatırım projesinin seçimi de önem arz etmektedir. Hatalı
yatırım projesi veya projelerinin seçimi sonrasında kaynaklar boşa harcanmakta
ve kuruluşlar da zarar etme boyutuna gelmektedir. Bu çalışmada, havacılık
savunma sanayinde faaliyet gösteren işletme için yatırım yapılabilecek projeler
arasından optimum yatırım projelerinin seçimi için çok ölçütlü karar verme
yöntemlerinden analitik hiyerarşi prosesi (AHP) ve VIKOR yöntemleri
kullanılmış; ayrıca hedef programlama ile matematiksel model kurulmuştur.
Yatırım projesi seçiminde bütçe, personel sayısı, bağımlılık durumu, proje
süresi, ekonomiye katkı kriterleri uygulamaya dahil edilmiştir. AHP yöntemi ile
kriterlerin ve alternatiflerin ağırlıkları elde edilmiştir. Elde edilen
ağırlıklar VIKOR yönteminde sıralamanın yapılması için kullanılmıştır. Hedef
programlama ile de matematiksel model kurulmuştur. AHP yönteminde elde edilen
ağırlıklar ve VIKOR yönteminde bulunan sıralama değerleri matematiksel modelde
kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca matematiksel modelde birtakım kısıtlar çözüme
katılmıştır. Farklı senaryolar matematiksel model üzerinde uygulanmıştır.
Böylece karar vericiye alternatif yatırım projeleri arasından optimum projelerin
belirlemesinde yol gösterilmesi sağlanmıştır.

Kaynakça

  • Aragones-Beltran, P., Chaparro-Gonzalez, F., Pastor-Fernando, J.P. ve Rodriguez-Pozo, F. (2010). An ANP-Based Approach For The Selection Of Photovoltaic Solar Power Plant Investment Projects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 249-264.
  • Aragones-Beltran, P., Chaparro-Gonzalez, F. ve Pastor-Fernando, J.P. (2014). An AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)/ANP (Analytic Network Process)-Based Multi-Criteria Decision Approach For The Selection Of Solar-Thermal Power Plant Investment Projects. Energy, 66, 222-238.
  • Aras, H., Erdoğmuş, Ş. ve Koç, E. (2004). Multi-Criteria Selection For A Wind Observation Station Location Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Renewable Energy, 29,1383-1392.
  • Aytürk, S. (2006). Askeri savunma sistemlerinde analitik hiyerarşi ve analitik şebeke prosesi ile hafif makineli tüfek seçimi. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Badri, M.A., Davis, D. ve Davis, D. (2001). A Comprehensive 0–1 Goal Programming Model For Project Selection. International Journal Of Project Management, 19, 243-252.
  • Bedir, N. ve Eren, T. (2015). AHP-PROMETHEE Yöntemleri Entegrasyonu ile Personel Seçim Problemi: Perakende Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Social Sciences Research Journal, 4, 46-58.
  • Bilgen, B. ve Şen, M. (2012). Project Selection Through Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and A Case Study On Six Sigma Implementation In An Automotive Industry. Production Planning and Control, 23 (1), 2-25.
  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. ve Ferguson, R. (1955). Optimal Estimation of Executive Compensation by Linear Programming. Management Science, 1, 138-151.
  • Charnes, A. ve Cooper, W.W. (1961). Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming. New York: Wiley.
  • Cheng, E.W.L. ve Li, H. (2005). Analytic Network Process Applied To Project Selection. J. Constr. Eng. Management, 131 (4), 459-466.
  • Cihan, Ş., Ayan, E., Eren, T., Topal, T. ve Yıldırım, E.K. (2017). Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Ekokardiyografi Cihazı Seçiminin Yapılması. HSP, 4 (1), 41-49.
  • Dimova, L., Sevastianov, P. Ve Sevastianov, D. (2006). MCDM In A Fuzzy Setting: Investment Projects Assessment Application. Int. J. Production Economics, 100, 10-29.
  • Dozic, S. ve Kalic, M. (2014). An AHP Approach To Aircraft Selection Process. Transportation Research Procedia, 3, 165-174.
  • Ebrahimnejad, S., Mousavi, S.M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Hashemi, H. ve Vahdani, B. (2012). A Novel Two-Phase Group Decision Making Approach For Construction Project Selection In A Fuzzy Environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36, 4197–4217.
  • Eren, T. ve Özder, E. H. (2016, November). Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri İle Bir İçecek Firması İçin Tedarikçi Seçimi. In 4th International Symposium on Innovative Technologies in Engineering and Science (ISITES2016) 3-5 Nov 2016 Alanya/Antalya-Turkey.
  • Göze, E.A. (2008). Analitik ağ süreci ile sürdürülebilir bir üçüncü parti lojistik servis sağlayıcı seçimi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • Gülenç, İ.F. ve Bilgin, G.A. (2010). Yatırım Kararları İçin Bir Model Önerisi. Öneri, 9 (34), 97-107. Hamurcu, M., & Eren, T. (2016). A Multicriteria Decision-Making for Monorail Route Selection in Ankara. International Journal of Industrial Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 4 (5), 121-125.
  • Ignizio, J.P. (1976). Goal Programming and Extensions, Lexington Mass: Heath. MA: Lexington Books.
  • Kaplan, S. ve Arıkan, F. (2012). Hava Savunma Sektörü Tezgah Yatırım Projelerinin Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi İle Değerlendirilmesi. Havacılık Ve Uzay Teknolojileri Dergisi, 5 (3), 23-33.
  • Karaman, B. ve Çerçioğlu, H. (2015). 0-1 Hedef Programlama Destekli Bütünleşik AHP– VIKOR Yöntemi: Hastane Yatırımı Projeleri Seçimi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 30 (4), 567-576.
  • Kim, G.C. ve Emery, J. (2000). An Application Of Zero–One Goal Programming in Project Selection and Resource Planning–A Case Study from the Woodward Governor Company. Computers & Operations Research, 27 (14), 1389-1408.
  • Kim, I., Shin, S., Choi, Y., Thang, N.M., Ramos, E.R. ve Hwang, W.J. (2009). Development Of A Project Selection Method On Information System Using ANP And Fuzzy Logic. International Journal of Computer, Electrical, Automation, Control and Information Engineering, 3 (5).
  • Kuru, A. ve Akın, B. (2012). Entegre Yönetim Sistemlerinde Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Tekniklerinin Kullanımına Yönelik Yaklaşımlar ve Uygulamaları. Öneri, 10 (38), 129-144.
  • Lee, J.W. ve Kim, S.H. (2000). Using Analytic Network Process And Goal Programming For Interdependent Information System Project Selection. Computers and Operations Research, 27, 367-382.
  • Lee, S.M. (1972). Goal Programming for Decision Analysis. Philadelphia: Auerbach.
  • Liu, H. Ve Yan, T. (2007, August). Bidding-evaluation of construction projects based on VIKOR method. In Automation and Logistics, 2007 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 1778-1782). IEEE.
  • Mukherjee, K. Ve Bera, A. (1995). Application Of Goal Programming In Project Selection Decision-A Case Study From The Indian Coal Mining Industry. European Journal Of Operational Research, 82 (1), 18-25.
  • Nandi, S., Paul, S. ve Phadtare, M. (2011). An AHP-Based Construction Project Selection Method. Decision, 38 (1), 91-118.
  • Opriovic, S. ve Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Compromise Solution By MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis Of VIKOR And TOPSIS. European Journal Of Operational Research, 156, 445-455.
  • Opricovic, S. ve Tzeng, G.H. (2007). Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178, 514-529.
  • Pangsri, P. (2015). Application Of The Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods For Project Selection. Universal Journal Of Management, 3 (1), 15-20.
  • Partovi, F.Y. (1994). Determining What To Bechmark: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach. International Journal Of Operation And Production Management, 14 (6), 25-39.
  • Russell, R.S. ve Taylor, B.W. (2003). Operations Management 4th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
  • Saaty, T.L. (1990). How To Make A Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 9-26.
  • Satty, T.L. (1994). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory With The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pitssburgh: RWS Publications.
  • Salehi, K. (2015). A Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Approach For Project Selection Problem. Decision Science Letters, 4, 109–116.
  • San Cristobal, J.R. (2011). Multi-Criteria Decision-Making In The Selection Of A Renewable Energy Project In Spain: The Vikor method. Renewable Energy, 36, 498-502.
  • Santhanamt, R. ve Kyparisis, J. (1995). A Multiple Criteria Decision Model For Information System Project Selection. Computers And Operations Research, 22 (8), 807-818.
  • Tamiz, M. ve Jones, D.F. (1997). Interactive Frameworks For Investigation Of Goal Programming Models: Theory and Practice. Journal Of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 6, 52-60.
  • Tripathy, B.B. ve Biswal, M.P. (2007). A Zero-One Goal Programming Approach For Project Selection. Journal Of Information And Optimization Sciences, 28 (4), 619-626.
  • Tzeng, G.H., Lin, C.W. ve Opricovic, S. (2005). Multi-Criteria Analysis of Alternative-Fuel Buses for Public Transportation. Energy Policy, 33, 1373-1383.
  • Weingartner, H.M. (1966). Criteria For Programming Investment Project Selection. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 15 (1), 65-76.
  • Yang, C. ve Wang, T. (2006). VIKOR Method Analysis of Interactive Trade in Policy-Making. The Business Review, 6 (2), 77-85.
  • Yavuz, S. ve Captain, T.A. (2002). Making Project Selection Decisions: A Multi-Period Capital Budgeting Problem. International Journal Of Industrial Engineering, 9 (3), 301-310.
  • Yılmaz, H. (2009). Ürün Tasarımında Kalite Fonksiyon Yayılımı (KFY) ve Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHS) Yöntemleriyle Ürün Optimizasyonu: Seramik Lavabo Örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İzmir Yüksek Teknoloji Enstitüsü, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Yu, P.L. (1973). A Class Of Solutions For Group Decision Problems. Management Science, 19, 936–946.
  • Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple Criteria Decision Making. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.
Toplam 47 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Konular Uzay Mühendisliği
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Bahri Uçakcıoğlu Bu kişi benim

Tamer Eren

Yayımlanma Tarihi 18 Aralık 2017
Gönderilme Tarihi 14 Ağustos 2017
Kabul Tarihi 23 Ekim 2017
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2017 Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Uçakcıoğlu, B., & Eren, T. (2017). Selection of Investment Projects in Air Defense Industry by Multi Criteria Decision Making and Goal Programming. Journal of Aviation, 1(2), 39-63. https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.334675

Journal of Aviation - JAV 


www.javsci.com - editor@javsci.com


9210This journal is licenced under a Creative Commons Attiribution-NonCommerical 4.0 İnternational Licence