Document Type : Research Paper


1 Master Student, Department of Management, Parand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Parand, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Parand Branch, Islamic Azad University,Parand, Iran


Supplier selection is one of the most important problems in the field of management and optimization. It aims to optimize the cost of supply, quality of products and services, and the risk of non-supply, among others. However, existing models often overlook the risk of non-supply and the brand effect on demand. In this research, a supplier selection integer model is developed that considers lead time and the risk of non-supply. To solve this model, the LOKAD benchmark database is utilized, and a new adaptive variable neighborhood search algorithm is introduced, incorporating a scoring strategy to handle the model's complexity and obtain optimal or near-optimal solutions. The obtained Pareto solutions outperform traditional results, as confirmed by the Wilcoxon test. Sensitivity analysis of the solutions on the budget demonstrates that the final profit is more sensitive compared to lead time. Furthermore, distance from the ideal and diversity measures are used to quantitatively compare the results.
Supplier selection involves identifying, evaluating, and contracting with suppliers to meet an organization's requirements for raw materials and related infrastructure. It plays a crucial role in financial resource allocation and product/service quality. The main objectives of supplier selection include reducing purchasing risks, minimizing lead time, and enhancing quality. Many organizations face multiple criteria for selecting suppliers, such as receipt risk, green criteria, and lead time. Mathematical modeling and optimization techniques are commonly employed to achieve these objectives. However, existing models often lack real-case assumptions, motivating researchers to extend models in this environment. This research addresses these gaps by developing a mathematical model for supplier selection that considers the risk of non-supply and the substitution rate of inventory-less products.
 Materials and Methods
Technically, the conducted modeling is a quantitative research in which data has been collected using library-based tools. Additionally, the statistical population corresponds to the LOKAD company, and a sample of its information is publicly available and will be utilized in the numerical computations phase of this research. This research develops a novel supplier selection multi-objective mathematical model that considers the risk of non-supply and substitution rate of demand when a product is inventory-less. Additionally, a modified adaptive variable neighborhood search (AVNS) algorithm is proposed to solve the model. While the focus of this paper is on the retail industry, the proposed model can be adapted to any industry.
 Discussion and Results
The developed model will be solved using data related to the LOKAD company, which was collected during a one-year period in 2018. This dataset includes sales and purchasing information of products related to the LOKAD company, encompassing details about the suppliers of the products and their brands. The utilization of this dataset is due to the fact that many articles have made use of it for its detailed information provided by the LOKAD company.  In order to compare the method, the Wilcoxon test is used to compare two groups of variables, which can determine the presence of a difference between them. The observations reveal that the substitution rate of demand significantly affects the results and can alter the selection of final suppliers. Budget limitations are another important factor, where increasing the budget leads to higher profits by enabling the selection of more competent suppliers and high-quality products for customers.
Supplier selection is a challenging problem in various industries. The experiments conducted in this research demonstrate that increasing the budget limitation results in higher profits, as customers prefer products or services with higher levels of quality. The developed mathematical multi-objective model incorporates real-case assumptions such as the risk of non-supply and substitution rate of demand. The model is solved using the proposed modified AVNS algorithm. The solutions obtained are analyzed using mean ideal distance and diversification metric measures to ensure their reliability. The analysis highlights the significance of budget limitations, which outweighs the impact of lead time in supplier selection problems. Ultimately, the model provides an optimal combination of suppliers. Additionally, the sensitivity analysis performed on the budget constraint reveals that changes in the budget have a greater impact on the final profit compared to lead time. The proposed model effectively determines the allocation of purchases from each supplier to enhance the final profit. In this regard, an initial estimation of future demand is considered as deterministic, although transforming this parameter into a probabilistic form can make the model more robust.


Bhattacharya, A., Sarkar, B., & Mukherjee, S. K. (2005). Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective. International journal of production research43(17), 3671-3685.
Bhattacharya, A., Geraghty, J., & Young, P. (2019). Supplier selection paradigm: An integrated hierarchical QFD methodology under multiple-criteria environment. Applied Soft Computing10(4), 1013-1027.
Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., & Benton, W. C. (2019). Vendor selection criteria and methods. European journal of operational research50(1), 2-18.
Kahraman, C., Ruan, D., & Doǧan, I. (2003). Fuzzy group decision-making for facility location selection. Information sciences157, 135-153.
Igarashi, M., de Boer, L., & Fet, A. M. (2013). What is required for greener supplier selection? A literature review and conceptual model development. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 19(4), 247-263.
Kanagaraj, G., Ponnambalam, S. G., & Jawahar, N. (2016). Reliability-based total cost of ownership approach for supplier selection using cuckoo-inspired hybrid algorithm. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology84(5-8), 801-816.
Chai, J., Liu, J. N., & Ngai, E. W. (2013). Application of decision-making techniques in supplier selection: A systematic review of literature. Expert systems with applications40(10), 3872-3885.
Mutingi, M., & Mbohwa, C. (2017). Modeling Supplier Selection Using Multi-Criterion Fuzzy Grouping Genetic Algorithm. Grouping Genetic Algorithms, 11(3), 213-228
Paydar, M., & Saidi-Mehrabad, M. (2017). A hybrid genetic algorithm for dynamic virtual cellular manufacturing with supplier selection, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 19(4), 247-263.
Tsai, Y. L., Yang, Y. J., & Lin, C. H. (2010). A dynamic decision approach for supplier selection using ant colony system. Expert systems with applications, 37(12), 8313-8321.
Abdollahzadeh, H., & Atashgar, K. (2017). Optimal design of a multi-state system with uncertainty in supplier selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 105(1), 411-424.
Fashoto, S. G., Akinnuwesi, B., Owolabi, O., & Adelekan, D. (2016). Decision support model for supplier selection in healthcare service delivery using analytical hierarchy process and artificial neural network. African journal of business Management, 10(9), 209-232.
Büyüközkan, G., & Göçer, F. (2017). Application of a new combined intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach based on axiomatic design methodology for the supplier selection problem. Applied Soft Computing, 52(3), 1222-1238.
Wang, Y. C., & Chen, T. (2021). A Bi-objective AHP-MINLP-GA approach for Flexible Alternative Supplier Selection amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Soft Computing Letters, 3(1), 100016.
Sarkar, S., Lakha, V., Ansari, I., & Maiti, J. (2017). Supplier selection in uncertain environment: a fuzzy MCDM approach. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Communication, pp. 257-266.
Tavana, M., Shaabani, A., Di Caprio, D., & Bonyani, A. (2021). An integrated group fuzzy best-worst method and combined compromise solution with Bonferroni functions for supplier selection in reverse supply chains. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 2(2), 100-109.
Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Shakouri, H., Javadi, B., & Keramati, A. (2013). Supplier selection and order allocation problem using a two-phase fuzzy multi-objective linear programming. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(22), 9308-9323.
Fallahpour, A., Olugu, E. U., Musa, S. N., Khezrimotlagh, D., & Wong, K. Y. (2016). An integrated model for green supplier selection under fuzzy environment: application of data envelopment analysis and genetic programming approach. Neural Computing and Applications, 27(3), 707-725.
Pramanik, D., Haldar, A., Mondal, S. C., Naskar, S. K., & Ray, A. (2017). Resilient supplier selection using AHP-TOPSIS-QFD under a fuzzy environment. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 12(1), 45-54.
Kilic, H. S., & Yalcin, A. S. (2020). Modified two-phase fuzzy goal programming integrated with IF-TOPSIS for green supplier selection. Applied Soft Computing, 93, 106371.
Lima-Junior, F. R., & Carpinetti, L. C. R. (2016). Combining SCOR® model and fuzzy TOPSIS for supplier evaluation and management. International Journal of Production Economics, 174, 128-141.
Azadi, M., Jafarian, M., Saen, R. F., & Mirhedayatian, S. M. (2015). A new fuzzy DEA model for evaluation of efficiency and effectiveness of suppliers in sustainable supply chain management context. Computers & Operations Research, 54, 274-285.
Karsak, E. E., & Dursun, M. (2014). An integrated supplier selection methodology incorporating QFD and DEA with imprecise data. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(16), 6995-7004.
Dotoli, M., Epicoco, N., Falagario, M., & Sciancalepore, F. (2016). A stochastic cross‐efficiency data envelopment analysis approach for supplier selection under uncertainty. International Transactions in Operational Research, 23(4), 725-748.
Lin, C. T., Chen, C. B., & Ting, Y. C. (2011). An ERP model for supplier selection in electronics industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1760-1765.
Toloo, M. (2016). A cost efficiency approach for strategic vendor selection problem under certain input prices assumption. Measurement, 85, 175-183.
Hfeda, M., Marchand, F., & Dao, T. M. (2017). Optimization of Milk-Run Delivery Issue in Lean Supply Chain Management by Genetic Algorithm and Hybridization of Genetic Algorithm with Ant Colony Optimization: An Automobile Industry Case Study. Journal of Management & Engineering Integration, 10(2), 90-99.
Guo, X., Zhou, L., Guo, Q., & Rouyendegh, B. D. (2021). An optimal size selection of hybrid renewable energy system based on Fractional-Order Neural Network Algorithm: A case study. Energy Reports, 7, 7261-7272.
Karabati, S., Tan, B., & Öztürk, Ö. C. (2009). A method for estimating stock-out-based substitution rates by using point-of-sale data. IIE Transactions, 41(5), 408-420.
Luan, J., Yao, Z., Zhao, F., & Song, X. (2019). A novel method to solve supplier selection problem: Hybrid algorithm of genetic algorithm and ant colony optimization. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 156, 294-309.
Memari, A., Dargi, A., Jokar, M. R. A., Ahmad, R., & Rahim, A. R. A. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection: A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 50, 9-24.
Li, J., Fang, H., & Song, W. (2019). Sustainable supplier selection based on SSCM practices: A rough cloud TOPSIS approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222(1), 606-621.
Haeri, S. A. S., & Rezaei, J. (2019). A grey-based green supplier selection model for uncertain environments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 221(2), 768-784.
Li, H., Wang, F., Zhang, C., Wang, L., An, X., & Dong, G. (2021). Sustainable supplier selection for water environment treatment public-private partnership projects, Journal of Cleaner Production, 324(1), 210-225.
Liberopoulos, G., Deligiannis, M. (2021). Optimal supplier inventory control policies when buyer purchase incidence is driven by past service, European Journal of Operational Research, 307(1), 189-207.