Analytical Hierarchy Process for Enhancing Procurement Decision-Making in Project Phase: A Case Study in the Gold Mining Project
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/comtech.v11i1.6326Keywords:
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), procurement decision-making, gold mining projectAbstract
The aim of the research was to enhance the selection for the process plant equipment supplier based on their country of origin in the gold mining project using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). The research also intended to investigate how AHP could further enhance the process of the project. The steps for modeling the AHP were identifying the hierarchy by the project team, constructing the AHP model, and calculating the weight for supplier selection. The research object was a gold mining company based in Indonesia. The schedule and resources were calculated, followed by a survey to evaluate the AHP process. After modeling and calculating using AHP, it is found that the three highest criteria for selecting the process plant equipment suppliers are running capacity (14,3 %), efficiency (9,9%), and endurance (9,7%). The overall scores for each supplier show that supplier from United States (25,87%) is in the first rank. It is followed by Germany (25,80%) and Australia (25,20%). Moreover, AHP is proven to enhance the process by not only reducing the time of decision-making for two days but also increasing the resource by almost 23%. Based on the survey to the project team, AHP increases the involvement of the project team in the decision-making process and shows that more than 80% of the project team agrees with the decision. The survey also reveals that almost 63% of the project team decides to use the same tools for the decision-making process.
Plum Analytics
References
Ahmadi, S. A., & Azadani, M. N. (2018). Solving the suppliers selection problem in the supply chain by using Analytical Hierarchy Process: A case study. International Journal of Applied Optimization Studies, 1(01), 49-58.
Bali, S., & Amin, S. S. (2017). An analytical framework for supplier evaluation and selection: A multi-criteria decision making approach. International Journal of Advanced Operations Management, 9(1), 57-72.
Das, D., & Saha, A. (2016). Analytical HierarchyProcess based supplier selection methodology: A framework and application. International Journal of Reliability and Safety, 10(2), 125-144.
Deepika, M., & Kannan, A. K. (2016). Global supplier selection using intuitionistic fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. In 2016 International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, and Optimization Techniques (ICEEOT) (pp. 2390-2395).
Deng, X., Hu, Y., Deng, Y., & Mahadevan, S. (2014). Supplier selection using AHP methodology extended by D numbers. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(1), 156-167.
Fu, Y. K. (2019). An integrated approach to catering supplier selection using AHP-ARAS-MCGP methodology. Journal of Air Transport Management, 75(March), 164-169.
Haq, A. N., & Kannan, G. (2006). Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process for evaluating and selecting a vendor in a supply chain model. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 29(7-8), 826-835.
Jain, V., Sangaiah, A. K., Sakhuja, S., Thoduka, N., & Aggarwal, R. (2018). Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS: A case study in the Indian automotive industry. Neural Computing and Applications, 29(7), 555-564.
Jayant, A. (2018). An Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) based approach for supplier selection: An automotive industry case study. International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science (IJLTEMAS), VII(I), 102-114.
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396.
Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ulukan, Z. (2003). Multicriteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics Information Management, 16(6), 382-394.
Khalil, N., Kamaruzzaman, S. N., & Baharum, M. R. (2016). Ranking the indicators of building performance and the users’ risk via Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP): Case of Malaysia. Ecological Indicators, 71(December), 567-576.
Liberatore, M. J., Nydick, R. L., & Sanchez, P. M. (1992). The evaluation of research papers (or how to get an academic committee to agree on something). Interfaces, 22(2), 92-100.
Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kannan, D., Mangla, S. K., & Garg, C. P. (2017). An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1686-1698.
Luzon, B., & El-Sayegh, S. M. (2016). Evaluating supplier selection criteria for oil and gas projects in the UAE using AHP and Delphi. International Journal of Construction Management, 16(2), 175-183.
Mathiyazhagan, K., Diabat, A., Al-Refaie, A., & Xu, L. (2015). Application of analytical hierarchy process to evaluate pressures to implement green supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107(November), 229-236.
Min, H. (1994). International supplier selection: A multiattribute utility approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 24(5), 24-33.
Nallusamy, S., Sri Lakshmana Kumar, D., Balakannan, K., & Chakraborty, P. S. (2016). MCDM tools application for selection of suppliers in manufacturing industries using AHP, Fuzzy Logic and ANN. International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa, 19, 130-137.
Pieter, M. S., Lamia, I. I., & Wattimena, F. Y. (2017). Decision Support System in giving recommendation for flat screen television purchase using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. In 2017 Second International Conference on Informatics and Computing (ICIC) (pp. 1-5).
Pjevcevic, D., Dimitrijevic, B., Bisevac, I. V., & Vukadinovic, K. (2018). Design process of dry bulk cargo handling at an inland port: Case study of Port Danube Pancevo. International Journal of Industrial Engineering, 25(2), 267-282.
Polat, G., & Eray, E. (2015). An integrated approach using AHP-ER to supplier selection in railway projects. Procedia Engineering, 123, 415-422.
Rajesh, G., & Malliga, P. (2013). Supplier selection based on AHP QFD methodology. Procedia Engineering, 64, 1283-1292.
Santoso, D., & Besral, A. M. (2018). Supplier performance assessment using Analytical Hierarchy Process method. Sinergi: Jurnal Teknik Mercu Buana, 22(1), 37-44.
Singawinata, I. P. (2007). The future of the Indonesian mining industry: Recommendations to policy makers. Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 22, 99-113.
Stange, W. (1999). The process design of gold leaching and carbon-in-pulp circuits. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 99(1), 13-25.
Tam, M. C., & Tummala, V. R. (2001). An application of the AHP in vendor selection of a telecommunications system. Omega, 29(2), 171-182.
UmaDevi, K., Elango, C., & Rajesh, R. (2012). Vendor selection using AHP. Procedia Engineering, 38, 1946-1949.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Budi Irawan Saleh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows:
