تحلیلی بر کیفیت دیجیتالی‌سازی مدل‌های همکاری زنجیره‌تامین با رویکرد ترکیبی Fuzzy BWM-TOPSIS

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران.

2 گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اراک، اراک، ایران.

3 گروه مدیریت، موسسه آموزش عالی آیندگان، تنکابن، ایران.

4 گروه تحقیقاتی سامانه‌های هوشمند صنعتی مروارید، ایران.

چکیده
هدف: هدف این پژوهش، ارزیابی و رتبه‌بندی مدل‌های همکاری در زنجیره‌تامین صنعت لاستیک ایران از منظر کیفیت دیجیتال‌سازی است. منظور از کیفیت دیجیتال‌سازی، میزان بهره‌گیری موثر از فناوری‌های صنعت 4.0 برای ارتقای شفافیت، یکپارچگی، چابکی، تاب‌آوری و پایداری در زنجیره‌تامین است. انتخاب صنعت لاستیک به‌دلیل پیچیدگی‌های عملیاتی و نیاز مبرم به تحول دیجیتال در این صنعت بوده است.
روش‌شناسی پژوهش: در این پژوهش، از روش تصمیم‌گیری چندمعیاره با ترکیب بهترین-بدترین فازی (Fuzzy BWM) و TOPSIS استفاده شده است. ابتدا با نظر خبرگان، وزن معیارهای کلیدی تعیین شد و سپس مدل‌های مختلف همکاری رتبه‌بندی شدند. برای بررسی پایداری نتایج، تحلیل حساسیت روی تغییر وزن معیارها نیز انجام شد.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد که مدل زنجیره‌تامین دیجیتال دارای بالاترین کیفیت دیجیتال‌سازی است و معیار "یکپارچگی فناوری" بیشترین اهمیت را دارد. همچنین تحلیل حساسیت نشان داد که مدل دیجیتال در اکثر سناریوهای تغییر وزن، پایداری بالایی در رتبه‌بندی دارد و نتایج از استحکام مناسبی برخوردارند.
اصالت/ارزش‌افزوده علمی: این پژوهش با تمرکز بر صنعت لاستیک ایران، به تحلیل تطبیقی مدل‌های همکاری از منظر کیفیت دیجیتال‌سازی پرداخته و از ترکیب Fuzzy BWM و TOPSIS به‌عنوان روشی قابل تکرار برای انتخاب مدل همکاری بهینه بهره برده است. همچنین، تحلیل حساسیت انجام‌شده، شفافیت بالاتری به تصمیم‌گیری می‌بخشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله English

Analyzing the quality of digitalization in supply chain collaboration models using an integrated fuzzy BWM-TOPSIS approach

نویسندگان English

Shahab Bayatzadeh 1
Hamidreza Talaie 2
Ali Sorourkhah 3 4
1 Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Arak University, Arak, Iran.
3 Department of Management, Ayandegan Institute of Higher Education, Tonekabon, Iran.
4 Morvarid Intelligent Industrial Systems Research Group, Iran.
چکیده English

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate and rank collaboration models in the Iranian rubber industry supply chain from the perspective of digitalization quality. Digitalization quality refers to the effective use of Industry 4.0 technologies to improve transparency, integration, agility, resilience, and sustainability. The rubber industry was selected due to its operational complexity and urgent need for digital transformation.
Methodology: A multi-criteria decision-making approach was adopted, combining the Fuzzy Best-Worst Method (BWM) for weighting the evaluation criteria and TOPSIS for ranking the collaboration models. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted to assess the robustness of the results across varying criterion weights.
Findings: The digital supply chain model ranks highest in digitalization quality, with "technology integration" as the most critical criterion. The sensitivity analysis confirms the rankings' robustness and stability across different weight scenarios.
Originality/Value: This research uniquely addresses the comparative assessment of collaboration models in the rubber industry based on digitalization quality. The use of a Fuzzy BWM-TOPSIS hybrid method and comprehensive sensitivity analysis provides a novel, practical framework for strategic decision-making in digital supply chain transformation.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Rubber industry
Industry 4.0
Digital supply chain
Best-worst fuzzy
Supply chain quality
[1]   Chienwattanasook, K., Tancho, N., Onputtha, S., Boonrattanakittibhumi, C., Sriyakul, T., & Waiyawuththanapoom, P. (2022). The role of industry 4.0 in supply chain sustainability: Evidence from the rubber industry. Uncertain supply chain management, 10(4), 1243–1252. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.uscm.2022.8.004
[2]   Veile, J. W., Schmidt, M. C., Müller, J. M., & Voigt, K. I. (2024). The transformation of supply chain collaboration and design through Industry 4.0. International journal of logistics research and applications, 27(6), 986–1014. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2022.2148638
[3]   Hrouga, M. (2024). Towards a new conceptual digital collaborative supply chain model based on Industry 4.0 technologies: A conceptual framework. International journal of quality and reliability management, 41(2), 628–655. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-07-2022-0221
[4]   Goswami, S. S., & Mondal, S. (2024). The role of 5G in enhancing IOT connectivity: A systematic review on applications, challenges, and future prospects. Big data and computing visions, 4(4), 314–325. https://doi.org/10.22105/bdcv.2024.486159.1215
[5]   Dutta, G., Kumar, R., Sindhwani, R., & Singh, R. K. (2021). Digitalization priorities of quality control processes for SMEs: A conceptual study in perspective of Industry 4.0 adoption. Journal of intelligent manufacturing, 32(6), 1679–1698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-021-01783-2
[6]   Ajalli, M. (2024). Conceptual modeling of determining factors in the assessment of sustainability and resilience of the supply chain: a study of rubber industry suppliers in Iran. Journal of rubber research, 27(2), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42464-024-00257-3
[7]   Ajalli, M., Azimi, H., & Zamani, F. (2024). The impact of blockchain technology on the internet of things in the fourth industrial revolution: Applications, opportunities, and challenges. Modern research in performance evaluation, 3(1), 60–73. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22105/mrpe.2024.201235
[8]   Ebrahimi, M. (2024). Determining and ranking the indicators of evaluating the performance of wood industry-employees. Journal of applied research on industrial engineering, 11(2), 166–178. https://doi.org/10.22105/jarie.2024.388802.1534
[9]   Yadav, A., Sachdeva, A., Garg, R. K., Qureshi, K. M., Mewada, B. G., Al-Qahtani, M. M., & Qureshi, M. R. N. M. (2024). Challenges of blockchain adoption for manufacturing supply chain to achieve sustainability: A case of rubber industry. Heliyon, 10(20), e39448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39448
[10] Pachouri, V., Singh, R., Gehlot, A., Pandey, S., Vaseem Akram, S., & Abbas, M. (2024). Empowering sustainability in the built environment: A technological Lens on industry 4.0 Enablers. Technology in society, 76, 102427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102427
[11] Omrany, H., Al-Obaidi, K. M., Husain, A., & Ghaffarianhoseini, A. (2023). Digital Twins in the construction industry: A comprehensive review of current implementations, enabling technologies, and future directions. Sustainability, 15(14), 10908. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410908
[12] da Silva, T. H. H., & Sehnem, S. (2024). The utilization of Industry 4.0 technologies to enhance the circular economy through the engagement of stakeholders in Brazilian food technology companies. Business strategy and the environment, 34(1), 129–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3954
[13] Bosman, L., Hartman, N., & Sutherland, J. (2020). How manufacturing firm characteristics can influence decision making for investing in Industry 4.0 technologies. Journal of manufacturing technology management, 31(5), 1117–1141. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-09-2018-0283
[14] Rezaei Manesh, B., Hamzavi, H., & Hosseini, S. M. (2025). Identifying and prioritizing drivers for optimizing sustainable performance of oil, gas, and petrochemical organizations with a futures research approach. Modern research in performance evaluation, 4(1), 11–26. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22105/mrpe.2025.506185.1146
[15] Heravi, A., Zamani Moghadam, A., Hashemi, S. A., Vakil Alroaia, Y., & Sajadi Jagharg, A. (2023). Evaluation of the influential factors in human resource development in state-owned enterprises using a mixed method. Journal of applied research on industrial engineering, 10(2), 238–255. https://doi.org/10.22105/jarie.2021.284052.1322
[16] Czukor, G., Dinçer, H., Eti, S., Yüksel, S., & Pamucar, D. (2025). Integrating artificial intelligence into fuzzy decision analytics: A novel approach to mitigating stereotype threat in sustainable business environments. Journal of fuzzy extension and applications, 6(2), 371–390. https://doi.org/10.22105/jfea.2025.480001.1641
[17] Siraj, M. T., Haque, M. R., Chowdhury, M. S., Islam, N., Biswas, B., & Chowdhury, M. K. H. (2024). Analyzing challenges in enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementation in a safety inspection company: An IVT2IF DEMATEL approach. Optimality, 1(2), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.22105/opt.v1i2.50
[18] Bayatzadeh, S. and Amiri, M. (2024). Identifying and evaluating supplier selection criteria in Iran’s steel industry according to Industry 4.0 technologies. Innovation management and operational strategies, 5(3), 306-330. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22105/imos.2024.472776.1379
[19] Thakur, R., Raj, M., & Malik, S. C. (2025). Correlation coefficient measures for probabilistic single valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy sets and its application in supply chain management. Journal of fuzzy extension and applications, 6(2), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.22105/jfea.2025.475283.1602
[20] Adolph Groenewald, C., Garg, A., Santosh Yerasuri, S., Sharma, H., & Sibonghanoy Groenewald, E. (2024). Smart supply chain management  optimization and risk mitigation with  artificial intelligence. Naturalista campano, 28(1), 261–270. https://museonaturalistico.it/index.php/journal/article/view/72
[21] Ekram Nosratian, N., & Taghavi Fard, M. T. (2023). A proposed model for the assessment of supply chain management using DEA and knowledge management. Computational algorithms and numerical dimensions, 2(3), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.22105/cand.2023.191008
[22] Montazeri, F. Z., Sorourkhah, A., Marinković, D., & Lukovac, V. (2024). Robust-fuzzy-probabilistic optimization for a resilient, sustainable supply chain with an inventory management approach by the seller. Big data and computing visions, 4(2), 146–163. https://doi.org/10.22105/bdcv.2024.481945.1208
[23] Shafique, M. N., Yeo, S. F., & Tan, C. L. (2024). Roles of top management support and compatibility in big data predictive analytics for supply chain collaboration and supply chain performance. Technological forecasting and social change, 199, 123074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123074
[24] Silva, B. E., Vieira, J. G. V., & Yoshizaki, H. (2024). Motivating factors for blockchain technology adoption: A theoretical analysis from the perspective of supply chain collaboration. Journal of global operations and strategic sourcing, 18(1), 36–63. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-04-2023-0033
[25] Kunkel, S., Matthess, M., Xue, B., & Beier, G. (2022). Industry 4.0 in sustainable supply chain collaboration: Insights from an interview study with international buying firms and Chinese suppliers in the electronics industry. Resources, conservation and recycling, 182, 106274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106274
[26] Patrucco, A., Moretto, A., Trabucchi, D., & Golini, R. (2022). How do Industry 4.0 Technologies boost collaborations in buyer-supplier relationships? Research technology management, 65(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2021.1999131
[27] Attaran, S., Attaran, M., & Celik, B. G. (2024). Digital twins and industrial internet of things: Uncovering operational intelligence in industry 4.0. Decision analytics journal, 10, 100398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2024.100398
[28] Van Der Valk, H., Strobel, G., Winkelmann, S., Hunker, J., & Tomczyk, M. (2022). Supply chains in the era of digital twins - A review. Procedia computer science, 204, 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.08.019
[29] Sedky, A. (2023). Digital supply chain: A proposed solution to the global supply chain disruption impact on business sustainability. In Digital supply chain, disruptive environments, and the impact on retailers (pp. 160–177). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-7298-9.ch009
[30] Itiat, N. E., Ekanem, I. I., & Ikpe, A. E. (2024). A comprehensive review on green energy technologies: An approach for environmental sustainability and eco-friendliness. Systemic analytics, 2(2), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.31181/sa22202427
[31] Bayatzadeh, S. and Talaie, H. (2024). Identifying and evaluating of sustainable and resilient supplier selection criteria according to industry 5.0 concepts (Case study: steel industry). Journal of decisions and operations research, 9(4), 1045-1063. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22105/dmor.2025.498734.1904
[32] Esmaeilian, G., Fardoie, R. S., Hourali, M., & Farbod, E. (2024). Investigating the impact of blockchain technology adoption on integration and economic sustainability of the automotive supply chain: A bayesian structural equation modeling approach. Transactions on quantitative finance and beyond, 1(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22105/tqfb.v1i1.16
[33] Rezaei, A., Zare Mehrjerdi, Y., Owlia, M. S., & Khademizare, H. (2023). Identifying and prioritizing ecosystem indicatorsusing Fuzzy Delphi and Fuzzy DEMATEL approaches. Research in production and operations management, 14(2), 51-82. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22108/pom.2023.134879.1462
[34] Yurtay, Y. (2025). Carbon footprint management with Industry 4.0 technologies and erp systems in sustainable manufacturing. Applied sciences, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/app15010480
[35] Labaran, M. J., & Masood, T. (2023). Industry 4.0 driven green supply chain management in renewable energy sector: A critical systematic literature review. Energies, 16(19), 6977. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16196977
[36] Ghobakhloo, M., Iranmanesh, M., Foroughi, B., Tseng, M. L., Nikbin, D., & Khanfar, A. A. A. (2025). Industry 4.0 digital transformation and opportunities for supply chain resilience: A comprehensive review and a strategic roadmap. Production planning & control, 36(1), 61–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2023.2252376
[37] Mosleuzzaman, M., Arif, I., & Siddiki, A. (2024). Design and development of a smart factory using Industry 4.0 technologies. Academic journal on business administration, innovation & sustainability, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.69593/ajbais.v4i04.131
[38] Ismail, M. M., Ahmed, Z., Abdel-Gawad, A. F., & Mohamed, M. (2024). Toward supply chain 5.0: An integrated multi-criteria decision-making models for sustainable and resilience enterprise. Decision making: applications in management and engineering, 7(1), 160–186. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame712024955
[39] Özek, A., & Yildiz, A. (2020). Digital supplier selection for a garment business using interval type-2 fuzzy TOPSIS. Tekstil ve konfeksiyon, 30(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.32710/tekstilvekonfeksiyon.569884
[40] Liu, L., Ang, S., Yang, F., & Zhang, X. (2025). Partner selection for supply chain collaboration: New data envelopment analysis models. Omega (United Kingdom), 132, 103245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2024.103245
[41] Zhou, J., Xu, T., Chiao, Y., & Fang, Y. (2024). Interorganizational systems and supply chain agility in uncertain environments: The mediation role of supply chain collaboration. Information systems research, 35(1), 184–202. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2023.1210
[42] Queiroz, M. M., Telles, R., & Bonilla, S. H. (2020). Blockchain and supply chain management integration: A systematic review of the literature. Supply chain management, 25(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-03-2018-0143
[43] Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
[44] Mi, X., Tang, M., Liao, H., Shen, W., & Lev, B. (2019). The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what’s next? Omega (United Kingdom), 87, 205–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2019.01.009
[45] Guo, S., & Zhao, H. (2017). Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowledge-based systems, 121, 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.01.010
[46] Ünver, M., & Aydoğan, B. (2025). Optimized climate change management: Integrating fuzzy CRITIC-TOPSIS approach with continuous function-valued fuzzy sets. Risk assessment and management decisions, 2(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.48314/ramd.vi.34
[47] Rezaei, J. (2016). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega (United Kingdom), 64, 126–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.001
[48] Mohseni Andargoli, S. , Arasteh, A. and Divsalar, A. (2024). A novel hybrid approach for smart locker location in delivery systems: A solution for enhancing urban logistics performance (Case study: Babol county). Journal of decisions and operations research, 9(4), 1021-1044. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22105/dmor.2025.489345.1890
[49] Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey (pp. 58–191). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3
[50] Sulistiani, H., Pasaribu, A., Palupiningsih, P., Anwar, K., & Saputra, V. H. (2024). New TOPSIS: Modification of the TOPSIS method for objective determination of weighting. International journal of intelligent engineering and systems, 17(5), 991–1003. https://doi.org/10.22266/ijies2024.1031.74