0-1 HEDEF PROGRAMLAMA DESTEKLİ BÜTÜNLEŞİK AHP VIKOR YÖNTEMİ: HASTANE YATIRIMI PROJELERİ SEÇİMİ

İhtiyaçların, sınırlı kaynaklara oranla sınırsız olarak gözüktüğü günümüz dünyasında, söz konusu sınırlı kaynakları doğru ihtiyaçlara atamak büyük önem taşımaktadır. Karşılanması gereken ihtiyacın büyüklüğü nispetinde atanması gereken kaynak miktarı da artmakta, bu doğrultuda doğru çözümü bulmak daha da önemli hale gelmektedir. Yapılan çalışmada belirli kısıtlar altında hastane projeleri seçimi problemi ele alınmıştır. Çalışmada seçim probleminin doğasında bulunan birçok kriteri çözüme yansıtabilmek amacıyla VIKOR yöntemi, kriter ağırlıklarının belirlenmesi amacıyla da AHP yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri sonrasında bir 0-1 hedef programlama modeli kurulmuştur. Bu matematiksel model sayesinde problem özelindeki bazı kısıtlar çözüme katılmıştır. Bu yöntemlerin uygulanması neticesinde bazı hastane alternatifleri seçilmiştir. Kurulan bileşimin, kısıtlar altındaki çok kriterli karar verme problemlerinin çözümünde etkili olduğu görülmektedir.

APPLICATION OF HOSPITAL INVESTMENT PROJECT SELECTION

In the modern day where demands are seen unlimited in comparison with sources, allocation of these sources to the right demands is of great importance. The source that should be assigned grows in proportion to the size of the demand, accordingly finding the right solution becomes more important. In this study, hospital projects selection problem under particular constraints is addressed. In the study VIKOR method is used in order to reflect the multiple criteria, which lies on the problems nature, to the solution, while AHP method is used to determine criteria weights. Subsequent to multiple criteria decision making methods, a 0-1 goal programming model is built. With the help of this mathematical model, problem specific constraints are involved in the solution. As a result of the implementation of these models, some hospital alternatives are selected. It is seen that the integrated method is efficient in solving the decision making problems under constraints.

PDF

___

1. Triantaphyllou, E., Shu, B., Nieto Sanchez, S., Ray, T., Multi-Criteria Decision Making: An Operations Research Approach, Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, (J.G. Webster, Ed.), John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, Cilt 15, 175-186, 1998.
2. San Cristobal, J.R., Multi-Criteria DecisionMaking in the Selection of a Renewable Energy Project in Spain: The Vikor Method, Renewable Energy, Cilt 36, 498-502, 2011.
3. Mahmoodzadeh, S., Shahrabi, J., Pariazar, M., Zaeri, M.S., Project Selection by Using Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Technique, International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Cilt 1 No 3, 135-140, 2011.
4. Mavrotas, G., Diakoulaki, D., Caloghirou, Y., Project Prioritization Under Policy Restrictions. A Combination of MCDA with 0-1 Programming, European Journal of Operational Research, 171, 296-308, 2006.
5. Dağdeviren, M., Eren, T., Tedarikçi Firma Seçiminde Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi ve 0-1 Hedef Programlama Yöntemlerinin Kullanılması, Journal of The Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, Cilt 16, No 2, 41-52, 2001.
6. Bondor, C.-I., Kacso, I.M., Lenghel, A., Istrate, D., Mureşan, A., VIKOR Method for Diabetic Nephropathy Risk Factors Analysis, Applied Medical Informatics, Cilt 32, No 1, 43-52, 2013.
7. Kul, Y., Şeker, A., Yurdakul, M., Bulanık Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinin Alışılmamış İmalat Yöntemlerinin Seçiminde Kullanılması, Journal of The Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, Cilt 29, No 3, 589-603, 2014.
8. Nikjoo, M.A., Khah, M.M., Moghimi, A., Fuzzy TOPSIS and GP Application for Evaluation and Selection of a Suitable ERP, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Cilt 5, No 11, 1358-1367, 2011.
9. Can, Ş., Arıkan, F., Bir Savunma Sanayi Firmasında Çok Kriterli Alt Yüklenici Problemi ve Çözümü, Journal of The Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, Cilt 29, No 4, 645-654, 2014.
10. Kaya, T., Kahraman, C., Multicriteria Renewable Energy Planning Using an Integrated Fuzzy VIKOR & AHP Methodology: The Case of İstanbul, Energy, 35, 2517-2527, 2010.
11. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.,-H., Extended VIKOR Method in Comparison with Outranking Methods, European Journal of Operational Research, 178, 514-529, 2007.
12. Schniederjans, M.J., Wilson, R.L., Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Goal Programming for Information System Project Selection, Information & Management, 20, 333-342, 1991.
13. Lee, J.W., Kim, S.H., An Integrated Approach for Interdependent Information System Project Selection, International Journal of Project Management, 19, 111-118, 2001.
14. Kim, I., Shin, S., Choi, Y., Thang, N.M., Ramos, R.E., Hwang, W.-J., Development of a Project Selection Method on Information System Using ANP and Fuzzy Logic, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 29, 411- 416, 2009.
15. Kabak, M., Dağdeviren, M., A Hybrid MCDM Approach to Assess the Sustainability of Students Preferences for University Selection, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20, 391-418, 2014.
16. Kabak, M., Uyar, Ö. O., Lojistik Sektöründe Ağır Ticari Araç Seçimi Problemine Çok Ölçütlü Bir Yaklaşım, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, Cilt 28, No 1, 115-125, 2013.
17. Saaty, T.L., A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 57-68, 1977.
18. Triantaphyllou, E., Mann, S.H., Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decision Making in Engineering Applications: Some Challenges, Interl Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice, Cilt 2, No 1, 35-44, 1995.
19. Saaty, T.L., Decision Making with Analytic Hierarchy Process, International Journal of Services Sciences, Cilt 1, No 1, 83-98, 2008.
20. Bahurmoz, A.M.A., The Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Methodology for Win-Win Management, JKAU: Econ.&Adm., Cİlt 20, No 1, 3-16, 2006.
21. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.-H., Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 445- 455, 2004.
22. Ertuğrul, İ., Karakaşoğlu, N., Banka Şube Performanslarının VIKOR Yöntemi İle Değerlendirilmesi, Endüstri Mühendisliği Dergisi, Cilt 20, No 1, 19-28, 2008.
23. Leung, S.C.H., Wu, Y., ve Lai, K.K., Multi-Site Aggregate Production Planning with Multiple Objectives: A Goal Programming Approach, Production Planning & Control, Cilt 14, No 5, 425436, 2003.
24. Jones, D., Tamiz, M., Practical Goal Programming, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, 2010.
25. Schutte, I.C., Brits, A., Prioritizing Transport Infrastructure Projects: Towards a MultiCriterion Analysis, Southern Africa Business Review, Cİlt 16, No 3, 97-117, 2012.
26. Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis-State of the Art Surveys, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, 2005.
27. Peterson, T., Reports and Comments, CostBenefit Analysis for Evaluating Transportation Proposals; Los Angeles Case Study, Land Economics, Cilt 51, 72-79, 1975.
28. Sevil, G., Başar, M., Çoskun, M., Finansal Yönetim-II, Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları, 76, 2013.
29. Mareschal, B., Weight Stability Intervals in Multicriteria Decision Aid, European Journal of Operational Research, Cilt 3, No 1, 54-64, 1988.
30. Tzeng, G.-H., Lin, C.,-W., Opricovic, S., MultiCriteria Analysis of Alternative-Fuel Buses for Public Transportation, Energy Policy, 33, 1373- 1383, 2005.
31. Kaya, T., Kahraman, C., Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Forestry Decision Making Based on an Integrated VIKOR and AHP Approach, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 7326-7333, 2011.