Intercompany cooperation in supply chain management and the method of hierarchy analysis

Aim. The work aimed to construct a system of criteria which may be used as a basis to form and improve supply chain management both at an individual firm and at the level of the industry as a whole.
Objectives. The work seeks to identify the factors that contribute to the coordination of the supply chain while analyzing scientific literature; to determine their sequential arrangement (from highest to lowest) and priority using the method of hierarchy analysis; based on the ranking, to construct a system of criteria which can be used to optimize supply chains due to non-monetary factors of competition.
Methods. The study employed qualitative and quantitative methods used for deeper understanding of the problem under consideration. The article examines an array of relevant data and expert assessments in the field of supply chain management. In addition to analytical methods, it uses a comprehensive expert method of hierarchy analysis. The process of its application has three stages [1], namely 1) defining a decision hierarchy; 2) assigning decision-making criteria and constructing a matrix; 3) analyzing and summing up.
Results. The author analyzed the process of intercompany coordination in supply chains as a key factor in long-term competitive advantage. The hierarchy analysis method was used to examine and aggregate the most relevant studies in the literature, while criteria and subcriteria determining the quality of interaction within supply chains were identified, and the weights and influence of each criterion on the overall result were established. All criteria were validated when calculating the consistency coefficients. Conclusions on improving these characteristics were formed for each comparison matrix. In conclusion, the work provides recommendations for integrating the criteria system into the overall supply chain management system. 
Conclusions. The article examines the criteria influencing the intercompany coordination in supply chains, while the key ones were identified in the field of supply chain management. These include criteria describing material aspects, relationships between chain participants, their reputation and experience, productivity, and others. A pairwise comparison of the above criteria, as well as an analysis of subcriteria, were used to draw a number of conclusions, namely the most significant ones include the quality of the information flow and IT infrastructure, the current level of supply chain integration, delivery speed, long-term relationships between chain participants, and the price of services. These criteria are presented in descending order of relative priority. Specific weights are described in detail in the text of this study. In addition to defining and ranking the criteria, the limitations and barriers to forming a criteria system were identified. The main limitation is that the rating scale used in studying the hierarchy analysis method is conceptual, although it determines the factors of greater importance. The proposed approach does not provide instructions on the action plan to eliminate disadvantages. There is also a possibility of bias in pairwise comparison of different factors. Therefore, caution should be exercised when determining the relative assessment of different factors. Some of those selected for the model may also be interrelated, while the analytical chain method may be the best option. As a practical use of such a system of criteria, its implementation in a simulation logistic model is proposed to improve traditional optimization problems by involvement of non-economic factors of collaboration and cooperation. 

1. Tramarico C.L., Karpak B., Salomon V.A.P., da Silveira С.A.M., Marins F.A.S. Multi-criteria analysis of professional education on supply chain management. Production. 2019;29:e20180087. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6513.20180087

2. Arshinder K.A., Desmukh S.G. A framework for evaluation of coordination by contracts: A case of two-level supply chains. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 2009;56(4):1177-1191. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2008.03.014

3. Soroor J., Tarokh M.J., Shemshadi A. Theoretical and practical study of supply chain coordination. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 2009;24(2):131-142. DOI: 10.1108/08858620910931749

4. Chopra S., Meindle P. Supply chain management: Strategy, planning and operation. 4th ed. Delhi: Pearson Education; 2010. 519 p.

5. Tsay A.A. The quantity flexibility contract and supplier customer incentives. Management Science. 1999;45(10):1339-1358. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.45.10.1339

6. Cao M., Zhang Q. Supply chain collaboration: Impact on collaborative advantage and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management. 2011;29(3):163-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.jom.2010.12.008

7. Saaty T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 2008;1(1):83-98. DOI: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

8. Saaty T.L. Decision making for the new millenium: ANP software for dependence and feedback. Pittsburgh, PA: Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh; 1999. 258 p.

9. Ortiz-Barrios M., Borrego-Areyanes A.A., Gómez-Villar I.D., et al. A multiple criteria decision-making approach for increasing the preparedness level of sales departments against COVID-19 and future pandemics: A real-world case. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2021;62:102411. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102411

10. Singh R.K. Prioritizing the factors for coordinated supply chain using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Measuring Business Excellence. 2013;17(1):80-97. DOI: 10.1108/13683041311311383

11. Datta S., Samantra C., Mahapatra S.S., Mandal G., Majumdar G. Appraisement and selection of third party logistics service providers in fuzzy environment. Benchmarking. 2013;20(4):537-548. DOI: 10.1108/BIJ-11-2011-0087

12. Hwang B.-N., Chen T.-T., Lin J.T. 3PL selection criteria in integrated circuit manufacturing industry in Taiwan. Supply Chain Management. 2016;21(1):103-124. DOI: 10.1108/SCM-03-2014-0089

13. Yayla A.Y., Oztekin A., Gumus A.T., Gunasekaran A. A hybrid data analytic methodology for 3PL transportation provider evaluation using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. International Journal of Production Research. 2015;53(20):6097-6113. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2015.1022266

14. Prakash C., Barua M.K. A combined MCDM approach for evaluation and selection of third-party reverse logistics partner for Indian electronics industry. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 2016;7:66-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2016.04.001

15. Tiblola L.I.T., Aminullah A., Nugroho A.S.B. Analysis of supplier selection criteria using fuzzy analytical hierarchy process by contractors in Yogyakarta. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi dan Kejuruan. 2024;30(1):112-128. DOI: 10.21831/jptk.v30i1.68323

16. Rashid A., Rasheed R., Ngah A.H., et al. Role of information processing and digital supply chain in supply chain resilience through supply chain risk management. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing. 2024;17(2):429-447. DOI: 10.1108/JGOSS-12-2023-0106