Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 14 - 24, 30.06.2020

Volkan Efecan İzzettin Temiz

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Almoghathawi, Y., Barker, K., Rocco, C. M., & Nicholson, C. D. (2017). A multi-criteria decision analysis approach for importance identification and ranking of network components. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 158, 142-151.
  • Ayşegül Şahin, C. A. (2013). Promethee Sıralama Yöntemi ile Portföy Oluşturma Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Journal of Economics and Management Research, 3(2).
  • Şenkayas and Hekimoğlu, (2013). Çok Kriterli Tedarikçi seçimi problemine PROMETHEE yöntemi uygulaması, Verimlilik Dergisi, 4(2), 63-80.
  • Brans, J. P. And Vincke, (1985), A Preference Ranking Organization Method. Management Science, 31(6):647-656.
  • Chan, F. T. S., & Kumar, N. (2007). Global Supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, 35(4), 417-431.
  • Dağdeviren, M., and Eraslan, E. (2008). Supplier Selection Using Promethee Sequencing Method, Gazi Üniversitesi. Müh. Mim. Fak. Der, 23(1), 69–75.
  • Dikeç, Görkem and Töz, Ali, (2016). Marina Müşterilerinin Marinalarda Aldıkları Hizmetlerin Kalite Düzeylerine Yönelik Algılarının Analizi. III. Ulusal Deniz Turizmi Sempozyumu.
  • Huang, C. C., Chu, P Y., &Chiang, Y. H. (2008). A Fuzzy AHP-based performance evaluation model for implementing SPC in the Taiwanese LCD industry. International Journal of Production Research, 47(18), 5163-5183.
  • Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Newyork.
  • Güney, C. (2017). Visual Promethee ile Yatırımcılar Açısından Sektörlerin Değerlendirilmesi. International Scientific Peer-Reviewed and Refereed Journal, 9(34), 177–188.
  • Işık, D. A., and Cerit, A. G. (2007). Yacht Tourism Education: A Study on Curriculums, 585–592.
  • Mahdavi, I., Mahdavi-Amiri, N., Heidarzade, A., & Nourifar, R. (2008). Designing amodel of fuzzy TOPSIS in multiple criteria decision making.Applied Mathematicsand Computation, 206, 607–617.
  • Nas, S., Kan, N. (2014). Yacht Type Preference in Yacht Purchase Decision: A Case Study Through Yacht Owners at ic Cesme. Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 49–69.
  • Yacht Statistics, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Https://Yigm.Ktb.Gov.Tr/Tr201145/Yatistatistikleri.Html. Accessed 10.10.2019
  • Kahraman, C., Beskese, A., & Kaya, I. (2010). Selection among ERP outsourcing alternatives using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Production Research, 48(2), 547-566.
  • Kecek, G., & Yüksel, R. (2016). Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve PROMETHEE Teknikleriyle Akıllı Telefon Seçimi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (49), 46-62.
  • Kelemenis, A., Ergazakis, K., & Askounis, D. (2011). Support managers’ selectionusing an extension of fuzzy TOPSIS.Expert Systems with Applications, 38,2774–2782
  • Kuruüzüm, A. and Atsan, N. (2001). Anali̇ti̇k Hi̇yerarşi̇ Yöntemi̇ ve İşletmeci̇li̇k Alanındaki̇ Uygulamaları. Akdeniz I: I: B: F: Dergisi, (1), 83–105.
  • Liang, Y. H. (2015), Performance measurement of interorganizational information systems in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5484-5499.
  • Maglić, L. (2019). Multi-Criteria Decision Model for Marina Location Selection in The County of Primorje And Gorski Kotar Primjena Višekriterijske Analize Pri Izboru Lokacije Za Izgradnju Marine U Primorsko-Goranskoj Županiji, (April).
  • Ömürbek, N. and Şimşek, A. (2014). Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci ve Analitik Ağ Süreci Yöntemleri ile Online Alışveriş Site Seçimi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 22.
  • Paker, N., and Altuntas, C. (2016). Customer Segmentation for Marinas: Evaluating Marinas as Destinations, 56, 156–171.
  • Rezaei, J., & Ortt, R. (2013). Multicriteria supplier segmentation using fuzzy preference relations based AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1)
  • Ritchie, W. J. and Melnyk (2017). Environmental Standard Adoption in Marinas: A Spatiotemporal Analysis of a Special Form of Maritime Transportation Hubs. Transportation Research Part D, 55, 1–11.
  • Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-Making with The Ahp: Why Is the Principal Eigenvector Necessary. European Journal of Operational Research, 145, 85–91.
  • Sabri, K. (2016). Multiple Criteria Performance Analysis: The Comparison Of Telecommunications Sectors In North Africa. 18th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social, Hırvatistan.
  • Sariisik, M., Turkay, O. and Akova, O. (2011). How to Manage Yacht Tourism in Turkey: A Swot Analysis and Related Strategies. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1014–1025.
  • Sezer, I. (2012). In View of The Effects on Touristic Functions and Marina Tourism; Didim. Eastern Geographical Review, 103–124.
  • Uzun, S.; Kazan, H. (2016). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinden AHP TOPSIS ve PROMETHEE Karşılaştırılması: Gemi Inşada Ana Makine Seçimi Uygulaması. Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 1(1), 99-113.
  • Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 7118, 2634 Sayılı Turizmi Teşvik Kanunu.
  • TDK, Turkish Language Society, https://sozluk.gov.tr/?Kelime=, Accessed 01.10.2019
  • Tomovic, S. (2014). Application of Multi-Criteria Optimisation In Marina Planning on the Montenegrin Coast, 21(2), 97–101.
  • Vahdani, B., Hadipour, H., & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2010). Soft computing based on interval valued fuzzy ANP – a novel methodology, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. 23, 1529–1544 (2012).
  • Wang, Chu, J., & Wu, J. (2007). Selection of optimum maintenance strategies based on a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Production Economics, 107(1), 151-163.
  • Wang, Y. M., & Elhag, T. M. S. (2006). Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level setswith an application to bridge risk assessment.Expert Systems with Applications,31, 309–319.
  • Wilson, A. M. W., Mugerauer, R., and Klinger, T. (2015). Rethinking Marine Infrastructure Policy and Practice: Insights from three large-scale Marina Developments in Seattle. Marine Policy, 53, 67–82.
  • Yaralıoglu, K. (2001). Performans Değerlendirmede Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses. Dokuz Eylül University, Journal of I. İ. B. F., 3(5), 129–142.
  • Yılmaz, M., & Ballı, S. (2016). Veri şifreleme algoritmalarının kullanımı için Akıllı bir seçim sistemigeliştirilmesi. Uluslararası Bilgi Güvenliği Mühendisliği Dergisi, 2(2), 18-28.

MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 14 - 24, 30.06.2020

Volkan Efecan İzzettin Temiz

Öz

In the scope of the research, determination of preference criteria of yacht owners, applicability of the most suitable marina and selected methods to the marina selection problem were evaluated and findings obtained by different methods were compared and to what extent these methods contributed to the decision-making process and how consistent they were. In this study, the criteria of yacht owners to prefer marinas of our country are tried to be determined by using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) which is one of the multi criteria decision making methods. Weight input values obtained by AHP were used in TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) and PROMETHEE methods, which are multi-criteria decision-making methods, to evaluate yacht owners to determine the most suitable marina alternative for themselves. As a result of the study, consistent and real-life results were obtained, it was concluded that AHP, TOPSIS and PROMETHEE methods could be used for decision support during selection.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Marina Selection Analytic Hierarchy Process TOPSIS PROMETHEE Tourism of marine

Kaynakça

  • Almoghathawi, Y., Barker, K., Rocco, C. M., & Nicholson, C. D. (2017). A multi-criteria decision analysis approach for importance identification and ranking of network components. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 158, 142-151.
  • Ayşegül Şahin, C. A. (2013). Promethee Sıralama Yöntemi ile Portföy Oluşturma Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Journal of Economics and Management Research, 3(2).
  • Şenkayas and Hekimoğlu, (2013). Çok Kriterli Tedarikçi seçimi problemine PROMETHEE yöntemi uygulaması, Verimlilik Dergisi, 4(2), 63-80.
  • Brans, J. P. And Vincke, (1985), A Preference Ranking Organization Method. Management Science, 31(6):647-656.
  • Chan, F. T. S., & Kumar, N. (2007). Global Supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, 35(4), 417-431.
  • Dağdeviren, M., and Eraslan, E. (2008). Supplier Selection Using Promethee Sequencing Method, Gazi Üniversitesi. Müh. Mim. Fak. Der, 23(1), 69–75.
  • Dikeç, Görkem and Töz, Ali, (2016). Marina Müşterilerinin Marinalarda Aldıkları Hizmetlerin Kalite Düzeylerine Yönelik Algılarının Analizi. III. Ulusal Deniz Turizmi Sempozyumu.
  • Huang, C. C., Chu, P Y., &Chiang, Y. H. (2008). A Fuzzy AHP-based performance evaluation model for implementing SPC in the Taiwanese LCD industry. International Journal of Production Research, 47(18), 5163-5183.
  • Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Newyork.
  • Güney, C. (2017). Visual Promethee ile Yatırımcılar Açısından Sektörlerin Değerlendirilmesi. International Scientific Peer-Reviewed and Refereed Journal, 9(34), 177–188.
  • Işık, D. A., and Cerit, A. G. (2007). Yacht Tourism Education: A Study on Curriculums, 585–592.
  • Mahdavi, I., Mahdavi-Amiri, N., Heidarzade, A., & Nourifar, R. (2008). Designing amodel of fuzzy TOPSIS in multiple criteria decision making.Applied Mathematicsand Computation, 206, 607–617.
  • Nas, S., Kan, N. (2014). Yacht Type Preference in Yacht Purchase Decision: A Case Study Through Yacht Owners at ic Cesme. Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 49–69.
  • Yacht Statistics, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Https://Yigm.Ktb.Gov.Tr/Tr201145/Yatistatistikleri.Html. Accessed 10.10.2019
  • Kahraman, C., Beskese, A., & Kaya, I. (2010). Selection among ERP outsourcing alternatives using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Production Research, 48(2), 547-566.
  • Kecek, G., & Yüksel, R. (2016). Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve PROMETHEE Teknikleriyle Akıllı Telefon Seçimi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (49), 46-62.
  • Kelemenis, A., Ergazakis, K., & Askounis, D. (2011). Support managers’ selectionusing an extension of fuzzy TOPSIS.Expert Systems with Applications, 38,2774–2782
  • Kuruüzüm, A. and Atsan, N. (2001). Anali̇ti̇k Hi̇yerarşi̇ Yöntemi̇ ve İşletmeci̇li̇k Alanındaki̇ Uygulamaları. Akdeniz I: I: B: F: Dergisi, (1), 83–105.
  • Liang, Y. H. (2015), Performance measurement of interorganizational information systems in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5484-5499.
  • Maglić, L. (2019). Multi-Criteria Decision Model for Marina Location Selection in The County of Primorje And Gorski Kotar Primjena Višekriterijske Analize Pri Izboru Lokacije Za Izgradnju Marine U Primorsko-Goranskoj Županiji, (April).
  • Ömürbek, N. and Şimşek, A. (2014). Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci ve Analitik Ağ Süreci Yöntemleri ile Online Alışveriş Site Seçimi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 22.
  • Paker, N., and Altuntas, C. (2016). Customer Segmentation for Marinas: Evaluating Marinas as Destinations, 56, 156–171.
  • Rezaei, J., & Ortt, R. (2013). Multicriteria supplier segmentation using fuzzy preference relations based AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1)
  • Ritchie, W. J. and Melnyk (2017). Environmental Standard Adoption in Marinas: A Spatiotemporal Analysis of a Special Form of Maritime Transportation Hubs. Transportation Research Part D, 55, 1–11.
  • Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-Making with The Ahp: Why Is the Principal Eigenvector Necessary. European Journal of Operational Research, 145, 85–91.
  • Sabri, K. (2016). Multiple Criteria Performance Analysis: The Comparison Of Telecommunications Sectors In North Africa. 18th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social, Hırvatistan.
  • Sariisik, M., Turkay, O. and Akova, O. (2011). How to Manage Yacht Tourism in Turkey: A Swot Analysis and Related Strategies. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 1014–1025.
  • Sezer, I. (2012). In View of The Effects on Touristic Functions and Marina Tourism; Didim. Eastern Geographical Review, 103–124.
  • Uzun, S.; Kazan, H. (2016). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinden AHP TOPSIS ve PROMETHEE Karşılaştırılması: Gemi Inşada Ana Makine Seçimi Uygulaması. Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 1(1), 99-113.
  • Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 7118, 2634 Sayılı Turizmi Teşvik Kanunu.
  • TDK, Turkish Language Society, https://sozluk.gov.tr/?Kelime=, Accessed 01.10.2019
  • Tomovic, S. (2014). Application of Multi-Criteria Optimisation In Marina Planning on the Montenegrin Coast, 21(2), 97–101.
  • Vahdani, B., Hadipour, H., & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2010). Soft computing based on interval valued fuzzy ANP – a novel methodology, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. 23, 1529–1544 (2012).
  • Wang, Chu, J., & Wu, J. (2007). Selection of optimum maintenance strategies based on a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Production Economics, 107(1), 151-163.
  • Wang, Y. M., & Elhag, T. M. S. (2006). Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level setswith an application to bridge risk assessment.Expert Systems with Applications,31, 309–319.
  • Wilson, A. M. W., Mugerauer, R., and Klinger, T. (2015). Rethinking Marine Infrastructure Policy and Practice: Insights from three large-scale Marina Developments in Seattle. Marine Policy, 53, 67–82.
  • Yaralıoglu, K. (2001). Performans Değerlendirmede Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses. Dokuz Eylül University, Journal of I. İ. B. F., 3(5), 129–142.
  • Yılmaz, M., & Ballı, S. (2016). Veri şifreleme algoritmalarının kullanımı için Akıllı bir seçim sistemigeliştirilmesi. Uluslararası Bilgi Güvenliği Mühendisliği Dergisi, 2(2), 18-28.
Toplam 38 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Deniz Mühendisliği (Diğer), İşletme
Bölüm Research Articles
Yazarlar

Volkan Efecan 0000-0002-8450-0445

İzzettin Temiz 0000-0001-8672-1340

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2020
Gönderilme Tarihi 12 Kasım 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2020 Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Efecan, V., & Temiz, İ. (2020). MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE. Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty, 2(1), 14-24.
AMA Efecan V, Temiz İ. MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE. MEUJMAF. Haziran 2020;2(1):14-24.
Chicago Efecan, Volkan, ve İzzettin Temiz. “MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE”. Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty 2, sy. 1 (Haziran 2020): 14-24.
EndNote Efecan V, Temiz İ (01 Haziran 2020) MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE. Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty 2 1 14–24.
IEEE V. Efecan ve İ. Temiz, “MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE”, MEUJMAF, c. 2, sy. 1, ss. 14–24, 2020.
ISNAD Efecan, Volkan - Temiz, İzzettin. “MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE”. Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty 2/1 (Haziran 2020), 14-24.
JAMA Efecan V, Temiz İ. MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE. MEUJMAF. 2020;2:14–24.
MLA Efecan, Volkan ve İzzettin Temiz. “MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE”. Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty, c. 2, sy. 1, 2020, ss. 14-24.
Vancouver Efecan V, Temiz İ. MARINA SELECTION OF YACHTSMEN USING AHP-TOPSIS AND AHP-PROMETHEE. MEUJMAF. 2020;2(1):14-2.
 Kapak Resmi İndir

download

Mersin University Journal of Maritime Faculty is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.