International journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN:2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 5, Issue 9 (September 2018), Pages: 88-95

----------------------------------------------

 Technical Note

 Title: Measuring aftersales productivity by multi attribute decision making methods: An application in the automotive sector

 Author(s): Yasin Galip Gencer 1, *, Ulas Akkucuk 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Department of International Trade and Finance, Yalova University, Yalova, Turkey
 2Department of Management, Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2018.09.013

 Full Text - PDF          XML

 Abstract:

The aim of the research is to propose a Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) methodology for the performance evaluation of 76 dealers of Hyundai in Turkey in terms of after sales services such as repair and maintenance. Through this work, appropriate inputs and outputs are determined and the DEA methodology is applied for 76 dealers. DEA is a multi-criteria decision making model that can be used to determine rank orders of units when there are given inputs and outputs. Three inputs and four outputs are determined by the authors and expert opinion. After data collection and DEA analysis, we reported the ranks of 76 dealers after sales services and classify the ranks by regions in order to spotlight certain regional considerations (such as popular touristic destinations) in terms of after sales performance. Research is limited to a specific brand and can be extended to include other brands in the future. Also, other after sales services such as appliance repair can be included. After sales service personnel can easily use the method by Excel and can see their performance with respect to other dealers. As dealers can see performance based incentives becoming a major part of their total profits being able to see the relative positions among the many dealers would have practical implications. 

 © 2018 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: DEA, Automotive, Performance, After sales services, MADM

 Article History: Received 2 May 2018, Received in revised form 25 July 2018, Accepted 28 July 2018

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2018.09.013

 Citation:

 Gencer YG and Akkucuk U (2018). Measuring aftersales productivity by multi attribute decision making methods: An application in the automotive sector. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 5(9): 88-95

 Permanent Link:

 http://www.science-gate.com/IJAAS/2018/V5I9/Gencer.html

----------------------------------------------

 References (22) 

  1. Abbasi M and Kaviani MA (2016). Operational efficiency-based ranking framework using uncertain DEA methods: An application to the cement industry in Iran. Management Decision, 54(4): 902-928. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2015-0413   [Google Scholar]
  1. Avkiran NK (2006). Productivity analysis in the service sector with data envelopment analysis. 3rd Edition, Avkiran NK, Brisbane, Australia. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2627576   [Google Scholar]
  1. Banker RD, Charnes A, and Cooper WW (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9): 1078-1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078   [Google Scholar]
  1. Sarrico CS, Hogan SM, Dyson RG, and Athanassopoulos AD (1997). Data envelopment analysis and university selection. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(12): 1163-1177. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600475   [Google Scholar]
  1. Charnes A, Cooper WW, and Rhodes E (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6): 429-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8   [Google Scholar]
  1. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Golany B, Seiford L, and Stutz J (1985). Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. Journal of Econometrics, 30(1-2): 91-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(85)90133-2   [Google Scholar]
  1. Cooper WW, Park KS, and Yu G (1999). IDEA and AR-IDEA: Models for dealing with imprecise data in DEA. Management Science, 45(4): 597-607. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.4.597   [Google Scholar]
  1. Cooper WW, Seiford LM, and Zhu J (2011). Handbook on data envelopment analysis. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6151-8   [Google Scholar]
  1. de Alvarenga EFS, de Sousa Junior LAM and Lins ME (2016). Selection of corporate spare parts inventory for Brazilian refineries: A smoothed data envelopment analysis frontier function using calculus of variations. Palgrave Macmillan UK, Basingstoke, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  1. Førsund FR and Sarafoglou N (2002). On the origins of data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 17(1-2): 23-40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013519902012   [Google Scholar]
  1. Gencer YG and Akkucuk U (2017). Measuring quality in automobile aftersales: AutoSERVQUAL scale. Amfiteatru Economic, 19(44): 110-123.   [Google Scholar]
  1. Gillen D and Lall A (1997). Developing measures of airport productivity and performance: An application of data envelopment analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 33(4): 261-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(97)00028-8   [Google Scholar]
  1. Golany B and Roll Y (1989). An application procedure for DEA. Omega, 17(3): 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(89)90029-7   [Google Scholar]
  1. Kim SH, Park CG, and Park KS (1999). An application of data envelopment analysis in telephone offices evaluation with partial data. Computers and Operations Research, 26(1): 59-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(98)00041-0   [Google Scholar]
  1. Lewin AY, Morey RC, and Cook TJ (1982). Evaluating the administrative efficiency of courts. Omega, 10(4): 401-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(82)90019-6   [Google Scholar]
  1. Melao N (2005). Data envelopment analysis revisited: A neophyte's perspective. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 6(2): 158-179. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2005.006029   [Google Scholar]
  1. Ross AD, Parker H, del Mar Benavides-Espinosa M, and Droge C (2012). Sustainability and supply chain infrastructure development. Management Decision, 50(10): 1891-1910. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211279666   [Google Scholar]
  1. Sherman HD and Ladino G (1995). Managing bank productivity using data envelopment analysis (DEA). Interfaces, 25(2): 60-73. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.25.2.60   [Google Scholar]
  1. Thanassoulis E, Dyson RG, and Foster MJ (1987). Relative efficiency assessments using data envelopment analysis: an application to data on rates departments. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 38(5): 397-411. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.1987.68   [Google Scholar]
  1. White CC, Sage AP, and Dozono S (1984). A model of multiattribute decisionmaking and trade-off weight determination under uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-14(2): 223-229. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1984.6313205   [Google Scholar]
  1. Wu YC and Lin CW (2008). National port competitiveness: Implications for India. Management Decision, 46(10): 1482-1507. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810920001   [Google Scholar]
  1. Wu J, Zhu Q, Chu J, Liu H, and Liang L (2016). Measuring energy and environmental efficiency of transportation systems in China based on a parallel DEA approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 48: 460-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.08.001   [Google Scholar]