Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 22, pp 7491–7503 | Cite as

Development of a multi-level performance measurement model for manufacturing companies using a modified version of the fuzzy TOPSIS approach

  • Mustafa Yurdakul
  • Yusuf Tansel İç


This paper aims to develop a comprehensive hierarchical performance measurement model. The proposed model not only determines a manufacturing company’s overall performance within its industry but also obtains its strengths and weaknesses in critical activities. It lets one to combine a company’s performance scores in seventeen critical activities with important industry-specific objectives to obtain a single overall performance score by using a 4-Point Fuzzy Scale and a modified fuzzy version of the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution approach. The calculated overall performance scores provide a ranking order among manufacturing companies within their industry. In addition, it also enables each company to compare its performance in critical activities with respect to other companies in its industry. Furthermore, the performance measurement model has the capability to determine what a company should do to improve its performance in critical activities. This paper provides an example to illustrate the application of the proposed model.


Performance measurement Manufacturing companies Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Ahmad K, Zabri SM (2016) The application of non-financial performance measurement in malaysian manufacturing firms. Procedia Econ Financ 35(2016):476–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson JC, Rungtusanatham M, Schroeder RG, Devaraj S (1995) A path analytic model of a theory of quality management underlying the deming management method: preliminary empirical findings. Decis Sci 26(5):637–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babic Z, Plazibat N (1998) Ranking of enterprises based on multicriterial analysis. Int J Prod Econ 56–57:29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banker RD, Potter G, Schroeder RG (1993) Reporting manufacturing performance measures to workers: an empirical study. J Manag Acc Res 5:33–53Google Scholar
  5. Banks RL, Wheelwright SC (1979) Operations versus strategy—trading tomorrow for today. Harvard Bus Rev 57(3):112–120Google Scholar
  6. Böhm E, Eggert A, Thiesbrummel C (2017) Service transition: a viable option for manufacturing companies with deteriorating financial performance? Ind Mark Manag 60:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braz GT, Scavarda LF, Martins RA (2011) Reviewing and improving performance measurement systems: an action research. Int J Prod Econ 133(2011):751–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bromiley P, Rau D (2016) Operations management and the resource based view: another view. J Oper Manag 41:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chamodrakas I, Leftheriotis I, Martakos D (2011) In-depth analysis and simulation study of an innovative fuzzy approach for ranking alternatives in multiple attribute decision making problems based on TOPSIS. Appl Soft Comput 11:900–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen S-J, Hwang C-L (1992) Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Springer, Berlin CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheng C-H, Lin Y (2002) Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. Eur J Oper Res 2002(142):174–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiarini A, Vagnoni E (2015) World-class manufacturing by Fiat. Comparison with Toyota production system from a strategic management, management accounting, operations management and performance measurement dimension. Int J Prod Res 53(2):590–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Choi TY, Liker JK (1995) Bringing Japanese continuous improvement approaches to US manufacturing: the roles of process orientation and communications. Decis Sci 26(5):589–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cua KO, McKone KE, Schroeder RG (2001) Relationships between implementation of TQM, JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance. J Oper Manag 19(6):675–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Das A, Handfield RB, Calantone RJ, Ghosh S (2000) A contingent view of quality management—the impact of international competition on quality. Decis Sci 31(3):649–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Felice F, Petrillo A (2015) Optimization of manufacturing system through world class manufacturing. IFAC Papers On-line 48(3):741–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dow D, Samson D, Ford S (1999) Exploding the myth: do all quality management practices contribute to superior quality performance? Prod Oper Manag 8(1):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) “Dynamic Capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manag J 21:1105–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Epstein MJ, Manzoni J (1997) The balanced scorecard and tableau de board, Translating strategy into action. Manag Account 8:28–36Google Scholar
  20. Eraslan E, İç YT (2011) A multi-criteria approach for determination of investment regions: Turkish case. Ind Manag Data Syst 111(6):890–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ertugrul I, Karakasoglu N (2009) Performance evaluation of Turkish cement firms with fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl 36:702–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Esmaeel RI, Zakuan N, Jamal NM, Taherdoost H (2018) Understanding of business performance from the perspective of manufacturing strategies: fit manufacturing and overall equipment effectiveness. Procedia Manuf 22:998–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ezzabadi JH, Saryazdi MD, Mostafaeipour A (2015) Implementing Fuzzy Logic and AHP into the EFQM model for performance improvement: a case study. Appl Soft Comput 36:165–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fitzgerald L, Johnston R, Brignall TJ, Silvestro R, Voss C (1991) Performance measurement in service businesses. The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Flynn BB, Schroeder RG, Sakakibara S (1995) The impact of quality management practices on performance and competitive advantage. Decis Sci 26(5):659–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Forza C, Flippini R (1998) TQM impact on quality conformance and customer satisfaction: a causal model. Int J Prod Econ 55(1):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fry TD, Cox JF (1989) Manufacturing performance; local versus global measures. Prod Inven Manag J 30(2):52–56Google Scholar
  28. Hall RW (1983) Zero inventories. Dow, Jones-Irwin, HomewoodGoogle Scholar
  29. Hayes RH, Abernathy WJ (1980) Managing our way to economic decline. Harvard Bus Rev 62:95–101Google Scholar
  30. Hayes RH, Garvin DA (1982) Managing as if tomorrow mattered. Harvard Bus Rev 60(3):70–79Google Scholar
  31. Hayes RH, Wheelwright SC (1984) Restoring our competitive edge: competing through manufacturing. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Ic YT (2012) Development of a credit limit allocation model for banks using an integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and linear programming. Expert Syst Appl 39(2012):5309–5316Google Scholar
  33. Ic YT (2014) A TOPSIS based design of experiment approach to assess company ranking. Appl Math Comput 227:630–647MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Ic YT, Yurdakul M (2010) Development of a quick credibility scoring decision support system using fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 37:567–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. IFAC (1998) International management accounting practice statement: management accounting concepts. International Federation of Accountants, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Ittner C, Larcker D, Randall T (2003) Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial service firms. Acc Organ Soc 28(7/8):715–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kagioglou M, Cooper R, Aouad G (2001) Performance management in construction: a conceptual framework. Constr Manag Econ 19(85):95Google Scholar
  38. Kaplan RS (1983) Measuring performance: a new challenge for managerial accounting research. Acc Rev 18(4):686–705Google Scholar
  39. Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard—measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus Rev 70(1):71–79Google Scholar
  40. Kaynak H (2003) The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. J Oper Manag 21(4):405–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kennerley M, Neely A (2002) A framework of the factors affecting the evolution of performance measurement systems. Int J Oper Prod Manag 22(11):1222–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kundu P, Kar S, Maiti M (2014) A fuzzy MCDM method and an application to solid transportation problem with mode preference. Soft Comput 18:1853–1864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lynch RL, Cross KF (1991) Measure up – the essential guide to measuring business performance. Mandarin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Maksoud A, Dugdale D, Luther R (2005) Non-financial performance measurement in manufacturing companies. Br Acc Rev 37:261–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Matsui Y(2002) An empirical analysis of quality management in Japanese manufacturing companies. In: Proceedings of the seventh annual meeting of the asia-pacific decision sciences institute, APDSI, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  46. Melnyk SA, Davis EW, Spekman RE, Sandor J (2010) Outcome-driven supply chains. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 51(2):33–38Google Scholar
  47. Moullin M (2003) Defining performance measurement. Perspect Perform 2(2):3Google Scholar
  48. Neely A (2002) Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Parast MM, Adam SG, Jones EC, Rao SS, Raghu-Nathan TS (2006) Comparing quality management practices between the United States and Mexico. Qual Manag J 13(4):36–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Parkan C, Wu M-L (1999) Decision making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Comput Ind Eng 36:503–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Petrillo A, De Felice F, Zomparelli F (2018) Performance measurement for world-class manufacturing: a model for the Italian automotive industry. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Phan AC, Abdallah AB, Matsui Y (2011) Quality management practices and competitive performance: empirical evidence from Japanese manufacturing companies. Int J Prod Econ 133:518–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prybutok V, Zhang X, Peak D (2011) Assessing the effectiveness of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award model with municipal government. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 45:118–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rao M, Chhabria R, Gunasekaran A, Mandal P (2018) Improving competitiveness through performance evaluation using the APC model: a case in micro-irrigation. Int J Prod Econ 195(2018):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rawat GS, Gupta A, Juneja C (2018) Productivity measurement of manufacturing system. Mater Today Proc 5:1483–1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Samson D, Terziovski M (1999) The relationship between total quality management practices and operational performance. J Oper Manag 17(4):393–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sangwa NR, Sangwan KS (2018) Development of an integrated performance measurement framework for lean organizations. J Manuf Technol Manag 29(1):41–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sardana D, Terziovski M, Gupta N (2016) The impact of strategic alignment and responsiveness to market on manufacturing firm’s performance. Int J Prod Econ 177:131–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schroeder RG, Flynn BB (2001) High performance manufacturing: global perspectives. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Skinner W (1974) The decline, fall and renewal of manufacturing. Indus Eng 52(5):32–38Google Scholar
  61. Striteska M (2012) Key features of strategic performance management systems in manufacturing companies. Procedia Social Behav Sci 58:1103–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Taylor A, Taylor M (2013) Antecedents of effective performance measurement system implementation: an empirical study of UK manufacturing firms. Int J Prod Res 51(18):5485–5498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Teece DJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg Manag J 28(13):1319–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Teece DJ (2009) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: organizing for innovation and growth. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  65. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 18(7):509–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Toklu MC, Taskin H (2017) Performance evaluation of small-medium enterprises based on management and organization. Acta Phys Pol A 132(3):994–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Yeo B, Grant D (2017) Exploring the factors affecting global manufacturing performance. Inf Technol Dev. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Yeung ACL, Cheng TCE, Lai KH (2005) An empirical model for managing quality in the electronic industry. Prod Oper Manag 14(2):189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yurdakul M, Ic YT (2005) Development of a performance measurement model for manufacturing companies using the AHP and TOPSIS approaches. Int J Prod Res 43(21):4609–4641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yurdakul M, Ic YT (2009a) Analysis of the benefit generated by using fuzzy numbers in a TOPSIS model developed for machine tool selection problems. J Mater Process Technol 209:310–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yurdakul M, Ic YT (2009b) Application of correlation test to criteria selection for multi criteria decision making (MCDM) models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 40:403–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringGazi UniversityMaltepeTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringBaskent UniversityBaglica, EtimesgutTurkey

Personalised recommendations