Advertisement

Interpretive Structural Modeling Technique to Analyze the Interactions Between the Factors Influencing the Performance of the Reverse Logistics Chain

  • Jalel EuchiEmail author
  • Dalel Bouzidi
  • Zahira Bouzid
Original Research
  • 61 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyze the interactions among the different factors influencing the performance of the reverse logistics chain. We attempted to explore the factors touching performance of reverse logistics relatively to customer satisfaction. We have proposed a structural analysis based on MICMAC (Impact Matrix Cross-Reference Multiplication Applied to a Classification) method to classify factors rendering their direct/indirect influences and dependencies. The upshot of this research is to identify the relationship between the 31 variables used in the experimentation. It observed that this exploration might cooperate in reverse logistics policy development arrangement, motivated by customer necessity.

Keywords

Customer satisfaction Performance Reverse logistics Structural analysis 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest

References

  1. Agi, M. A. N., & Nishant, R. (2017). Understanding influential factors on implementing green supply chain management practices: An interpretive structural modelling analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 188, 351–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali, S. M., Arafin, A., Moktadir, M. A., Rahman, T., & Zahan, N. (2017). Barriers to reverse logistics in the computer supply chain using interpretive structural model. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 19, 53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. China, T. A., HonTatb, H., & Sulaiman, Z. (2015). Green Supply chain management, environmental collaboration and sustainability performance. Procedia CIRP, 26, 695–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chow, W. S., & Ha, W. O. (2009). Determinants of the critical success factor of disaster recovery planning for information systems. Information Management and Computer Security, 17(3), 248–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dubey, R., & Ali, S. S. (2014). Identification of flexible manufacturing system dimensions and their interrelationship using total interpretive structural modelling and fuzzy MICMAC analysis. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 15(2), 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Childe, S. J., Shibin, K. T., & Wamba, S. F. (2017). Sustainable supply chain management: Framework and further research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 119–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edalatpour, M. A., Mirzapour Al-e-hashem, S. M. J., Karimi, B., & Bahli, B. (2018). Investigation on a novel sustainable model for waste management in megacities: A case study in tehran municipality. Sustainable Cities and Society, 36(8), 286–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Euchi, J. (2017a). The vehicle routing problem with private fleet and multiple common carriers: Solution with hybrid metaheuristic algorithm. Vehicular Communications, 9, 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Euchi, J. (2017b). Genetic scatter search algorithm to solve the one-commodity pickup and delivery vehicle routing problem. Journal of Modelling in Management, 12(1), 2–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Euchi, J., Yassine, A., & Chabchoub, H. (2015). The dynamic vehicle routing problem: Solution with hybrid metaheuristic approach. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 21, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Godet M (2007) Manuel de la prospective stratégique: Tome 2, L’Art et la méthode (pp 122–159) France.Google Scholar
  12. Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., & Singh, S. P. (2016). Flexible sustainable supply chain network design: Current trends, opportunities and future. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 17(2), 109–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jain, V., Benyoucef, L., & Deshmukh, S. G. (2008). A new approach for evaluating agility in supply chains using fuzzy association rules mining. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 21(3), 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Khatwani, G., Singh, S. P., Trivedi, A., & Chauhan, A. (2015). Fuzzy-TISM: A fuzzy extension of TISM for group decision making. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 16(1), 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kima In, J., Kimb, S. J., & Yoonc, S.-J. (2014). A dark side of international capital market integration: Domestic investors’ view. International Review of Economics and Finance, 33, 238–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kolarovszki, P. (2014). Research of readability and identification of the items in the postal and logistics environment. Transport and Telecommunication, 15(3), 196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krumwiede, D. W., & Sheu, C. (2002). A model for reverse logistics entry by third-party providers. Omega, 30, 325–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Min, H., & Zhou, G. (2002). Supply chain modeling: Past, present and future. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 43(1–2), 231–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peretti, U., Tatham, P., Wu, Y., & Sgarbossa, F. (2015). Reverse logistics in humanitarian operations: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 5(2), 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Saxena, J. P., Sushil, & Vrat, P. (1990). Impact of indirect relationships in classification of variables—a MICMAC analysis for energy conservation. Systems Research, 7(4), 245–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shibin, K. T., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Dubey, R., Singh, M., & Wamba, S. F. (2015). Enablers and barriers of flexible green supply chain management: A total interpretive structural modeling approach. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 17(2), 171–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sushil. (2017). Modified ISM/TISM process with simultaneous transitivity checks for reducing direct pair comparisons. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 18(4), 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sushil. (2018). How to check correctness of total interpretive structural models? Annals of Operations Research, 270(1–2), 473–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tibben-Lembke, R. S., & Rogers, D. S. (2002). Differences between forward and reverse logistics in a retail environment. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 7(5), 271–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Van Hoek, R. I. (1999). From reverse logistics to green supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 4(3), 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Varsei, M., Soosay, C., Fahimnia, B., & Sarkis, J. (2014). Framing sustainability performance of supply chains with multidimensional indicators. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(3), 242–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yadav, D. K., & Barve, A. (2015). Analysis of critical success factors of humanitarian supply chain: An application of interpretive structural modeling. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 12, 213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LOGIQ Laboratory, Department of Quantitatives MethodsSfax UniversitySfaxTunisia

Personalised recommendations