Competitive advantage assessment for container shipping liners using a novel hybrid method with intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to design a method for ranking the competitive advantages of container shipping liner companies. The major issue that arises in applying this method is capturing and dealing with qualitative and uncertain information in a complex decision-making environment. A novel hybrid scheme combining intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables with optimal determining weights is proposed to assess the competitive advantages of five representative shipping liner companies. Several experts in the related field are invited to adopt intuitionistic fuzzy sets into their group decision-making on the basis of four aspects of competitive advantage held by each shipping liner firm. The intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables are employed to evaluate data under each key attribute, which is extracted from the public reports issued by each company concerned. The result validates the effectiveness of the scheme with intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables, and it is found that the experts involved more easily grasp the classical intuitionistic fuzzy evaluation tool, benefiting the effectiveness of competitive advantage assessments of liner companies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Wiggins RR, Rueflfli TW (2002) Sustained competitive advantage: temporal dynamics and the incidence and persistence of superior economic performance. Org Sci 13(1):81–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Maury B (2018) Sustainable competitive advantage and profitability persistence: sources versus outcomes for assessing advantage. J Bus Res 84:100–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Pérez Lespier L, Long S, Shoberg T, Corns S (2018) A model for the evaluation of environmental impact indicators for a sustainable maritime transportation system. Front Eng Manag 6(3):368–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Fanam P, Nguyen H, Cahoon S (2016) Competitiveness of the liner operators: methodological issues and implications. J Traf Transp Eng 4(5):231–241

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Magnus U, Basedow J, Wolfrum R (2012) The Hamburg lectures on maritime affairs 2009 and 2010. Springer, Berlin, pp. 3–27. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-642-27419-0#toc. Accessed 29 May 2020

  6. 6.

    Kuo S-Y, Lin P-C, Lu C-S (2017) The effects of dynamic capabilities, service capabilities, competitive advantage, and organizational performance in container shipping. Transp Res A 95:356–371

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Moir L, Lohmann G (2018) A quantitative means of comparing competitive advantage among airlines with heterogeneous business models: analysis of US airlines. J Air Transp Manag 69:72–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Cao G, Duan Y, Cadden T (2019) The link between information processing capability and competitive advantage mediated through decision-making effectiveness. Int J Inf Manag 44:121–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Karsak EE, Dursun M (2014) An integrated supplier selection methodology incorporating QFD and DEA with imprecise data. Expert Syst Appl 41(16):6995–7004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.06.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Wu J, Wang L, Li L (2020) 2-Dimensional interval neutrosophic linguistic numbers and their utilization in group decision making. neural computing for advanced applications, NCAA 2020. Commun Comput Inform Sci 1265:234–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7670-6_20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 4120(1):87–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Atanassov K, Gargov G (1989) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 31(3):343–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(89)90205-4

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J, Bujnowski P (2014) How to measure the amount of knowledge conveyed by Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 257:276–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2012.12.046

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Kacprzyk J, Krawczak M, Szkatuła G (2017) On bilateral matching between fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 402:244–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.03.019

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Alcantud JCR, Torra V (2018) Decomposition theorems and extension principles for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf Fusion 41:48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2017.08.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Song Y, Fu Q, Wang Y-F, Wang X (2019) Divergence-based cross entropy and uncertainty measures of Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy sets with their application in decision making. Appl Soft Comput J 84:105703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Liu P, Wang Y (2014) Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators. Appl Soft Comput 17:90–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Xu Z (2006) Induced uncertain linguistic OWA operators applied to group decision making. Inf Fusion 7(2):231–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Wang J, Li J (2009) The multi-criteria group decision making method based on multi-granularity intuitionistic two semantics. Sci Technol Inf 33:8–9

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Wang J, Li H (2010) Multi-criteria decision-making method based on aggregation operators for intuitionistic linguistic fuzzy numbers. Control Decis 25(10):1571–1584

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Guo X, Chen Y (2013) A deviation method for determining the weight of interval number index. Stat Decis 20:61–63

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Li N, He Z (2009) Power quality comprehensive evaluation combining subjective weight with objective weight. Power Syst Technol 33(06):55–61

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Chen H (2003) Research on optimal combination determining weights method for multiple attribute decision making. Oper Res Manag Sci 02:6–10

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Chen W, Xia J (2007) An optimal weights combination method considering both subjective and objective weight information. Math Pract Theo 01:17–22

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    CMA CGM (2019) Corporate social responsibility report 2018. https://www.cmacgm-group.com/en/csr/social. Accessed 29 May 2020

  26. 26.

    Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation (Yang Ming) (2019) 2019 Corporate social responsibility report. https://www.yangming.com/files/Investor_Relations/2019CSR.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2020

  27. 27.

    SITC International Holdings Co., Ltd. (2020) Social responsibility. http://www.sitc.com/en/social%20responsibility/index2.asp. Accessed 8 Mar 2020

  28. 28.

    Cosco Shipping Lines Co., Ltd. (2018) 2018 Sustainability report. http://lines.coscoshipping.com/lines_resource/pdf/quality2018en.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2020

  29. 29.

    Maersk (2017) 2017 Sustainability report. https://www.maersk.com.cn/about/sustainability/reports. Accessed 29 May 2020

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junzhong Bao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors claim no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bao, J., Zhou, Y. & Li, R. Competitive advantage assessment for container shipping liners using a novel hybrid method with intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables. Neural Comput & Applic (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-05718-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Competitive advantage assessment
  • Container shipping liner
  • Intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic variables
  • Optimal determining weights