Different from the traditional supply chain, there are more uncertainty in the supply chain of social commerce (SCOSC), which brings new risk. As a fundamental stage in the supply chain risk management (SCRM), risk assessment can effectively control risks in supply chain. To address risk preference of decision makers (DMs) and the criteria ambiguity, this paper proposes an extended generalized TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese of interactive and multi-criteria decision making) method within interval type-2 fuzzy sets (IT2FSs) to evaluate the risk of the SCOSC. First, the generalized TODIM is extended with two different value functions based on two types of criteria, cost and benefit, and the alternatives are ranked according to the distance to the ideal solution and the negative-ideal solution. Second, the IT2FSs is applied to deal with the linguistics ambiguity with the generalized TODIM method. Furthermore, the risk assessment of SCOSC based on the extended generalized TODIM within IT2FSs is proposed. Finally, a case of the risk assessment in SCOSC is presented to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method.
HoW.et al., Supply chain risk management: A literature review, International Journal of Production Research53 (2015), 5031–5069.
2.
ChopraS. and SodhiM.S., Managing risk to avoid: Supply-chain breakdown, Sloan Management Review46 (2004), 53–62.
3.
TummalaR. and SchoenherrT., Assessing and managing risks using the supply chain risk management process (SCRMP), Supply Chain Management: An International Journal16 (2011), 474–483.
4.
WuT., BlackhurstJ. and ChidambaramV., A model for inbound supply risk analysis, Computers in Industry57 (2006), 350–365.
5.
VenkateshV.G., RathiS. and PatwaS., Analysis on supply chain risks in Indian apparel retail chains and proposal of risk prioritization model using Interpretive structural modeling, Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services26 (2015), 153–167.
6.
TurbanE., BollojuN. and LiangT.-P., Social commerce: An e-commerce perspective, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Electronic Commerce: Roadmap for the Future of Electronic Business, ACM, 2010, pp. 33–42.
7.
LuB., FanW. and ZhouM., Social presence, trust, and social commerce purchase intention: An empirical research, Computers in Human Behavior56 (2016), 225–237.
8.
MarkovaS. and Petkovska-MircevskaT., Social Media And Supply Chain, Amfiteatru Economic15 (2013), 89–102.
9.
SigalaM.et al., Customer involvement in sustainable supply chain management: A research framework and implications in tourism, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly55 (2014), 76–88.
10.
HallikasJ.et al., Risk management processes in supplier networks, International Journal of Production Economics90 (2004), 47–58.
11.
KusevP. and SchaikP.V., Preferences under risk: Content-dependent behavior and psychological processing, Frontiers in Psychology2 (2011), 269.
12.
GomesL.F.A.M. and LimaM.M.P.P., TODIM: Basics and application to multicriteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts, Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences16 (1992), 113–127.
13.
GomesabL.F.A.M., An application of the TODIM method to the multicriteria rental evaluation of residential properties, European Journal of Operational Research193 (2009), 204–211.
14.
GonçalvesT.S.H.et al., An idiosyncratic decision support system for credit risk analysis of small and medium-sized enterprises, Technological & Economic Development of Economy22 (2016), 1–19.
15.
LourenzuttiR. and KrohlingR.A., The Hellinger distance in Multicriteria Decision Making: An illustration to the TOPSIS and TODIM methods, Expert Systems with Applications41 (2014), 4414–4421.
16.
GomesL.F.A.M. and GonzálezX.I., Behavioral multi-criteria decision analysis: Further elaborations on the TODIM method, Foundations of Computing & Decision Sciences37 (2012), 3–8.
17.
LlamazaresB., An analysis of the generalized TODIM method, European Journal of Operational Research269 (2018), 1041–1049.
18.
LeeY.-S. and ShihH.-S., Incremental analysis for generalized TODIM, Central European Journal of Operations Research24 (2015), 901–922.
19.
ChenC.T., LinC.T. and HuangS.F., A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management, International Journal of Production Economics102 (2006), 289–301.
20.
WangX., TiwariP. and ChenX., Communicating supply chain risks and mitigation strategies: A comprehensive framework, Production Planning & Control (2017), 1–14.
21.
MoeinzadehP. and HajfathalihaA., A combined fuzzy decision making approach to supply chain risk assessment, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology60 (2009), 519–528.
22.
SamvediA., JainV. and ChanF.T.S., Quantifying risks in a supply chain through integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS, International Journal of Production Research51 (2013), 2433–2442.
23.
GangulyK.K. and GuinK.K., A fuzzy AHP approach for inbound supply risk assessment, Benchmarking An International Journal20 (2013), 129–146(18).
24.
SongW., MingX. and LiuH.C., Identifying critical risk factors of sustainable supply chain management: A rough strength-relation analysis method, Journal of Cleaner Production143 (2017), 100–115.
25.
DongQ. and CooperO., An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework, International Journal of Production Economics182 (2016), 144–156.
26.
ZadehL.A., The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—I, Information Sciences8 (1974), 199–249.
27.
ChenS.-M. and LeeL.-W., Fuzzy multiple criteria hierarchical group decision-making based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans40 (2010), 1120–1128.
28.
WangJ.Q.et al., An interval type-2 fuzzy number based approach for multi-criteria group decision-making problems, International Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems23 (2015), 565–588.
29.
AbdullahL. and NajibL., A new type-2 fuzzy set of linguistic variables for the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, Expert Systems with Applications41 (2014), 3297–3305.
30.
WangW., LiuX. and QinY., Multi-attribute group decision making models under interval type-2 fuzzy environment, Knowledge-Based Systems30 (2012), 121–128.
31.
SangX. and LiuX., An interval type-2 fuzzy sets-based TODIM method and its application to green supplier selection, Journal of the Operational Research Society67 (2017), 722–734.
32.
MendelJ.M., RajatiM.R. and SussnerP., On clarifying some definitions and notations used for type-2 fuzzy sets as well as some recommended changes, Information Sciences340 (2016), 337–345.
33.
WuD. and MendelJ.M., Uncertainty measures for interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Information Sciences177 (2007), 5378–5393.
34.
ChenS.M. and WangC.Y., Fuzzy decision making systems based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Information Sciences242 (2013), 1–21.
35.
QinJ., LiuX. and PedryczW., An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment, European Journal of Operational Research258 (2017), 626–638.
36.
ChenS.M.et al., Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Expert Systems with Applications An International Journal39 (2012), 5295–5308.
37.
ZhongL. and YaoL.M., An ELECTRE I-based multi-criteria group decision making method with interval type-2 fuzzy numbers and its application to supplier selection, Applied Soft Computing57 (2017), 556–576.
38.
ChoiT.-M., Incorporating social media observations and bounded rationality into fashion quick response supply chains in the big data era, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review114 (2018), 386–397.
39.
See-ToE.W.K. and NgaiE.W.T., Customer reviews for demand distribution and sales nowcasting: A big data approach, Annals of Operations Research270 (2016), 415–431.
