臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

供應鏈為複雜且需要與合作夥伴共存的組織發展概念，早期的供應鏈能力皆以精實製造為重，側重於消除浪費及降低成本。隨著供應鏈逐漸發展至今，不斷進步的社會需求，使競爭產生的服務及產品品質規格越來越高，為回應需求不斷更迭，產品生命週期越來越短造成能源消耗、空氣汙染與環境危害的社會問題隨之而來，供應鏈加入永續發展能力已成為趨勢。西元2019年全球爆發疫情，中斷的供應鏈系統使全球供應鏈受到波及，人們開始意識到韌性對於供應鏈的重要性，企圖發展更符合新時代的供應鏈能力系統。然而，精實、永續發展及韌性(LGR)於實踐上並沒有明確或既定的方針，且針對供應鏈能力涵蓋此三種或以上的綜合實施研究並不多。基於上述之原因，本研究整合多屬性決策分析模式，將LGR能力分層解析，並使用LGR供應鏈能力應用於評估汽車供應鏈之鋼鐵鈑金供應商的績效能力，分析之結果可提供企業決策者打造全新LGR供應鏈時，能夠優先汰換表現不佳之供應商，提升供應鏈的競爭力。
本研究整理LGR相關文獻，建構並定義LGR供應鏈能力準則與次準則之相關指標。使用層級分析法(AHP)將LGR供應鏈能力指標進行系統化分層，並利用準則成對比較來解析業界專家經驗，用以計算綜合整體權重。各供應商之LGR能力績效的定量及定性數據，藉由灰關聯分析法(GRA)運算得出灰關聯係數，最終結合AHP之綜合整體權重與GRA之灰關聯係數，得出準確性高且客觀之灰關聯係數，用於評選汽車供應鏈之鋼鐵鈑金各供應商的LGR能力。最後結果顯示四家供應商之LGR能力優勢排序為A (0.7852) > B (0.7505) > D (0.6606) > C (0.5647)，依據灰關聯分析結果，將四家供應商分列為三個等級，並依等級提出供應商往後之分類及策略性管理方向。此研究成果可供企業提升供應鏈能力之參考，並能有效增進企業對LGR能力的認知及重要性。

The supply chain is a complex organizational development concept that requires the coexistence of partners. The early supply chain capabilities focused on Lean manufacturing, eliminating waste, and reducing costs. With the gradual development of the supply chain, the ever-increasing social demand has made the service and product quality standards generated by competition becomes higher and higher. In response to the continuous change of demand, the product life cycle is getting shorter and shorter, resulting in energy consumption, air pollution and environmental hazards. Due to the social problems that follow, it has become a trend to add Green capabilities to the supply chain. In 2019, a global epidemic broke out, and the interrupted supply chain system affected the global supply chain. People began to realize the importance of resilience to the supply chain, and attempted to develop a supply chain capability system that is more in line with the new era. However, there is no clear or established policy for Leanness, Green and Resilience (LGR) in practice, and there are not many comprehensive implementation studies covering these three or more in supply chain capabilities. Based on the above reasons, this study integrates the multi-attribute decision-making analysis model, analyzes the LGR capabilities hierarchically, and uses the LGR supply chain capabilities to evaluate the performance capabilities of steel sheet metal suppliers in the automotive supply chain. The results of the analysis can provide corporate decision makers during creating a new LGR supply chain, to give priority in replacing underperforming suppliers and improve the competitiveness of the supply chain.
This study sorts out the relevant literature of LGR, constructs and defines the relevant indicators of the LGR supply chain capacity criteria and sub-criteria. Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to systematically stratify the LGR supply chain capability indicators, and use the pairwise comparison of the criteria to analyze the experience of industry experts to calculate the overall weight. The quantitative and qualitative data of the LGR capability performance of each supplier is calculated by grey relational analysis (GRA) to obtain the grey relational coefficient. Finally, combined with the overall weight of AHP and the grey relational coefficient of GRA, the result is highly accurate and objective. The grey correlation coefficient is used to evaluate the LGR capability of the steel sheet metal suppliers in the automotive supply chain. The final result shows that the LGR capability advantages of each supplier are ranked as A (0.7852) > B (0.7505) > D (0.6606) > C (0.5647). According to the grey relational analysis results, the four suppliers are divided into three levels. It also puts forward the future classification and strategic direction of suppliers according to the level, and uses the research results as a reference for enterprises to improve their supply chain capabilities, and effectively enhances enterprises' awareness and importance of LGR capabilities.

摘要.....................i
Abstract...............iii
誌謝.....................v
目錄....................vi
表目錄................viii
圖目錄..................ix
第一章 緒論.....................1
1.1研究背景與動機...............1
1.2研究目的....................4
1.3研究流程....................5
1.4研究限制....................7
第二章 文獻探討.................8
2.1 精實生產、永續發展及韌性能力...........8
2.1.1 供應鏈LGR能力發展過程...............8
2.1.2 供應鏈LGR能力特性...................9
2.2 精實製造..................10
2.2.1 精實製造準則............10
2.2.1.1成本準則...............11
2.2.1.2品質準則...............12
2.2.1.3時間準則...............13
2.3 永續發展..................14
2.3.1 永續發展準則............14
2.3.1.1環境準則...............15
2.3.1.2經濟準則...............16
2.3.1.3社會準則...............16
2.4 供應鏈韌性................17
2.4.1供應鏈韌性準則...........17
2.4.1.1彈性準則...............18
2.4.1.2虛擬整合準則...........19
2.4.1.3穩健性準則.............20
2.4.1.4敏捷性準則.............20
2.5 LGR能力文獻彙整...........21
第三章 研究方法...............23
3.1研究流程..................23
3.2研究架構..................25
3.3層級分析法.................26
3.3.1層級分析法內涵...........26
3.3.2應用問題範圍.............26
3.3.3層級結構.................27
3.3.4文獻整合及說明...........28
3.4層級分析法分析步驟..........30
3.5灰關聯分析.................36
3.5.1灰關聯分析內涵...........36
3.5.2灰關聯分析結合層級分析法案例及發展...............37
3.6灰關聯分析步驟.............39
第四章 實證分析...............42
4.1問卷調查者基本資料..........42
4.2 案例計算–AHP流程..........42
4.3 案例計算–GRA流程..........49
4-4 結果分析..................59
第五章 結論...................61
5.1結論.......................61
5.2未來研究方向與建議..........61
5.3汽車產業之結論與建議........62
參考文獻......................63
附錄一：層級分析法（Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP）專家問卷...............69
附錄二：灰關聯分析法（Grey Relational Analysis, GRA）專家問卷...............80
附錄三：LGR定義表..............90
Extended Abstract............94

中文文獻
1.鄧聚龍(1992)。灰色系統理論教程。華中理工大學出版社，武昌。
2.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)，「層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（上)」，中國統計學報，27(6)，頁6-22。
3.鄧振源、曾國雄(1989)，「層級分析法（AHP）的內涵特性與應用（下）」，中國統計學報，27(7)，頁1-19。

英文文獻
1.Alqudah, S., Shrouf, H., Suifan, T., & Alhyari, S. (2020). A moderated mediation model of lean, agile, resilient, and green paradigms in the supply chain. Int J Sup Chain Mgt, 9(4), 1-16.
2.Bai, C., Sarkis, J., & Wei, X. (2018). Integrating green, lean, and resilience paradigms in supply chains: A bibliometric analysis and review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 179, 81-98.
3.Belhadi, A., Kamble, S., Jabbour, C. J. C., Gunasekaran, A., Ndubisi, N. O., & Venkatesh, M. (2021). Manufacturing and service supply chain resilience to the COVID-19 outbreak: Lessons learned from the automobile and airline industries. Technological forecasting and social change, 163, 120447.
4.Bhattacharya, A., Nand, A., & Castka, P. (2019). Lean-green integration and its impact on sustainability performance: A critical review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236, 117697.
5.Boks, C., & Stevels, A. (2007). Essential perspectives for design for environment. Experiences from the electronics industry. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18-19), 4021-4039.
6.Carvalho, H., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2011). Integrating lean, agile, resilience and green paradigms in supply chain management (LARG_SCM). Supply chain management, (April).
7.Carvalho, H., Duarte, S., & Machado, V. C. (2011). Lean, agile, resilient and green: divergencies and synergies. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma.
8.Cherrafi, A., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Kumar, V., Mishra, N., Ghobadian, A., & Elfezazi, S. (2018). Lean, green practices and process innovation: A model for green supply chain performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 206, 79-92.
9.Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2).
10.Colicchia, C., Creazza, A., & Dallari, F. (2017). Lean and green supply chain management through intermodal transport: insights from the fast moving consumer goods industry. Production Planning & Control, 28(4), 321-334.
11.Das, K. (2018). Integrating lean, green, and resilience criteria in designing a sustainable food supply chain. In Proc. Int. Conf. Ind. Eng. Oper. Manag (pp. 462-473).
12.Deng, J. (1982). Grey control theory. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 10(3), 9-18.
13.Dong, Q., & Cooper, O. (2016). An orders-of-magnitude AHP supply chain risk assessment framework. International journal of production economics, 182, 144-156.
14.Dües, C. M., Tan, K. H., & Lim, M. (2013). Green as the new Lean: how to use Lean practices as a catalyst to greening your supply chain. Journal of cleaner production, 40, 93-100.
15.Elkington, J. (1998). Accounting for the triple bottom line. Measuring Business Excellence, 2(3), 18-22.
16.Engin, B. E., Martens, M., & Paksoy, T. (2019). Lean and green supply chain management: A comprehensive review. Lean and green supply chain management, 1-38.
17.Fakhrzad, M. B., & Kabir, G. (2020). Green supply chain management and lean principles: A systematic review and future research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 124292.
18.Garza-Reyes, J. A. (2015). Lean and green–a systematic review of the state of the art literature. Journal of cleaner production, 102, 18-29.
19.Govindan, K., Azevedo, S. G., Carvalho, H., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2015). Lean, green and resilient practices influence on supply chain performance: interpretive structural modeling approach. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 12(1), 15-34.
20.Habibi Rad, M., Mojtahedi, M., & Ostwald, M. J. (2021). The integration of lean and resilience paradigms: A systematic review identifying current and future research directions. Sustainability, 13(16), 8893.
21.Hatefi, S. M., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2018). Construction projects assessment based on the sustainable development criteria by an integrated fuzzy AHP and improved GRA model. Sustainability, 10(4), 991.
22.Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual review of ecology and systematics, 4(1), 1-23.
23.Kaur, H., & Singh, S. P. (2019). Sustainable procurement and logistics for disaster resilient supply chain. Annals of Operations Research, 283(1), 309-354. Kaur, H., & Singh, S. P. (2019). Sustainable procurement and logistics for disaster resilient supply chain. Annals of Operations Research, 283(1), 309-354.
24.Lee, K. H. (2011). Integrating carbon footprint into supply chain management: the case of Hyundai Motor Company (HMC) in the automobile industry. Journal of cleaner production, 19(11), 1216-1223.
25.Liu, S., Yang, Y., & Forrest, J. Y. L. (2022). Grey Systems Analysis: Methods, Models and Applications. Springer.
26.Maniya, K. D., & Bhatt, M. G. (2011). A multi-attribute selection of automated guided vehicle using the AHP/M-GRA technique. International Journal of Production Research, 49(20), 6107-6124.
27.Martínez-Jurado, P. J., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2014). Lean management, supply chain management and sustainability: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 134-150.
28.Mastrocinque, E., Ramírez, F. J., Honrubia-Escribano, A., & Pham, D. T. (2020). An AHP-based multi-criteria model for sustainable supply chain development in the renewable energy sector. Expert Systems with Applications, 150, 113321.
29.Melton, T. (2004). To lean or not to lean?(that is the question). The Chemical Engineer, 759, 34-37.
30.Melton, T. (2005). The benefits of lean manufacturing: what lean thinking has to offer the process industries. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83(6), 662-673.
31.Norman, W., & MacDonald, C. (2004). Getting to the bottom of “triple bottom line”. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 243-262.
32.Olabanji, O. M., & Mpofu, K. (2021). Appraisal of conceptual designs: Coalescing fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP) and fuzzy grey relational analysis (F-GRA). Results in Engineering, 9, 100194.
33.Palange, A., & Dhatrak, P. (2021). Lean manufacturing a vital tool to enhance productivity in manufacturing. Materials Today: Proceedings, 46, 729-736.
34.Paul, S. K., Chowdhury, P., Moktadir, M. A., & Lau, K. H. (2021). Supply chain recovery challenges in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Business Research, 136, 316-329.
35.Pophali, G. R., Chelani, A. B., & Dhodapkar, R. S. (2011). Optimal selection of full scale tannery effluent treatment alternative using integrated AHP and GRA approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 10889-10895.
36.Rachid, B. (2017, July). Supply chain improvement in LARG (lean, agile, resilient, green) context: a risk management approach. In 2017 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport (ICALT) (pp. 212-220). IEEE.
37.Rachid, B., Roland, D., Sebastien, D., & Ivana, R. (2017). Risk management approach for lean, agile, resilient and green supply chain. International Journal of Economics and Management Engineering, 11(4), 802-810.
38.Remko, V. H. (2020). Research opportunities for a more resilient post-COVID-19 supply chain–closing the gap between research findings and industry practice. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 40(4), 341-355.
39.Rezapour, S., Farahani, R. Z., & Pourakbar, M. (2017). Resilient supply chain network design under competition: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, 259(3), 1017-1035.
40.Ruiz-Benitez, R., López, C., & Real, J. C. (2017). Environmental benefits of lean, green and resilient supply chain management: The case of the aerospace sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 850-862.
41.Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytical Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority. Resource allocation. RWS publications, USA.
42.Saaty, T. L. (1990). An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process”. Management Science, 36(3), 259-268.
43.Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.
44.Sabouhi, F., Pishvaee, M. S., & Jabalameli, M. S. (2018). Resilient supply chain design under operational and disruption risks considering quantity discount: A case study of pharmaceutical supply chain. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 126, 657-672.
45.Samvedi, A., Jain, V., & Chan, F. T. (2013). Quantifying risks in a supply chain through integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. International Journal of Production Research, 51(8), 2433-2442.
46.Singh, C. S., Soni, G., & Badhotiya, G. K. (2019). Performance indicators for supply chain resilience: review and conceptual framework. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 15, 105-117.
47.Sonar, H., Gunasekaran, A., Agrawal, S., & Roy, M. (2022). Role of lean, agile, resilient, green, and sustainable paradigm in supplier selection. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain, 100059.
48.Spieske, A., & Birkel, H. (2021). Improving supply chain resilience through industry 4.0: A systematic literature review under the impressions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 158, 107452.
49.Suifan, T., Alazab, M., & Alhyari, S. (2019). Trade-off among lean, agile, resilient and green paradigms: an empirical study on pharmaceutical industry in Jordan using a TOPSIS-entropy method. Int. J. Adv. Oper. Manag., 11(1/2), 69-101.
50.Tanguay, G. A., Rajaonson, J., Lefebvre, J. F., & Lanoie, P. (2010). Measuring the sustainability of cities: An analysis of the use of local indicators. Ecological Indicators, 10(2), 407-418.
51.Tanguay, G. A., Rajaonson, J., Lefebvre, J. F., & Lanoie, P. (2010). Measuring the sustainability of cities: An analysis of the use of local indicators. Ecological Indicators, 10(2), 407-418.
52.Tseng, M. L., Islam, M. S., Karia, N., Fauzi, F. A., & Afrin, S. (2019). A literature review on green supply chain management: Trends and future challenges. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 145-162.
53.Tukamuhabwa, B. R., Stevenson, M., Busby, J., & Zorzini, M. (2015). Supply chain resilience: definition, review and theoretical foundations for further study. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5592-5623.
54.Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2007). Supply chain management and environmental technologies: the role of integration. International Journal of Production Research, 45(2), 401-423.
55.Wang, T. K., Zhang, Q., Chong, H. Y., & Wang, X. (2017). Integrated supplier selection framework in a resilient construction supply chain: An approach via analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and grey relational analysis (GRA). Sustainability, 9(2), 289.
56.Wang, X., Chan, H. K., Yee, R. W., & Diaz-Rainey, I. (2012). A two-stage fuzzy-AHP model for risk assessment of implementing green initiatives in the fashion supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(2), 595-606.
57.Wind, Y., & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 26(7), 641-658.
58.Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1997). Lean thinking—banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48(11), 1148-1148.
59.Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (1990). How lean production can change the world. New York Times Magazine, 23, 20-38.
60.Yavari, M., & Ajalli, P. (2021). Suppliers’ coalition strategy for green-Resilient supply chain network design. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 38(3), 197-212.
61.Yoon, S. Y., Kim, S. H., & Kim, Y. (2017). Integrating lean, green, and resilience paradigms in a global supply chain using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Sustainability, 9(8), 1384
62.Zahiri, B., Zhuang, J., & Mohammadi, M. (2017). Toward an integrated sustainable-resilient supply chain: A pharmaceutical case study. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 103, 109-142.
63.Zare, K., Mehri-Tekmeh, J., & Karimi, S. (2015). A SWOT framework for analyzing the electricity supply chain using an integrated AHP methodology combined with fuzzy-TOPSIS. International Strategic Management Review, 3(1-2), 66-80.
64.Zhao, P., Yin, S., Han, X., & Li, Z. (2021). Research on lean supply chain network model based on node removal. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 567, 125556.