切削刀具是航太產業加工製程中重要工具，產品的好壞往往取決於切削刀具的品質，因此切削刀具一直是航太加工業者時常討論與必須持續改善的議題。為取得高品質的切削刀具，供應商的選擇扮演著很大的角色。但是在航太產業對於刀具廠選商，大部份以價格為基準，而無一套正確完整的供應商評選指標，所以往往無法保證所挑的供應商能夠管控品質、交期、數量的交貨。本論文以某航太公司SKY廠為個案，藉由他們專業人員的專業知識與文獻的探討，建構一評估指標，再利用分析網路程序法(ANP)，來探討航太產業刀具供應商的評選與找尋評價好的供應商。並利用敏感度分析，進一步了解若調整某些重要的選擇評估指標如何影響供應商的評選指標。

本研究共有五項主要評量構面，包括成本競爭力、生產能力、公司政策、品保能力、與企業持續改善，以及16項評量次指標。ANP問卷分析結果顯示，成本競爭力與品保能力是最重要的供應商評選。次指標方面又以先期風險評估最為重要，之後則以問題解決能力、價格能力、檢驗設備、與檢驗能力等為重要指標。在敏感度分析比較時，當最重要的先期風險評估次指標增加時，供應商的選擇會改變以降低風險。所以，國內航太產業選擇或導入切削刀具時，除了價格因素外，為能找到品質可靠的供應商，必須做好先期風險評估，了解廠商問題解決能力，進而找出刀具品質穩定及可靠的廠商，以提升航太產業零件的製作品質。

Cutting tools are important tools in the aerospace industry's finishing process. Whether the products are good often depends on the quality of the cutting tools. Therefore, cutting tools have always been a topic that aerospace processing industries often discuss and must continue to improve. To obtain high-quality cutting tools, the choice of suppliers plays a big role. However, in the aerospace industry, most of the selection of tool factories is based on price, and there is no correct and complete set of supplier selection indicators. Hence, it is often impossible to guarantee that the selected supplier can control the quality, delivery time, and quantity of delivery goods. This paper takes a SKY factory in the aerospace industry as a case, builds an evaluation index based on their professional knowledge and literature discussion, and then uses Analytical Network Process (ANP) to explore the selection of tool suppliers in the aerospace industry and find well-evaluated suppliers. And sensitivity analysis is used to further understand how the adjustment of some important selection evaluation indicators will affect the supplier selection indicators.

There are five main evaluation indicators in this research, including cost competitiveness, production capacity, company policies, quality assurance capabilities, sustainable capabilities, and 16 evaluation sub- indicators. ANP questionnaire analysis results show that cost competitiveness and quality assurance capabilities are the most important supplier selection. In terms of secondary indicators, preliminary risk assessment is the most important one, followed by problem-solving ability, pricing ability, inspection equipment, and inspection ability as important indicators. In the comparison of sensitivity analysis, when the most important preliminary risk assessment sub-indicators increase, the supplier's choice will be changed to reduce the risk. Therefore, beside the price factors, when the domestic aerospace industry chooses or introduces cutting tools to find reliable suppliers, it is necessary to conduct a preliminary risk assessment, understand the customer’s problem-solving capabilities, and then find a supplier with stable and reliable tool quality, and enhance the production quality of aerospace industry parts.

摘 要 I
ABSTRACT II
誌 謝 III
圖目錄 VI
表目錄 VII
第一章 緒 論 1
1.1. 研究背景與動機 1
1.2. 研究目的 2
1.3. 研究方法 2
1.4. 研究範圍與限制 3
第二章 文 獻 探 討 4
2.1. 國內航太產業與刀具技術概況 4
2.2. 供應商評選 9
2.2.1. 供應商評選的程序 11
2.2.2. 供應商評選的方法與模式 12
2.2.3. 供應商評選準則 15
2.3. ANP分析網路程序法 19
2.3.1. 分析網路程序法(ANP)介紹與應用 19
2.3.2. 分析網路程序法(ANP)決策程序 20
2.3.3. 分析網路程序法 ( ANP ) 與分層分析法 ( AHP ) 比較 23
第三章 研究方法 26
3.1. 研究方法與步驟 26
3.2. 研究對象 28
3.3. 研究實施 28
3.3.1. 資料構面與準則指標訂定 29
3.3.2. 供應商評選準則架構圖部份 30
3.3.3. 重要性相對權重問卷設計與調查 32
第四章 實證分析 33
4.1. 問卷發放與回收 33
4.2. ANP問卷結果與分析 34
4.3. ANP敏感度分析 39
第五章 結論與建議 42
5.1. 研究結論 42
5.2. 研究限制 43
5.3. 後續研究建議 44
附錄一 指標構面與準則問卷 45
附錄二 ANP專家問卷 48
參考文獻 59
中文部分: 59
英文部分: 61
圖目錄
圖 1.1 流程架構圖 3
圖 2.1 我國航空產業歷年產值 8
圖 2.2 SKY公司刀具費用 8
圖 2.3 供應商評選要項 11
圖 2.4 供應商選擇的基本步驟 12
圖 2.5 ANP網路架構 20
圖 2.6 網路圖形範例一 21
圖 2.7 網路結構範例二 22
圖 2.8 AHP以及ANP結構相異圖 25
圖 3.1 ANP 研究步驟 27
圖 3.2 供應商評選準則架構圖 31
圖 4.1 Super Decisions 3.0軟體架構圖 35
圖 4.2 正規化極限矩陣與極限化矩陣圖 37
圖 4.3 供應商選擇最適廠商評估結果 39
圖 4.4 先期風險評估權重未變動時的供應商權重 40
圖 4.5 先期風險評估權重增加66.6%時的供應商權重 41
表目錄
表 2.1供應商選擇23個標準 10
表 2.2 供應商評選研究方法 12
表 2.3 供應商選擇評估因子相關文獻比較 14
表 2.4 統整供應商的評選準則的八大項目 15
表 2.5 供應商評估指標 16
表 2.6 Wilson提出的供應商選擇標準 16
表 2.7 供應商選擇評估指標 16
表 2.8 傳統與現行供應商評選重要準則比較 17
表 2.9 供應商選擇的重要指標構面彙整表 17
表 2.10 不同產業的供應商選商指標 18
表 2.11 ANP 法應用之相關文獻 24
表 2.12 分析層級程序法(AHP)與分析網路程序法(ANP)之比較 25
表 3.1 初步選廠指標因素訪談表 29
表 3.2 SKY公司刀具商年交易量比較表 30
表 4.1 研究成員基本資料表 34
表 4.2 ANP未加權超級矩陣 35
表 4.3 ANP加權超級矩陣 36
表 4.4 ANP極限超級矩陣 36
表 4.5 供應商選擇構面權重與評估準則之正規化相對權重值 38
表 4.6 供應商選擇之敏感度分析 40

中文部分:
王丹綺，(2011)，應用分析網路程序法於統包工程執行模式之研究，國立台北科技大學工程科技研究所博士論文，台北。
江育民，(2003)，航太工業供應商評估模式探討，義守大學工業工程與管理學系，航太產業供應鏈管理個案，高雄。
吳仁明，(2016)，ANP-SIPA 應用於網站服務品質構面評估─以休閒農場為例
，東亞論壇，第492期，29-43。
吳昭謀，(2006)，建構我國未來航太產業外包供應鏈體系選廠指標之研究，成功大學工程管理碩士在職專班碩士論文，台南。
宋哲、王樹恩，(2010)，基於ANP的企業效管理能力評價研究，科技管理研究，第30卷4期，160-172。
李先莉、陳俊安、莊千儀，(2012)，以DEMATEL及ANP探索中小型半導體通路商之企業成長策略，數據分析，第7卷3期，65-85。
李宛錡、沈浚凱，(2017)，從資源基礎觀點與交易成本理論探討國軍副食品供應商評選準則之研究。國防管理學報，第38卷第2期，23-25。
李政男、謝旻璋，(2019)，航太零件難削材之智慧製造技術，科儀新知，第221期，71-87。
林文苑，(2018)，鄉鎮市區層級災害耐韌力指標關聯性與權重之DANP分析以及空間聚集性分析之應用，台灣土地研究，第22卷1期，59-103。
張心雨、王貞酈等，(2020)，結合可能性資料包絡分析與聚類分析進行供應商評選，管理資訊計算，第2卷9期，87-100。
張有恆、林侑靜，(2018)，機坪安全之風險因素與改善策略之探討以航空公司GDI事件為例，航運季刊，第27卷3期，51-79。
張魁峯，(2009)，Super Decision 操作手冊，以ANP突破AHP的研究限制，鼎茂出版社，台北。
梁文耀、黃俊哲、世盟豪，(2015)，應用約略集合理論於醫療機構商業流程之委外供應商評選，品質學報，第22卷3期，235-236。
梁明哲，(2010)，運用灰色理論於TFT-LCD廠商之供應商評選之研究，國立交通大學碩士論文，新竹。
許振邦，(2007)，採購與供應管理，智勝文化事業有限公司，台北。
曾渙釗，(2015)，EMBA 雜誌，安瑟管理顧問公司，第344期
曾曉瑜，(2006)，阿里山森林鐵路民營化，國立成功大學交通管理科學系研究所碩士論文，台南。
程威翰，(2017)，分析網路程序法應用於郵輪母港選擇之研究，國立交通大學運輸與物流管理學系碩士論文，新竹。
辜南龍，(2019)，影響雷射印表機產業供應商評選之關鍵因素－以某高科技公司為例，中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，桃園。
黃士滔、楊婷詒，(2014)，運用 ANP 與階層式灰關聯探討未分類其他金屬製品製造業之供應商評選，工程科技與教育學刊，第11卷第1期，113-130。
黃智偉，(2000)，供應鏈管理下供應商選擇評估之研究-以台灣地區中衛體系之汽機車業與電腦資訊業為例，國立雲林科技大學工業工程與管理研究所碩士論文，雲林。
廖敏利，(2019)，台灣航太產業發展智慧工廠與供應鏈策略之重要關鍵因子研究-以A公司為例，中興大學高階經理人碩士在職專班碩士論文，台中。
鄧振源、曾國雄，(1989)，層級分析法AHP的內涵特性與應用。中國統計學報，第27卷6期，5-22。
蕭愛麗，(2012)，供應鏈管理下鞋業塑膠供應商評選之研究，國立雲林科技大學全球運籌管理研究碩士論文，雲林。
蘇暐竣，(2018)，應用ANP建構節慶產業之評估因子，國立屏東大學文化創意產業學系碩士論文，屏東。
英文部分:
Agnieszka, S. J., DEMATEL Method in Supplier Evaluation and Selection, Journal of The University of Gdansk, 82.
Ansari, A., and Modarress, B., (1990), JIT Brings Problems and Solutions, Purchasing World, 34, 47-50.
Barata, F. A., (2021), Performance Measurement of Supply Chains and Distribution Industry Using Balanced Scorecard and Fuzzy Analysis Network Process, Decision Science Letters, 10(3), 401-414.
Barbarosoglu, G., and Yazgac, T., (1997), An Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process to the Supplier Selection Problem, Journal of Production and Inventory Management, 38(1), 14-21.
Choi, T. Y., and Hartley, J. L., (1996), An Exploration of Supplier Selection Practices Across the Supply Chain, Journal of Operation Management, 14(4), 333-343.
Chou, S. Y., and Chang, Y. H., (2008), A Decision Support System for Supplier Selection Based on A Strategy-aligned Fuzzy SMART Approach, Expert Systems with Applications, 34(4), 2241-2253.
Degraeve, Z., and Roodhooft, F., (1998), Determining Sourcing Strategies: A Decision Model Based on Activity and Cost Driver Information, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(8), 781-789.
Degraeve, Z., Labro, E., and Roodhooft, F., (2000), An Evaluation of Vendor Selection Models From A Total Cost of Ownership Perspective, European Journal of Operational Research, 125(1), 34-58.
Dickson, G. W., (1966), An Analysis of Vender Selection Systems and Decisions, Journal of Purchasing, 2(1), 5-17.
Ellram, L. M., (1990), The Supplier Selection Decision in Strategic Partnerships, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 26(4), 8-14.
Elram, L.M., (1995), Total Cost of Ownership: An Analysis Approach for Purchasing, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 25(8), 4-23.
Essien, E. E., Lodorfos, G., and Kostopoulos, I., (2019), Antecedents of Supplier Selection Decisions in the Public Sector in Nigeria Journal of Public Procurement, 19(1), 15-45.
Gaikwad, L., (2020), Supplier Evaluation and Selection in the Automobile Industry, Lap Lambert Publishing, Republic of Moldova.
Ganie, A. H., (2017), Taste of Matrix Methods, OmniScriptum Publishing, Moldova.
Gaonkar, R. and Viswanadham, N., (2001), Collaboration and Information Sharing in Global Contract Manufacturing Networks, TEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 6(4), 366-376.
Gregory, R. E., (1986) Source Selection: A Matrix Approach, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 22(2), 24-29.
Hardiyanti, S., and Muslim, M. A., (2017), Decision Support System Based on Benefit Cost Ratio Method for Project Tender, Journal on Computer Science and Information Technologies, 2(1), 26-30.
Ho, W., Xu, X., and Dey, P. K., (2010), Multi Criteria Decision Making Approaches for Supplier Evaluation and Selection: A Literature Review, European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), 16-24.
Holt, G. D., (1998), Which Contractor Selection Methodology? International Journal of Project Management, 16(3), 153-164.
Ižaríková, G., (2019), Supplier Planning With Analytical Hierarchy Process, Acta Tecnología, 5(4), 103-107.
Jagdhuber, R., and Rahnenführer, J., (2021), Implications on Feature Detection When Using the Benefit–Cost Ratio, SN Computer Science, 2(4), 316.
Jajimoggala, S. S., Rao,V. V. S. K., and Beela, S., Supplier Evaluation Using Fuzzy Analytical Network Process and Fussy TOPSIS, Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 5(6), 543 – 551.
Jiménez, M., Bilbao, A., and Parra, M. A., (2020), Incorporating Preferential Weights as a Benchmark into a Sequential Reference Point Method, European Journal of Operational Research, 291(2).
Kara, M. E., Firat, S. U. (2016), Sustainable Supplier Evaluation and Selection Criteria, Social and Economic Perspectives on Sustainability, IJOPEC Publication, London–Istanbul, 159–168.
Karpak, B., Kumcu, E., and Kasuganti, R., (1999), An Application of Visual Interactive Goal Programming: A Case in Vendor Selection Decisions, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8(2), 93-105.
Krause, D. R., and Ellram, L. M., (1997), Critical Elements of Supplier Development – The Buying-Firm Perspective, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 3(1), 21-31.
Lee, A. H. I., (2009), A Fuzzy Supplier Selection Model With the Consideration of Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 2879-2893.
Mandal, A., and Deshmukh, S. G., (1994), Vendor Selection Using Interpretative Structural Modeling (ISM), International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 14(6), 52-59.
Mummalaneni, V., Dubas, K. M., and Chao, C. N., (1996), Chinese Purchasing Managers' Preferences and Trade-offs in Supplier Selection and Performance Evaluation, Industrial Marketing Management, 25(2), 115-124.
Narasimhan, R., (1983) An Analytical Approach to Supplier Selection, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 19(4), 27-32.
Nydick, R. L., and Hill, R. P., (1992), Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Structure the Supplier Selection Procedure, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 28(2), 31-36.
Petroni, A., and Braglia, M., (2000), Vendor Selection Using Principal Component Analysis, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 36(2), 63-69.
Pi, W. N., and Low, C., (2006), Supplier Evaluation and Selection Via Taguchi Loss Functions and An AHP, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 27(5), 625-630.
Saaty, T. L., (1996), Decision Making With Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA
Serin, H., Sahin, Y., Durgun, M., and Dabakoglu, C., (2015), Supplier Choice on Furniture Industry, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Department of Forest Industry Engineering, 46100, Turkey.
Stević, Ž., Tanackov, I., Vasiljević, M., and Rikalovic, A., (2017), Supplier Evaluation Criteria: AHP Rough Approach, International Scientific Conference on Industrial Systems, (IS'17), Novi Sad.
Talluri, S., and Narasimhan, R., (2003), Vendor Evaluation With Performance Variability: A Max-Min Approach, European Journal of Operational Research, 146(3), 543-552.
Thompson, K. N., (1991), Scaling Evaluative Criteria and Supplier Performance Estimates in Weighted Point Prepurchase Decision Models, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 27(1), 27-36.
Vinodh, S., Ramiya, R. A., and Gautham, S. G., (2011), Application of Fuzzy Analytic Network Process for Supplier Selection in A Manufacturing Organization, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 272-280.
Vondermbse, M. A. and Tracey, M., (1999), The Impact of Supplier Selection Criteria and Supplier Investment on Manufacturing, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 35(2), 33-39.
Weber, C. A., Current, J. R., and Desai, A., (1998), Non-cooperative Negotiation Strategies for Vendor Selection, European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 208-223.
Willis, T. H., and Huston, C. R., (1990), Vendor Requirements and Evaluation in A Just-In-Time Environment, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 10(4), 41-50.
Wilson, E. J., (1994), The Relative Importance of Suppliers Selection Criteria: A Review and Update, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 30(2), 34-41.
Yusoff, M., and Fathi, M. N. B., (2018), Evaluation of Clustering Methods for Student Learning Style Based Neuro Linguistic Programming, International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7 (3.15), 63-67.
網路部分:
碧威股份有限公司 : www.tool-tool.com
經濟部航太推動小組 : https://www.casid.org.tw