2012 101.12.07

Fuzzy AHP

1* 2

1 2

*lincy@mail.dyu.edu.tw

(AHP)(Fuzzy Theory)

1.

(AHP)(Fuzzy Theory)

2.

2.1

( 1)

2012 101.12.07

1.

()1907

19041909

2.2

(2010)

2012 101.12.07

()

2.3

(2003)

()

2.4

1950

(2003)

(cohesive whole)

(cost leadership)

(product differentiation)

(focus)

(2005)

1960 Strategy((2003)

(2010)) 1

2012 101.12.07

1.

Chandler

1962

Tiller1963

Ansoff1965

Newman

&

Logan1971

Glueck(1976)

Haner(1976)

Kotler1976

McNichols

1977

Hofer &

Schendel

(1979)

Glueck &

Jauch1980

Porter1980

(1981)

(1982)

(1985)

1998

1

2

3

4

2012 101.12.07

1. ()

2001

(2003)

2.5

2.

2.

(2003)

(2005)

(2006)

2012 101.12.07

(2010)

3. 3.1

3.

2012 101.12.07

2.

2.

(Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process, FAHP)

(Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP) Thomas

L. Saaty(1971)

(FAHP)Buckley(1985)

Saaty

4.

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9.

4.

1 0.3333 7.0000 2.3333

1 6.3333 3.0000

1 0.1429

1

C.I.=0.09R.I=0.90C.R.=0.08

2012 101.12.07

5.

1 0.3333 0.2000 2.5000 0.2000

1 1.0000 5.3333 0.4286

1 7.0000 1.0000

1 0.1250

1

C.I.=0.02R.I.=1.12C.R.=0.01

6.

1 0.1429 0.1429 1.6667 0.2500

1 4.0000 5.0000 4.3333

1 3.6667 3.8889

1 0.2857

1

C.I.=0.06R.I.=1.12C.R.=0.07

7.

1 0.1667 0.2500 0.1667 5.3333

1 2.0000 1.0000 5.5000

2012 101.12.07

1 2.6000 5.3333

1 6.0000

1

C.I.=0.04R.I.=1.12C.R.=0.04

8.

1 3.6667 6.0000 6.0000 1.0000

1 3.3333 3.2500 0.1667

1 0.2000 0.5714

1 0.2000

1

C.I.=0.05R.I.=1.12C.R.=0.04

9.

(P)

(0.2982)

(P1) (0.0914)

(P2) (0.2521)

(P3) (0.2923)

(P4) (0.0422)

(P5) (0.3219)

(R)

(0.1835)

(R1) (0.0645)

(R2) (0.4857)

(R3) (0.2597)

2012 101.12.07

9. ()

(R)

(0.1835)

(R4) (0.0551)

(R5) (0.1348)

(I)

(0.4719)

(I1) (0.0913)

(I2) (0.3388)

(I3) (0.2971)

(I4) (0.2226)

(I5) (0.0502)

(E)

(0.0465)

(E1) (0.4222)

(E2) (0.1378)

(E3) (0.0564)

(E)

(0.0465)

(E4) (0.0838)

(E5) (0.2998)

9.(0.4719)

(0.2982)(0.1835)(0.0465)(0.4857)(0.4222)

5.

(FAHP)

0.4719

0.2982

0.1835

0.0465

2012 101.12.07

1.

2.

3.

1. (1985)

2. (2001)

3. (1998)

4. (2005)-

5. (2003)-

6. (2006)

7. (2003)

8. (1981) 114-116

9. (2003)

10. (2010)

11. (2003)

12. (2005)

13. (2010):

14. (1982)

15. (2010)

1. Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate Strategy . New York: McGraw-Hill.

2. Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis . Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3),233-247.

2. Chandler, A. D. J. (1962). Strategy and Structure . Cambridge, Mass: M. I. T. Press.

2012 101.12.07

3. Glueck, W.F. (1976). Business Policy: Strategy Formulation and Management Action. 2nd ed. New York

McGraw-Hill.

4. Glueck, W.F., Jauch, L.R. (1980) . Business Policy and Strategic Management . McGraw-Hill, 1980

5. Haner, F.T. (1976). Business Policy, Planning and Strategy . Cambridge Mass: Winthrop Press.

6. Hofer C. W. and Schendel D. (1979). Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts . Minnesota: West

Publishing Co.

7. Kolter, P. (1976). Analysis Planning Implementation and Control . Marketing Management,lov.7,pp.107-113.

8. McNichols, T. J.(1977). Executive Policy and Planning . 1st edition, Mcgraw-Hill, New York.

9. Newman,W.H. and Logan J.P., (1971) . Strategy, policy, and central management . Cincinnati : South-western

Pub. Co.,

10. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. N. Y., The

Press.

11, Saaty, T. L. (1971). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill Company, New York.

11. Tiller, S. (1963). How to Evaluate Corporate Strategy . Harvard Business Review.

Fuzzy AHPbased Business Strategy Assessment of Paper Container Manufacturing Businesses

Chuay-Yuan Lin1* , Hsiao-Yan Lin1 1 Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management of Technology, Da-Yeh University

*lincy@mail.dyu.edu.tw

ABSTRACT

In complex and volatile trade situation, the impact of trade liberalization and internationalization makes the

operators and administrators of current enterprises face more kinds of challenges. They should adjust their

policies in accordance with the variation of industry. Enterprises should have suitable strategies for achieving a

sustainable competitive advantage. They should relocate their employees, optimize instruments for the best

operation and modify performance measure methods. High quality running strategy is the kernel of enterprise

sustaining development. Thus to rank among top enterprises, an enterpriser should create correct and suitable

strategies.

The development of paper container manufacture has close relation with the development of industry, world

trade, and domestic economy. Over the last few years, because of global economic recession , over production,

and regulations from both WTO and EU, enterprises, most of which are in middle-small scale, competed sharply.

In order to help them create proper running policies, enlarge business, and run it sustainably, the study adopts the

AHP method, based on Fuzzy Theory. We build the hierarchy and criteria and explore the characteristics of paper

container industry, running policies, and the trend of development.

The study finds that enterprisers pay the most attention to industrial development which include government

http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=1w3DOE/search?q=aue=%22Lin%2CHSIAOYAN%22.&searchmode=basic

2012 101.12.07

policy and the status of policy, employee recruiting, automation trends and the status of business clusters. Then

they also focus on manufacturing which includes standard operating procedures, quality control, warehousing

management and cost control. And, by the weight analysis of suitable running policies, decision risk will be

reduced.

KeywordsPaper Container ManufacturingBusiness StrategyFuzzy AHP