454
Tab. 1 Nine-point Pairwise Comparison Scale Numerical Value
Definition 1
equal importance 3
weak importance over one another 5
strong importance 7
very strong importance 9
absolute or extreme importance 2, 4, 6, 8
Intermediate values between two adjacent judgments
The data was analyzed by following several steps. Firstly, the goal, criteria, and alternatives are identified. Secondly, the pair wise comparison matrices of all criteria and alternatives are constructed.
Thirdly, the weights of criteria and local weight are determined by using normalization procedure. Finally, local weight is synthesized and it is followed by normalizing the global weights. All the data
was processed on Microsoft Excel Software.
Tab. 2 The Stages of AHP Hierarchy Goal
Criteria Sub Criteria
Determine supply chain management
practice in creative industries
Demand ManagementDM share information with supplierDM1; forecasting
DM2; planning capacityDM3 Cash FlowCF
provide loan to the customerCF1; pay the obligation to supplierCF2; share information to supplierCF3
Customer RelationshipCR effectively meet customer orderCR1; efficiently
meet customer orderCR2; meet customer demand with high qualityCR3; flexibilityCR4
Supplier RelationshipSR adversarial relationshipSR1; long term
relationshipSR2; supplier involvement in quality programSR3
Product DevelopmentPD supplier involvement in product designPD1;
customer involvement in product designPD2
4. Results and Discussion
AHP is one of methods for solving managerial and technical problems with complex decision. The AHP procedures will construct the criteria into sub criteria as presented on Tab. 2. Then, the criteria
can be analyzed by independent pair comparison analysis, which is available on Tab. 3. The rank of criteria and sub criteria can be identified by comparing the local weight. The priority vector is similar
to the local weight. Meanwhile, the global weight is obtained by multiplying the local weight with higher priority of the criteria.
Tab. 3 Pairwise matrix for comparison between criteria Criteria
Demand Management
DM Cash Flow
CF Customer
Relationship CR
Supplier Relationship
SR Product
Development PD
Demand ManagementDM 1
0.2 0.2
0.2 0.1
Cash FlowCF 5
1 3
3 3
Customer Relationship CR 5
0.3 1
0.1 6
Supplier RelationshipSR 5
0.3 7
1 5
Product Development PD 7
0.3 0.2
0.3 1
455
Tab. 4 Pairwise comparison of demand management Tab.5 Pairwise comparison of cash flow
Tab.6 Pairwise comparison of customer relationship Sub Criteria
Effectively meet customer order
CR1 Efficiently meet
customer order CR2
Meet customer demand with high
quality CR3 Flexibility CR4
Effectively meet customer order
CR1 1
0.33 0.33
0.5
Efficiently meet customer order
CR2 3
1 3
3 Meet customer
demand with high quality CR3
3 0.33
1 3
Flexibility CR4 2
0.33 0.33
1 Tab.7 Pairwise comparison of supplier relationship
Sub Criteria Adversarial
relationship SR1 Long term relationship
SR2 Supplier involvement in
quality program SR3 Adversarial
relationship SR1 1
0.2 0.5
long term relationship SR2
5 1
3 supplier involvement
in quality program SR3
2 0.33
1 Sub Criteria
Share information
with supplier
DM1 Forecasting
DM2 Planning
capacity DM3
Sub Criteria
provide loan to
the customer
CF1 pay the
obligation to
supplier CF2
share information
to supplier CF3
Share information
with supplier DM1
1 0.2
0.2 Provide
loan to the customer
CF1 1
0.2 0.33
Forecasting DM2
5 1
0.5 Pay the
obligation to supplier
CF2 5
1 3
Planning capacity
DM3 5
2 1
Share information
to supplier CF3
3 0.33
1
456
Tab. 8 Pairwise comparison of product development Sub Criteria
supplier involvement in product design PD1
customer involvement in product design PD2
supplier involvement in product design PD1
1 7
customer involvement in product design PD2
0.14 1
Tab. 9 The Global Weight Criteria
Local Weight Sub Criteria
Local Weight Global Weight
Demand Management DM
0.041 DM1
0.090 0.004
DM2 0.353
0.014 DM3
0,556 0.023
Cash Flow CF
0.355
CF1 0.106
0.038 CF2
0.633 0.225
CF3 0.260
0.092 Customer
Relationship CR 0.177
CR1 0.067
0.012 CR2
0.400 0.071
CR3
0.400 0.071
CR4 0.133
0.024 Supplier
Relationship SR 0.306
SR1 0.122
0.037 SR2
0.648 0.198
SR3 0.230
0.070 Product
Development PD 0.122
PD1
0.875 0.107
PD2 0.125
0.015
Tab. 9 shows that creative industries should focus on controlling the cash flow as the most important issue in managing supply chain management compare to others. In addition, the following issue is to
maintain relationship with supplier and it is nominated as the second important issue in supply chain management practice. Furthermore, customer relationship, product development, and demand
management are nominated as the rank third, fourth, and fifth respectively. For the sub criteria, supplier involvement in product design has high local weight if compared to other sub criteria in this
study. Meanwhile, pay the obligation to supplier has the highest global weight so that the creative industries should have proper control to manage the cash flow. Managing the cash flow is part of the
capability to sustain the performance of supply chain management practice. Thus, it depicts that creative industries expend more effort to reduce the risk compared to other aspects. The scale of
business is another reason to keep their business on the track.
5. Conclusion
