Ball corporation Essay

1. How would you think a little edge for mistake influences correspondence on a task? I feel that it can influence the zero mistake edges. By not tuning in and giving close consideration to the data, space for blunder can happen. Additionally in the wake of realizing that there zero space for blunder the individuals dealing with the venture will give close consideration to any correspondence. 2. In what ways do you act another way in an up close and personal gathering than you do during a phone telephone call? I have not have the experience, however may I feel that the distinction would be that during a telephone call, the individual who is talking won't have the option to see and body articulation in this way believing all is well. In an eye to eye consider the individual that relates the data can see anyone that probably won't concur and inquire as to why they may feel along these lines. 3. For what reason is it composed correspondence basic in certain circumstances, (for example, passing on details), while oral correspondence is basic in others, (for example, innovation exchange moves)? Composed correspondence now and then is a need it’s like having a modeler and instructing the temporary worker. It will be very hard for the temporary worker, since he may realize where to begin; miscommunication and the modeler may have different activities. So it may be simpler to have the plans close by and the temporary worker can go over it a few times to guarantee the structure is going along to detail. The oral interchanges are simply straightforward choice that will be settled upon not so much giving any numbers since it will be more diligently to clarify in detail than having the arrangement in front. 4. What listening obstacles do you end up looking as you tune in to other people? How would you handle it when you accept somebody you’re addressing isn't hearing what you state? A few obstacles I end up confronting would be interruptions, for example, viewing the T.V. furthermore, having a discussion with the family a great deal of correspondence can be lost by attempting to tune in to both at the same time. I have discovered a few different ways to battle this issue, one that the content give is posing inquiries to check whether the crowd is tuning in. Another that I have gained from my manager were if there are individuals talking during a discourse he carries the consideration regarding the colleagues by requesting that everyone focus on them since I surmise there discussion is a higher priority than the data that is being given, he at that point continues back to the data. I have seen this one work a few times.

Helicopter Experiment: Speed of Fall

Helicopter Experiment: Speed of Fall Hend Darwish Research Question: At what speed will the helicopter fall by adding more paper clasps to its base (the base)? Factors: Autonomous Variable: Amount of paper cuts Subordinate Variable: Speed Consistent: Same Helicopter Same Timer Same tallness (2m) Speculation: My speculation is that the more paper cuts added to the base of the helicopter, the speed will increment. I think this will happen on the grounds that gravity will pull the helicopter down and the contrary power (air opposition), which is following up on the wings will get more fragile in light of the fact that the wings will crease upwards. This will make less for the air opposition follow up on which will make the speed increment. Strategy: For our helicopter lab, we originally estimated two meters on the divider so we have will drop the helicopter at a similar spot. At that point, Eliah will drop the helicopter and Holly will time to what extent it takes with the stopwatch. We rehashed this progression for three mores tests and with two, three, four, five and six paperclips connected to the base. At that point, we found the normal speed of every paperclip and recorded our outcomes into a diagram. To make our test a reasonable test, we ensured its a similar individual planning and dropping the helicopter. Additionally, we generally dropped the helicopter from two meters. For our wellbeing, we ensured that we are in an unfilled space so we dont catch anybody or the paper helicopter doesnt go on someones head. Likewise, we ensured that we are not close to any synthetic substances or flared Bunsen burner so when we get our helicopter, it wont burst into flames or be secured by any synthetic substances that could hurt us. Mechanical assembly: 1 Paper Helicopter Stopwatch 100cm ruler 6 paperclips Outline: Information Collection: Measure of Paper Clips on a Helicopter The measure of paper-cuts on the helicopter Time taken for the helicopter to fall a separation of two meters (s) Preliminary 1 Preliminary 2 Preliminary 3 Mean Speed (m/s) 1 1.38 1.68 1.31 1.45 1.38 2 1.22 1.40 1.19 1.27 1.57 3 1.13 1.40 1.30 1.27 1.57 4 1.16 1.0 1.09 1.05 1.9 5 .96 1.30 .84 1.03 1.94 6 .63 .53 .81 .65 3.08 Information Processing: Table of Amount of Paper Clips Affect the Average Speed of the Paper Helicopter The measure of paper-cuts on the helicopter Time taken for the helicopter to fall a separation of two meters (s) Preliminary 1 Preliminary 2 Preliminary 3 Mean Normal Speed (m/s) 1 1.38 1.68 1.31 1.45 1.38 2 1.22 1.40 1.19 1.27 1.57 3 1.13 1.40 1.30 1.27 1.57 4 1.16 1.0 1.09 1.05 1.9 5 .96 1.30 .84 1.03 1.94 6 .63 .53 .81 .65 3.08 To get the mean, you need to include the three preliminaries together at that point isolate it by three. For instance: 1.83 + 1.68 + 1.31 =4.37 4.37/3 = 1.45 To get the speed, you need to partition 2 by the mean of the three preliminaries. For instance: 2/1.45 = 1.38 2/1.27 = 1.57 Information Presentation: End: As indicated by our diagram our theory was right: The more paper cuts added to the base of our helicopter the more the speed will increment. Our information compares with the line of best fit truly well up until our last information point which was 6 paper cuts and was 3.08s. It is a lot higher than the various focuses, I think this one specific bit of information is questionable in light of the fact that it portion not relate to the remainder of the information just as the diagram. This might be on the grounds that our planning strategies when timing the last one was diverse then the remainder of our chart. To ensure this would be a precise test, we completed three preliminaries for each paper clip(s) and afterward determined the mean and speed. Assessment: Â Â â Our Method was solid and amazingly exact in light of the fact that for each measure of paper cut, we had three preliminaries so we could make a normal speed. Additionally, we utilized a similar individual for clock and the dropper of the paper helicopter. In the event that I could re-do the trial, I would have made the stature higher, for example, 3-4m so we could have increasingly precise readings.

China Department Stores Essays

China Department Stores Essays China Department Stores Essay China Department Stores Essay China Distribution Trading Issue 61 July 2009 Department stores in China, 2009 IN THIS ISSUE : I. Diagram II. Activity methods of retail establishments in China III. Improvements of market players IV. Difficulties V. Ongoing improvements VI. End 10 11 19 6 2 4 Overview Department stores in China have delighted in numerous long stretches of blast, accomplishing a compound yearly development pace of 30% somewhere in the range of 2003 and 2008. Deals force for retail chains has decayed towards the finish of 2008 as customer cut back on optional and extravagance spending; yet there are late indications of getting development. Activity methods of retail chains in China Department stores administrators in China create income from 1) commissions on concessionaire deals, 2) stock direct deals, 3) rental salary from store occupants, and 4) the executives charge and so forth. Commissions from concessionaire deals are the overwhelming wellspring of salary. Advancements of market players The serious scene for retail establishments in China is profoundly divided with no noteworthy market pioneer. Outside players will in general have more extensive national impressions and they essentially focus on the country’s high-salary class. Residential retail chains administrators for the most part center around provincial markets. Difficulties Department stores administrators in China are frequently supposed to be acting like proprietors †leasing floor space to concessionaires or occupants and giving little consideration to separation and brand the executives. Undifferentiated players have turned to value rivalry to support deals, harming companies’ same-store-deals development and dissolving their edges. Different configurations, for example, claim to fame stores and retail cannibalization are presenting extraordinary difficulties to retail chains. Ongoing advancements Lower-level urban areas are the development center. Retail establishment administrators center around redesigning and separation. There is developing regard for change promoting rehearses. Fare arranged producers give developing consideration to residential market brings new potential for retail establishment administrators to grow stock blend. Retail chains administrators are getting a handle on consideration in the capital market. Numerous retail establishments administrators have set out on land systems. Some retail establishments have investigated the â€Å"click-and-mortar† model. Government urges retail chains players to upgrade administration levels and improve activity condition through granting players with quality administrations. Li Fung Research Center 13/F, LiFung Center 2 On Ping Street Shatin, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2635 5563 Fax: (852) 2635 1598 E-mail: [emailprotected] com lifunggroup. com/Li Fung Research Center Member of the Li Fung Group China Distribution Trading Issue 61 July 2009 Department stores in China, 2009 Department stores have for quite some time been one of the significant r etailing directs in China; they are the central conveyance channel for optional utilization things, for example, marked attire, beauty care products, adornments and watches, and so forth. According to numerous Chinese buyers, shopping in retail chains speak to quality way of life and status. For quite a long time, numerous buyer brands have seen retail chains as their top-of-decision in building their acknowledgment in China. As Chinese customers become growingly well-to-do, retail establishments in China has delighted in long periods of quick advancement lately. Be that as it may, development energy of China’s retail chains deals has eased back towards the finish of 2008; hosed buyer spirits in the midst of worldwide monetary emergency, progressively savage rivalry and youthful administration mentalities all posture difficulties to China’s retail establishments administrators. These have provoked retail chains administrators in China to develop to remain serious. In the course of recent months in 2009, as China’s economy starts to exhibit balanced out development, deals force of retail establishments has gotten once more. We accept, long haul prospect for retail chain division in China is ruddy, as utilization assumes a greater job in the Chinese economy. I. Outline Department stores1 have been one of the most significant retail diverts in China with a set up history longer than other retailing channels, for example, grocery stores, hypermarkets, comfort stores and shopping centers. They are a significant deals channel for optional utilization things, for example, marked clothing, adornments, beauty care products and watches, and so forth, a significant number of them focusing on the country’s higher-pay gatherings. On account of the expanding prosperity and urbanization, retail chains in China have delighted in numerous long periods of blast. As indicated by the National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBS), the complete deals estimation of retail establishments was 180. 1 billion yuan in 2007; the 2008 entire year deals esteem is yet discharged however the China Chain Store and Franchise Association (CCFA) and Deloitte gauge the incentive to arrive at 219. billion yuan, speaking to a compound yearly development pace of 30% somewhere in the range of 2003 and 2008 (see Exhibit 1). Display 1: Total deals estimation of retail establishments, 2003 2008 * Estimated an incentive by Deloitte Source: National Bureau of Statistics of China, China Chain Store and F ranchise Association and Deloitte 1 Department stores will be stores with deals territory somewhere in the range of 6,000 and 20,000 m2, as a rule multi-story, selling wide scope of stocks with accentuation on apparel and embellishments, footwear, beauty care products, family unit things and home machines and so on. Unique counters and open racks are the central deals groups. Li Fung Research Center Member of the Li Fung Group 2 China Distribution Trading Issue 61 July 2009 However, retail chain area has seen a few difficulties over the previous year. In the midst of the worldwide money related emergency, retail deals development in China has decelerated towards the finish of 2008 and deals of optional things are all the more contrarily affected. As per the CCFA, optional and extravagance retailers were feeling the squeeze than earlier years. Deals force for retail establishments has weakened as customers cut back on optional and extravagance spending. Show 2 exhibits the key insights of various configuration retailers. As will be seen, every day exchanges for retail establishments have enrolled negative development of 5. 2% in 2008; the decrease is the second greatest among different configurations. Normal ticket utilization additionally recorded moderate development of just 1. 5% in 2008. In 1Q09, as indicated by CCFA and Deloitte, the two deals income and benefit for retail chains was somewhere around about 5% yoy. Show 2: Key measurements of various arrangement retailers, 2008 Sales income (million Retail design Hypermarkets Supermarkets Department stores Convenience stores Home hardware retailers Pharmacies 501. 64 37. 06 2. 0 7. 1 729 1,724 - 7. 8 - 3. 8 1,901. 0 48. 2. 3 1. 3 10. 8 23. 1. 0 - 0. 7 yuan) 212. 90 72. 42 883. 97 4. 73 yoy development (%) 12. 4 11. 3 11. 1 12. 3 Number of Daily exchanges 10,059 4,554 10,839 758 yoy development (%) 1. 0 6. 5 - 5. 2 - 2. 7 Average ticket utilization (yuan) 58. 1 43. 6 226. 4 16. 2 yoy development (%) 11. 6 4. 5 1. 5 11. 1 Gross edge (%) 12. 9 12. 9 14. 1 16. 4 yoy development (%) 0. 3 0. 9 0. 3 0. 0 Source: China Chain Store and Franchise Association and Deloitte The China Commerce Association for General Merchandise (CCAGM) led an examination concentrate on 60 significant retail chains administrators in China; in 2008, normal deals income of significant retail chains administrators in China was up by 15. % yoy to 183. 74 billion yuan; the development was lower than that of 2007 (17. 8%). 86. 7% of the retail chains recorded deals development in 2008. The CCAGM additionally studied 205 of its part ventures prior and Exhibit 3 shows a few deals measurements of its part endeavors in the retail chain area. Show 3: Performance of the 205 enrollment endeavors of CCAGM, 2002 2007 Sales pay development (% yoy) Sales edge (%) Sales edge development (% yoy) 17. 8. 5 21. 7 2006 13. 7 8. 4 19. 5 2005 18. 0 7. 4 10. 1 2004 12. 7 8. 9. 9 2003 42. 9 7. 7 26. 0 2002 10. 8. 2 4. 1 Source: China Commerce Association for General Merchandise (CCAGM) Li Fung Research Center Member of the Li Fung Group 3 China Distribution Trading Issue 61 July 2009 Despite less fortunate deals execution toward the finish of a year ago, development force of retail chains in China is giving some ongoing indications of getting. With gigantic government activities to help local utilization, the complete retail deals of shopper merchandise developed by 15. 0% in the primary portion of 2009, as indicated by the NBS. Shopper trust in China is getting also. Retail establishments in China have without a doubt profited by China’s flexible retail deals development; specialists accept that development in second 50% of 2009 will be considerably more grounded. II. Activity methods of retail establishments in China Compared with numerous retail establishments administrators in created economies, which give colossal consideration to separation and brand-building, retail chains administrators in China are frequently supposed to be acting like landowners †leasing their floor space to concessionaires or occupants and giving little consideration o separation. Retail establishments administrators in China produce income from 1) commissions on concessionaire deals, 2) stock direct deals, 3) rental salary from store inhabitants, and 4) the board expense and so forth; and commissions from concessionaire deals are the overwhelming wellspring of pay. For example, over 70% of the income of Hong Kong-reco rded retail chains administrators, for example, Intime Department Store ( (see Exhibit 4). Show 4: Revenue breakdown of retail establishment activities from chose organizations, 2008 New World Intime Commissions from concessionaire deals Sale of merchandise direct deal Rental salary Managem

Substance Abuse Essays - Psychiatric Diagnosis, Substance Dependence

Substance Abuse Foundation PAPER ON Initiative AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE 1. What is substance misuse? Despite the fact that you may never need to manage issues, for example, substance misuse, you should be readied and educated should this sort of issue present itself to you. The data in this paper will acclimate you with the definition, recognizable proof, initiative and family inclusion concerning substance misuse. How about we start with the definition. 2. As indicated by Air Force Pamphlet 36-2241, The Professional Fitness Study Guide, sedate maltreatment is characterized as the unjust, unlawful, or illegal utilization of a controlled substance, remedy, and over-the counter drug. It likewise incorporates the ownership, dissemination, or presentation of any controlled substance onto an army base. Individuals from the Air Force are additionally denied from having, selling, or utilizing drug gear. Aviation based armed forces strategy is to forestall tranquilize maltreatment among its work force. (AFPAM 36-2241: 182). The Air Force has zero resistance on sedate maltreatment. 3. The Air Force characterizes liquor addiction as a preventable, dynamic, treatable, and noncompensable malady that influences the whole family. Liquor misuse has negative effects on open conduct, obligation execution, and additionally physical and emotional wellness. Aviation based armed forces approach is to forestall liquor misuse and liquor addiction among its individuals and their families. (AFPAM 36-2241: 183). Aviation based armed forces individuals should consistently keep up principles of conduct, execution, and order. This leads us to distinguishing substance abusers. TSgt Watts/G13/NCOA/akw/16 Oct 00 4. We should have a methods for distinguishing administration individuals encountering issues with their substance use. One strategy is the capture, worry, or examination of a part driving impaired (DUI) of medications or liquor. Another technique is through medication testing. The Drug Abuse Testing Program is best as an impediment, when utilized appropriately. All military faculty are liable to testing paying little heed to review, status, or position. Military individuals are requested or willfully agree to give pee tests whenever. (AFPAM 36-2241: 184). Being in the Air Force for a long time, I have been arbitrarily chosen for sedate testing too much. Since I am a pioneer it's more clear to me why this program is so significant. 5. As a parent, chief, or manager, there are signs and indications of substance maltreatment to search for. These signs and side effects, as per the book, Drugs and Alcohol in America can comprise of fierce conduct, memory misfortune, disintegrating obligation execution, sensational emotional episodes, and unforeseen or visit unlucky deficiencies just to give some examples. (Medications and Alcohol in America: Crisis or Hysteria?: 62). The Air Force supports work force with substance misuse issues to look for help. Under self-ID, a part's willful accommodation to an Air Force treatment program and self uncovered proof of earlier medication use may not be utilized against the part in disciplinary activity under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Regardless of whether self unveiled or not, it's up to us as guardians and directors to get individuals the consideration and treatment they so urgently need. 6. The Air Force's Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment (ADAPT) program is intended to advance preparation and wellbeing and health. It gives instruction 2. also, treatment to people who experience issues credited to substance misuse and return them to unlimited obligation status or help them in their change to regular citizen life. As pioneers, it is our job to distinguish subordinates with issues early and to inspire them to look for and acknowledge help. 7. As a boss, you are not entrusted to be a diagnostician, yet you are accused of standing up to inadmissible execution and conduct. Authority has a significant part in the distinguishing proof, treatment, and generally the board of substance abusers. Indicating real and individual worry for the government assistance of your subordinates is one of the most significant duties you have as a manager. Administrators and managers ought to tell and bend over backward to include relatives during the assessment procedure and at the hour of passage into a program. 8. Taking everything into account, we've talked about the definition and ID of substance misuse. We likewise discussed the significance of administration and relative's job. Recollect dealing with substance issues is one of your obligations as a pioneer, director, and NCO. Overlooking the issue in trusts it will leave will just aggravate the issue for the individual in question, the association, and eventually for the

Eating Disorders in Transgender People

Eating Disorders in Transgender People Eating Disorders Awareness and Prevention Print Eating Disorders in Transgender People By Lauren Muhlheim, PsyD, CEDS facebook twitter linkedin Lauren Muhlheim, PsyD, is a certified eating disorders expert and clinical psychologist who provides cognitive behavioral psychotherapy. Learn about our editorial policy Lauren Muhlheim, PsyD, CEDS Medically reviewed by Medically reviewed by Steven Gans, MD on February 25, 2019 Steven Gans, MD is board-certified in psychiatry and is an active supervisor, teacher, and mentor at Massachusetts General Hospital. Learn about our Medical Review Board Steven Gans, MD Updated on August 11, 2019 Nick David / Getty Images More in Eating Disorders Awareness and Prevention Symptoms Treatment Diagnosis Eating disorders have historically been believed to primarily afflict heterosexual, affluent, cisgender, thin, white females. This inaccurate stereotype decreases the likelihood that people with eating disorders who are homosexual, queer, poor, people of color, larger-bodied, or transgender will be diagnosed and receive adequate treatment. In particular, transgender people represent an understudied and under-recognized group that experience eating disorders at higher rates.  Eating disorder research is already underfunded, which means that there is an even greater disparity in research about transgender people with eating disorders. Defining Transgender The term transgender is used to define people who identify as a different gender than the gender they were assigned at birth. The term cisgender is used to describe people whose gender identity matches the gender they were assigned at birth. The transgender umbrella can include people who identify as a different binary gender from that which they were assigned at birth: female-to-male (FTM) transgender men and male-to-female (MTF) transgender women. The term also includes people who do not identify with a binary gender (male or female) and instead identify as nonbinary, agender, genderqueer, or gender-expansive. There is tremendous diversity within the transgender community. One problem in mental health research on transgender individuals is that the few studies that exist tend to collapse all this diversity into a single category. Studies also lump transgender people together with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and queer individuals, all people who have a non-dominant systemic sexual orientation. This causes confusion because gender identity and sexual orientation are different. Transgender people can have any sexual orientation, including heterosexual.   Eating Disorder Prevalence Most research on eating disorders and disordered eating has focused on cisgender female individuals, with little research available on transgender populations. The most comprehensive study to date on eating disorders among transgender people found that transgender college students reported experiencing disordered eating at approximately four times the rate of their cisgender classmates. Transgender students self-reported higher rates of an eating disorder diagnosis as well as higher rates of using compensatory behaviors such as diet pills, vomiting, and laxatives. They experienced these symptoms at even higher rates than heterosexual cisgender women, who are often thought to be the population most affected by eating disorders. In one study, the prevalence of self-reported eating disorders among transgender individuals was 7.4 percent. What Is Body Dissatisfaction? Body dissatisfactionâ€"the negative evaluation of one’s appearanceâ€"is considered a risk factor for mental health issues in general and is thought to be experienced by both trans people and those with an eating disorder. Research shows that body dissatisfaction and poor body image can lead to chronic depression, social anxiety disorder, substance use, and other mental health issues. What Is Gender Dysphoria? Gender dysphoria is a feeling of distress emanating from the disparity between one’s physical appearance and one’s gender identity. Individuals suffering from gender dysphoria do not see their bodies as they want them to be.  Or, they experience that society does not see their bodies as they themselves see their bodiesâ€"in either case, the disparity stems solely from their gender. This experience can be reinforced by daily encounters due to dominant societal gender expectations. Many, but not all, trans individuals experience gender dysphoria. Research indicates that body dissatisfaction may be experienced in relation to specific body parts. Just as the cultural ideals of gender and beauty are unattainable for most cisgender males and females, they are even more unattainable for many transgender people. Transgender people may become more focused on beauty ideals because they anticipate they might be accepted as their gender if they can meet them.   We know that the popularized beauty and gender standards play a role in diet culture and contribute to dieting, which in turn, can lead to disordered eating and eating disorders. However, its important to remember that eating disorders are complex; societal standards are not the full cause. The Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Eating Disorders Gender dysphoria and body dissatisfaction in transgender individuals is often cited as a key link to eating disorders. It is often hypothesized and reported that transgender individuals may attempt to suppress features of their assigned sex. Or they may try to accentuate features of their gender identity specifically to present gender identity in ways that are understandable to the world around them. For example, trans male individuals may attempt to stunt breast growth, reduce hips, or eliminate menstruation by restricting caloric intake. Trans female individuals may engage in disordered eating to accentuate their femininity and to increase their ability to be perceived as cisgender women. Non-binary people may restrict their eating to appear thin, consistent with the common stereotype of androgynous people in popular culture. As with any population, however, it is dangerous to generalize. We know that eating disorders are complex and stem from a combination of factors. While some transgender people with eating disorders may attempt to change their bodies to conform to their gender identity, others may feel that their eating disorder is not related to their physical body. Among both transgender and cisgender people with eating disorders, not all of them report a connection between body image and their eating disorder. Interestingly, gender non-conforming individuals assigned female at birth appear to have heightened eating disorder symptoms compared to transgender individuals assigned male at birth. This alludes to the cost one must pay for being socialized female.   Oppression-Based Trauma Eating disorders among transgender individuals may be related to discrimination and bias experienced by those whose physical features are not consistent with societal expectations for people of a particular gender. Researcher Elizabeth Diemer and colleagues emphasize the role of minority stress, which is defined as the excess stress experienced by individuals in stigmatized social categories as a result of their social position. Marginalized individuals including trans individuals experience higher rates of discrimination, violence, pressure from concealing one’s true identity, alienation, and internalized social stigma. Marginalized individuals, as a result of these experiences, often have decreased economic resources as well as worsened physical and mental health. Trans individuals face high rates of homelessness and poverty, and they are even more likely to be homeless or to live in poverty if they are transfeminine, a person of color, or a member of multiple non-dominant systemic identities. It appears that a big reason for the homelessness and poverty is that many trans people lack support from their families. One potential way in which stigma impacts health among transgender people is the use of coping such as disordered eating to manage stressors. Given the real threats they face on a daily basis, relying on disordered eating can be a sign of strength. Research has shown that transgender people who conform less to traditional gender appearances experience more mistreatment and worse health than transgender people who conform more. Treatment for Eating Disorders Both transgender populations and people with eating disorders have elevated rates of suicide, which means the combination of transgender identity and disordered eating must be taken very seriously. There are no specific treatments for transgender people with eating disorders. Furthermore, many eating disorder therapists lack training in working with transgender people and many therapists who treat transgender people may not be specialists in eating disorders. Find Treatment With the 9 Best Online Therapy Programs Less Access Transgender people and people with eating disorders each are subject to prejudiceâ€"the combination of the two increases the stigma. As a result, many may be reluctant to disclose their gender identity, their eating disorder, or both. Many transgender people report receiving inadequate care from health professionals. Due to their often limited resources resulting from discrimination and lack of community and family, they may be less likely to have access to health insurance and treatment. Stigmas When they do receive treatment, they may experience disregard for their gender identity which can include being misgendered, and professionals may assume their primary objective is a  surgical transition without an understanding of gender-affirming care. The body discomfort of transgender people with eating disorders is complex and may not be successfully addressed by the same body image interventions designed with cisgender patients in mind. These interventions that focus on accepting aspects of their body may be experienced as invalidating. Historically, many eating disorder treatment centers have organized along binary gender lines, providing treatment only to females or offering a separate track for malesâ€"those who are gender non-conforming are left out or lumped in with the group that is their sex assigned at birth (which is not affirming). Gender-Affirming Treatment Many transgender people are helped by medical interventions aimed at affirming their gender identity. Measures to achieve the desired masculinization or feminization include administration of hormone therapy, hair removal, and/or surgical interventions (including surgical change of the genitalia and other sex characteristics). Hormone Therapy Hormone therapy may include estrogens and antiandrogens for trans women and testosterone for trans men. Transfeminine individuals who take estrogen and antiandrogens may experience decreased facial hair growth, an increase in fat deposits around the hips and buttocks, breast growth, and reduced muscle mass, which accentuates a more feminine appearance. Transmasculine individuals who take testosterone can experience a redistribution of fat, increased muscle mass, and a deepened voice, which promotes a more culturally masculine appearance. Surgical Options Non-binary and gender-nonconforming people ideally should have access to gender-affirming care as well. Surgical interventions may include breast augmentation, tracheal shave, orchiectomy, and/or vaginoplasty for trans feminine individuals and chest removal, body contouring, hysterectomy, and phalloplasty for trans masculine individuals. Historically, individuals seeking these interventions receive hormone treatment prior to surgery, although not all individuals follow this sequence. Further, there are many barriers (including the cost) that prevent trans individuals from obtaining gender-affirming treatments. Many trans individuals do not undergo all surgically available optionsâ€"though, in the past, these options were presumed to be the endpoint of the trans experience. Research shows that both hormone therapy and gender affirmation surgeries can decrease the level of overall body dissatisfaction and/or increase body satisfaction. Not surprisingly, having a physical body that is more closely aligned with one’s gender identity can relieve distress. It can also increase one’s confidence in “passing” or blending in with cisgender people. This is a goal for some trans people and is offensive to others. Research shows that hormone therapy and gender-affirming treatments result in lower levels of depression and anxiety as well as eating disorders. In Summary Treatment for transgender people with eating disorders should address the complexity of their identities without assuming the  causes of the eating disorder. It should also leave room for them to pursue medical treatments aimed to alter their bodies versus focusing only on body acceptance. Transgender individuals are best served by a comprehensive team that includes mental health professionals specialized in eating disorders as well as gender-affirming care.     Resources There are a number of blogs and organizations that are continuing the conversation about eating disorders in the trans community. Trans Folx Fighting EDs is a collective of trans/gender diverse people and allies who believe eating disorders in marginalized communities are social justice issues.Thirdwheeled is a blog by a queer couple that explores gender identity and its relation to eating disorders  Resilient Fat Goddess is a queer, fat, trans body liberation project that promotes eating disorder awareness, identity affirmation, and fat liberation.  Nutrition Therapy For All on Instagram  focuses on nutrition therapy centered around trans and other marginalized communities.The Body Is Not An Apology  is an online  international movement committed to cultivating global radical self-love and body empowerment for all bodies.Lets Queer Things Up  is a personal blog exploring queer/trans identity  and mental health.   Leading Eating Disorder Organizations

Global Sourcing - Free Essay Example

Executive Summary The ever increasing competition in global markets today has led businesses and companies to find different methods for reducing production and manufacturing costs in order to maintain their competitive edge. The competition has no longer remained company to company but has become supply chain to supply chain. From a buyers perspective a qualified supplier is a key factor to reduce costs. Thus supplier selection and evaluation has gained vital importance in the supply chain management environment. It is extremely essential to develop a supplier selection model which is efficient, effective and considers all the aspects required by the company. A number of supplier selection methods are available in the current literature. Creating a model based on these methods that addresses the particular requirements of the company is vital. The following paper is in 5 sections. The literature review in the first section is on the various methods for supplier selection and evaluation. The following methods are reviewed. Mathematical Programming Data Envelopment Analysis Analytical Hierarchy Process Analytical Neural Network Fuzzy Set theory Along with the review of the methods a discussion on the evolution of supplier selection criteria is also included in the first section. In the second section, two existing supplier selection models in the aerospace sector have been critically reviewed. The description of the Aerospace industry and comparison between the two models is included in the third section. To determine the essential criteria to be included in the model and prioritizing them, the research methodology used was a survey design. The results of the survey are included in the fourth section. The fifth section contains recommendations for building a new model for supplier selection in the aerospace sector. Introduction One of the major topics discussed in most of the production and operations management literature is supplier selection and performance evaluation of suppliers. It is one of the most critical activities of firms due to the increasing significance of the purchasing function (De Boer et al., 2001). The main objective of a supplier selection process is to maximize overall value to the purchaser, reduce the purchase risk and develop a close and long term relationship between the buyer and supplier. Supplier selection is a multi-criterion decision making problem and a number of conflicting factors affect its outcome. The factors taken into consideration are wide ranged and are both quantitative as well as qualitative (Ho et al., 2009). Operational research offers a range of methods and techniques in the form of models which can support the supplier selection decision making. A number of supplier selection methods have been proposed such as data envelopment analysis (DEA), analytic hierarch y process (AHP), mathematical programming, fuzzy set theory and vague set theory, multi attribute rating systems etc. A literature review of international journal articles discussing different multi-criteria supplier selection methods is carried out in this paper. The methods that are prevalently applied in practice, the priority of the evaluating criteria and evolution of selection criteria are also discussed and reviewed. The aim of this paper is to carry out a literature review of the various methods and criteria for supplier selection available in the current literature, in order to produce a set of recommendations for building a new model for the supplier selection process in the aerospace sector. To achieve this, two supplier selection models were critically reviewed, one of which is currently implemented in an aerospace industry and the other one is a theoretical model. A survey on global sourcing and supplier selection process containing 25 questions on various aspects of st rategic sourcing was also carried out in order to identify the different characteristics that influence sourcing decisions. Supplier selection methods: Supplier selection methods or techniques are the models which are used by decision makers to conduct the supplier selection process. They act as supporting tools for the selection process. The selection of an appropriate method is essential for the overall selection process and can significantly influence the outcome of the selection results (Li et al., 1997). There are number of supplier selection methods available in the literatures. Mathematical Programming (MP): MP allows the formulation of the decision problem in the form of a mathematical objective function which needs to be minimised or maximised depending on the objective function by varying the values of the variables. It is an optimization method which selects a number of suppliers in order to maximize either a single criteria or multi criteria objective function subjected to supplier or buyer constraints (DeBoer et al., 2001). Talluri and Narasimhan (2003) used mathematical programming in the form of a linear programming model to first minimise and then maximise the performance of the suppliers against the best target measures set by the buyers, thus providing a wide-ranging understanding of supplier performance. The authors applied this model considering a set of six suppliers to a Fortune 500 Pharmaceutical company in the process of implementing a JIT system. They regarded price, quality and delivery as the top three criteria for evaluating the suppliers. One of the key features of this max-min approach was that it could identify a set of suppliers with identical characteristics, thus providing the buyer with effective alternates to make their final decision. For the supplier selection problem Ng (2008) developed a weighted linear programming model with an objective function of maximizing supplier score. He implemented the model considering 18 suppliers to a manufacturing firm producing agriculture and c onstruction equipment. He included five criteria namely quality, supply variety, delivery, distance and price. In order to maximise the revenue function Hong et al. (2005) developed a mixed integer linear model to optimize the number of suppliers and order quantity. He applied the model to the supply chain of the agriculture industry in Korea as the customer demand varied seasonally over a period of time. Similarly OBrien et al. (2001) created a mixed integer non-linear model to optimize the allocation of products to suppliers thus minimizing the annual purchasing costs. Narasimhan et al. (2006) and Wadwa et al. (2007) constructed theoretical multi-objective programming models to optimize supplier selection and order quantity and to minimise lead time, price and number of rejects. Karpak et al. (1999) constructed a goal programming model and applied it to an international manufacturing firm to minimise costs and maximise quality and delivery reliability for selection of suppliers an d allocation of products between them. The authors considered cost, quality and delivery reliability as the criteria for supplier evaluation. On one hand Mathematical programming is advantageous as compared to the other approaches as it takes into account all the constraints during the formulation of the problem. Hence it is much easier to work when a large number of constraints are considered. It can also be used for multiple supplier selection as the current situation can be taken into account in an MP model. On the other hand some of the drawbacks of using an MP model are that it often only considers the more quantitative criteria neglecting the qualitative criteria which are important in supplier selection especially when the goal is to build supplier partnership. Most of the theoretical MP models are complicated to build for the supplier selection problem, due to the large number of variables, but as it can be seen from the above mentioned examples, they can be implemented in an industry as they can be simulated and solved by computers. They are not considered as the most effective method for vendor evaluation as they do not take into account qualitative factors and are incapable of performing a qualitative analysis which is an important aspect of the supplier selection process, thus limiting their use. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA): The concept of DEA is constructed on the basis of calculating the efficiency of the decision alternatives or suppliers. The DEA is a non-parametric method the measures the efficiency without specifying the form of the production function or the weights of different inputs and outputs. The efficiencies are evaluated on the basis of benefits as output and cost as the input criteria (DeBoer et al., 2001). The efficiency of a supplier can be defined as the ratio of the weighted sum of the suppliers outputs to the weighted sum of his inputs, thus the DEA method calculates the most favourable set of weights for each supplier alternative classifying them into efficient and inefficient suppliers. The favourable set of weights that are calculated maximise the supplier efficiency ratings without altering its own rating or making the other suppliers efficiency ratings more than one (DeBoer et al., 2001). In order to measure the efficiency of alternative suppliers Braglia and Petroni (2000) applied the DEA method by proposing nine evaluating factors to measure the supplier ratings. The authors applied their proposed methodology to the supplier selection process of a middle-sized company manufacturing bottling machinery to test its efficiency. They also calculated the Cross efficiencies in which the weights chosen for a particular supplier can be applied to the weights of the inputs and outputs of the other suppliers as well as Maverick index which is the percentage relative difference between cross efficiency and simple efficiency in order to avoid the selection of false positive supplier. Talluri and Barker (2002) and Talluri and Sarkis (2002) applied DEA to evaluate suppliers, manufacturers and distributors as a three phase approach for a logistics distribution network. They also employed the DEA to measure the performance of the suppliers using six evaluating factors having two inp uts and four outputs. Ross et al. (2006) evaluated the supplier performance with respect to the performance attributes of both buyer and supplier by using DEA. The author carried out three sensitivity analysis; the first one computed supplier efficiency scores without taking into account the evaluation teams and the buyers weights. The second analysis considered the evaluation taking into account the teams preferences and the third analysis considered the buyers preference. Liu et al. (2000) constructed a DEA model to evaluate the overall performance of a supplier considering three inputs namely price index, delivery performance and distance factor and two outputs which were supply variety and quality. The authors applied the DEA model to a firm manufacturing agriculture and construction equipment containing a multi modal assembly line. The model could select suppliers with a high supply variety, thus reducing the number of suppliers. Seydel et al. (2006) developed a DEA model to evaluate technology suppliers considering three factors. He included amount of know-how transfer as a qualitative factor in the model. The author developed a five point scale to rank the suppliers in term of the qualitative factor. The DEA method provides a means to evaluate and select suppliers on the basis of their performance over a period of time. It compares supplier performance in a multi criterion setting thus allowing the purchasing firm to evaluate each suppliers performance relative to the performance of the best supplier in the market by calculating the efficiency measures. Observed supplier performance data is used in a DEA method, thus the purchasing firm does not have to calculate its own utility functions as is required in the other techniques. Some of the limitations of the DEA approach are that its focus is not on selection an optimal supplier as the other mathematical programming models; hence it cannot be used if the purchasing firm requires the selection of an optimal supplier. The DEA model also makes some assumptions like any other supplier selection model thus limiting its use. (Garfamy et al., 2006) Evolution of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): Linear Weighting Model: Weights are assigned to the criteria with the largest weight corresponding to the highest priority, in a linear weighted model. The ratings of the criteria are then multiplied with their respective weights and the sum of weights is assigned to each supplier, thus the supplier with the highest overall rating can be selected. There are a few imprecisions in the rating mechanism such as difficulty to determine the score of a supplier on a criterion or importance of some criterion with a high degree of precision. To overcome these imprecisions the use of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was proposed (DeBoer et al., 2001). Analytic Hierarchy Process: The AHP is a decision making method first introduced by Saaty (1980) which prioritizes alternatives or suppliers when considering multiple criteria, thus allowing the decision maker to restructure complex problems in the form of a set of integrated levels or a hierarchy. It is one of the most commonly applied methods in practice as it incorporates qualitative as well as quantitative criteria and is relatively simple to understand. Various adaptations of AHP have been developed since its introduction. Muralidharan et al. (2002) developed an AHP model consisting of five stages to rate and select suppliers considering nine criteria. Some of the major criteria that the author considered were quality, delivery, price and technical ability. The model was then applied to the supplier selection process to evaluate six suppliers of a leading organization manufacturing bicycles. Liu and Hai (2005) created an AHP model and used Noguchis voting and ranking system thus allowing each manager to determine the order of criteria instead of weights for the selection and evaluation of suppliers. They used a six step process for supplier evaluation and considered eight criteria in their analysis, some of them being quality, responsiveness, delivery, technical capabilities etc. The authors applied this model for selecting one of ten suppliers for the Umbrella Scheme of Malaysias furniture industry. Chan and Chan (2004) constructed an AHP model considering six criteria namely cost, delivery, flexibility, innovation, quality and service with twenty sub-factors among them. They applied the model to the supplier selection process of a leading company that manufactures and supplies semiconductor assembly equipment assuming that the supplier had to be chosen for a critical product. The relative priority ratings were calculated based on customer or buyer requirements. Hou et al (2007) developed a decision support system based on AHP in a mass customization environment considering internal and external factors to meet market requirements. The author applied the model to the selection process of a subsidiary company of a local Chinese printer manufacturer. Chan (2003) created an AHP based interactive selection model which determined the relative importance of evaluating criteria without being subjected to human judgment. The AHP model can also be integrated with other supplier selection models in order to achieve optimized selection results. Ramanathan (2007) suggested that the qualitative and quantitative information gained from the total cost of ownership model and AHP model can be utilized to evaluate the performance of a supplier using the DEA method. The author considered the costs from total cost of ownership as inputs and the weights gained from the AHP method as outputs. Sevkle et al. (2007) applied the AHP-DEA integrated method to solve the supplier selection problem of a major Turkish TV manufacturer BEKO, in which he used AHP to derive local weights from a given comparison matrix and summed up the local weights to get the overall weights. In order to calculate the efficiency scores of all the suppliers DEA was used on the decision making units. Percin (2006) applied integrated AHP-GP method, where AHP was used to measure the priority weightings of alternate suppliers considering twenty evaluating factors. The author used the weightings obtained by AHP Goal programming method as the coefficients for five object ive functions. The integrated model was used to optimize the order quantity from the most appropriate supplier considering the capacities of the suppliers. Mendoza et al. (2008) offered an integrated AHP- GP model in order to reduce a large number of potential suppliers to a manageable figure. He ranked the alternatives considering five evaluating criteria to optimize the order quantity. Xia and Wu (2007) applied the AHP model to calculate the performance scores of potential suppliers. The authors then applied the scores as coefficients of one of the four objective functions in a multi-objective mixed integer programming model. The model was developed in order to determine the optimal number of suppliers and to select the best set of suppliers. Some of the advantages of AHP method are as follows (Chan et al., 2003) The system can be represented in a hierarchical manner to explain the changes in priority and its effect at upper and lower levels. The desired performance of the supplier is characterized by hierarchical selection criteria viz. the management of the suppliers is better if the suppliers performance is evident to the buyer. It utilizes multiple paired comparisons of criteria to rank order alternatives and it is the most exceptional Multi-criterion decision making approach. Efficiently progresses through modular construction and final assembly of modules than those assembled as a whole, this is known as hierarchical assembly of natural systems. Identifies the key elements assisting in making more accurate business decisions and is a structured method which obtains information from target respondents (decision makers or experts). It provides information regarding the structure and function of a system in the lower levels of the hierarchy and gives the outline of the criteria and their purposes in the upper levels. Limitations on the elements in a level are best denoted in the next higher level to ensure they are satisfied. It has stability and flexibility, stability as small changes have small effects and flexible in the sense that the performance is not hampered if there are any additions to a well structured hierarchy Disadvantages: (Chan et al., 2003) Most of the supplier selection problems do not have a single hierarchy. Utilization of this statistical method is complicated for most of the users and this makes the process unmanageable. It is not cost effective to procure the essential information i.e. due to lack of information /willingness to compare two alternatives with respect to some criterion the supposition of comparability is invalid. To reach an agreement with the team members by reviewing the models is time consuming. The presumption that the relative importance of criteria affects the suppliers performance is definite which cannot effectively take into account the risk and uncertainty in assessment of suppliers potential performance. Analytic network process (ANP): Sarkis and Talluri (2000) suggested the use of analytic network process, which was a more sophisticated version of the AHP method. The authors believed that the supplier evaluating factors could influence each other and this interdependency needed to be considered in the process. They applied the ANP process to evaluate and select suppliers in a company manufacturing custom-designed high technology metal-based products, considering organizational factors and strategic performance matrix. The model included seven evaluating criteria namely cost, quality, flexibility, delivery time etc. also considering their interdependencies. Bayazit (2006) implemented an ANP model considering ten evaluating criteria. Some of the important criteria included were on time delivery, quality, flexibility and delivery lead time. He classified the criteria into supplier performance and capabilities clusters and the interdependencies among them were formulated by considering each cluster as a controlling fa ctor for a pair wise comparison matrix. Demirtas and Ustun (2008) developed an integrated model in which they used ANP to evaluate the performance of potential suppliers considering 14 criteria. The weights were then considered in one of the three objective functions of a multi-objective mixed integer programming model. Similarly the authors integrated the ANP and the GP methods of supplier selection and evaluation in 2009. The only difference to the previous model was that there were four goals in the GP model. Gencer et al. (2007) developed ANP model considering various evaluating criteria. He classified them into three clusters to take into account their interrelationships to evaluate and select the most appropriate supplier. Some major advantages of ANP process over AHP are that ANP provides with additional insight as most of the real world supplier selection problems have interdependencies among the evaluating criteria. It also incorporates both qualitative as well as quantitative factors which are important in supplier selection. The ANP method can deal with various uncertainties and complexities as it makes use of ratio scales to incorporate a variety of interactions. In spite of the advantages, the ANP method does have a few limitations as it is a very complex method and requires additional effort and time as compared to AHP. Fuzzy Set Theory: The fuzzy set theory is used to model uncertainty and imprecision in the supplier selection situation. Fuzzy set systems make use of linguistic rules which are very well suited to describe the behavior of practical problems. In most of the real world applications, fuzzy rules are created by the decision makers with a few input variables. When the number of input variables increases, the possible number of fuzzy rules for a particular system increases exponentially. It is rather difficult for the decision maker to generate a complete set of rules to assess the supplier selection system (Chan et al., 2006). Chan et al. (2006) presented a hierarchy model based on the fuzzy set theory which could deal with both quantitative and qualitative criteria. The author used linguistic values to assess the ratings and the weights for the evaluation factors. The ratings were arranged in triangular fuzzy numbers. They created a hierarchical structure of the decision problem and applied the model to a high technology manufacturing company to select a suitable supplier to supply material for key components of a new product. Sarkar and Mohapatra (2006) used a fuzzy set method to eliminate the imprecision in a number of subjective characteristics of suppliers. The authors evaluated and selected the suppliers on the basis of performance and capabilities as the two major measures for evaluation. They considered a hypothetical case to exemplify their model by considering a pool of ten suppliers and the goal being to reduce that number and select the best two suppliers. Kahraman et al. (2003) applied the integrated fuzzy AHP approach to select the most appropriate supplier for the biggest white goods manufacture in Europe to supply the plastic part scroll housing for their new model of aspirators. In this model the decision makers could specify their preferences in terms of linguistic variables regarding the priority of each evaluating criteria. Chan and Kumar (2007) also applied a fuzzy AHP methodology for selection of suppliers. The authors used triangular fuzzy numbers and fuzzy synthetic extent analysis methods to choose the final priorities of different criteria. The authors applied the model to the supplier selection process of a manufacturing company to select the best global supplier for one of their critical parts used in the assembling process. The criteria considered in the model for evaluation were overall cost, quality of product, service performance, supplier profile and risk factors. Amid et al. (2006) formulated an integrated fuzzy multi-objective linear programming model which took into account the vagueness and imprecision of the input data in order to optimize the order quantity. The author developed an algorithm to solve the model which incorporated three objective functions with different weights. They considered a hypothetical case to select three suppliers for supplying a new product to a market. The purchasing criteria considered for the model were net price, quality, service and capacity. The author also formulated a fuzzy multi-objective mixed integer programming model which was similar to the earlier model but it also took into account the quantity discount. The price discount was directly proportional to the quantities ordered (Amid et al, 2006). One of the primary advantages of using fuzzy set theory for supplier selection is that it makes use of linguistic variables, which are highly beneficial when the performance values cannot be expresses in terms of means of the numerical values. Thus, taking into consideration the uncertainty and imprecision of the quantitative data gathered by the purchasing company or provided by the supplier. It is beneficial and easier to use linguistic variables instead of numerical values while assessing potential suppliers with respect to criteria and weights. A modified fuzzy set theory is capable of handling both qualitative as well as quantitative data ratings and is flexible in use, which is an added advantage (Chan et al, 2006). Some of the disadvantages of fuzzy set theory are that the analysis is based on the theory and not exploratory data; hence validation of the data may be required. It is a subjective methodology, thus justification for each step is necessary. As the number of variabl es increase the complexity increases, thus requiring a number of procedures in the sub-systems of the methodology. Other Methods: A number of other methodologies exist for the supplier selection problem such as artificial intelligence and expert systems which includes case based reasoning (Choy et al, 2005; 2002; Humphreys et al, 2003) and Bayesian belief networks (Kreng et al, 2003). Multi-criteria decision methods which include outranking methods (DeBoer et al, 1998; Dulmin et al, 2003), judgmental modeling (DaSilva et al., 2002; Naude and Lockett, 1993), interpretive structural modeling (Mandal and Deshmukh, 1994) and categorical methods (Houshyar and Lyth, 1992). Multivariate statistical analysis that incorporates structural equation modeling (Lin et al., 2005; Tracey and Tan, 2001), Factor analysis (Krause et al., 2001; Tracey and Tan, 2001) and confidence interval approach (Muralidharan et al., 2001). Group decision methods (Han and Ahn, 2005; Mandal and Deshmukh, 1994) and multiple integrated methods also exist for supplier selection. All the methods that are utilized for selections of suppliers have their own advantages and disadvantages. No method can be said to be the perfect method which covers all aspects of the entire selection process. Modifications and improvements can be made to every method in according to the requirements of the decision makers. The selection process can be improved by integrating different techniques in order to negate the limitations of the techniques taken individually. Considering this procedure, the fuzzy integrated AHP model and the DEA integrated ANN model are comparatively the best combination of methods that can be implemented for supplier selection. Supplier Selection Criteria: Evolution of supplier selection criteria: A number of criteria need to be considered for the supplier selection decision making process which makes the selection of suppliers a complicated practice. Since the early 1960s, practitioners and academics have been focusing on the analysis of supplier selection criteria and measurement of supplier performance. Dickson et al, (1966) suggested From the purchasing literature is fairly easy to abstract a list of at least 50 distinct factors that are presented by various authors as being meaningful to consider in a vendor selection decisionÂ?. In his work he carried out a survey to identify the most important criteria required for the selection of suppliers. The author came up with 23 criteria and their relative importance for vendor selection. The following table summarizes the 23 criteria and their level of importance. Weber et al. (1991) conducted a similar study on the bases of the 23 criteria identified by Dickson (1966). The authors reviewed and classified 74 related articles appearing between 1966 and 1990. Their study provided a clear indication of the issues concerning selection of suppliers. Both the studies indicated net price, quality, delivery and production facility and capacity as the top 4 criteria for supplier evaluation. These two studies were the primary studies done on supplier selection criteria and were the bases of a number of papers in the forthcoming years. A number of changes at a profound level have taken place in the business environment, including purchasing and procurement since Weber et al.s work in 1991. The basic definitions of Dicksons 23 criteria have undergone change and expansion and new criteria have emerged due to a substantial growth in business and supply chain needs. Dickson (1966) defined net price as price offered by each vendor including discounts and freight charges. In the development of the net price criteria, the term net price had been replacement by the term cost which includes a number of costs such as fixed cost, inventory costs, ordering costs, supplier costs and costs associated with quality, after-sales and technology (Current and Weber, 1994). The term total cost of ownership has also become important in recent times which include not only the purchasing price but also purchasing related costs (Bhutta et al, 2002). The delivery criterion was defined by Dickson (1966) as the ability of each vendor to meet specified delivery schedules. The delivery criterion has now been developed to incorporate lead time, cycle time, shipment quantity and quality, delivery capacity etc (Karpak et al, 1999). According to Dickson quality was defined as the ability of each vendor to meet quality specifications consistently. The quality criterion has now been extended to include inspections and certain specifications such as the ISO9001 system (Lee et al, 2003) In addition to the evolution and development of the basic criteria a number of new criteria have emerged in literature from various authors. Some of the new criteria are flexibility, which includes process and production flexibility, response to change, responsiveness to customer needs (Ghodsypour et al, 2001), flexibility to change the order and order quantity and ability to respond to fluctuating demand (Verma et al, 1998). A product design and development criterion consists of commitment to continuous improvement, product development and improvement, design capabilities and continuous improvement in product and process (Chan et al, 2003). Supplier relationship is another criterion that has gained importance in recent years due to integration of various sections of supply chain. Supplier relationship has two aspects, strategic and tactical. The criterion can be sub divided into 4 sections namely strategic long term relationship, tactical long term relationship, strategic short term relationship and tactical short term relationship. Due to the growth in the businesses, buying firms prefer to integrate the suppliers in their supply chain, thus forming a strategic long term alliance with their suppliers. Summary A number of factors have contributed towards the development of the aforementioned criteria. The focus of companies and businesses has shifted from mass production in the 1980s and 90s to higher customer satisfaction and optimum quality. Due to this shift in goals supply chain management has gained major focus for both small and large scale industries. The companies are striving for seamless collaboration between the different components of the supply chain. Thus strategic long term relationships and integrated information sharing has become widely important. The ever changing business environment, fluctuation in customer demand and focus on customized product requirements has resulted in reduction of lot sizes and increase in delivery frequencies. Thus, responsiveness to customers and flexibility criteria has gained importance in the supplier selection process. Buyers encourage their suppliers to participate in the design and development process for their products in order to fast t rack the development cycle of their products. Therefore, product design and supplier integration have emerged as important criteria. A number of other criteria such as financial stability, risk assessment and environmental considerations have also been included in recent literature. Financial stability and risk assessment emerged as important criteria especially due to the growing political, socio-economical and cultural problems encountered while sourcing globally. Environmental consideration developed into an important criterion for global supplier selection due to the increasing concerns of impact of manufacturing practices on the environment. Application of Existing Supplier Selection Models in the Aerospace Industry Characteristics of the aerospace industry The aerospace industry, more precisely aerospace and defence industry, is one of the most dynamic and competitive industries in the world. For many countries, the development and advancement of the aerospace industry represents not only a symbol of highly advanced technology, competence and innovation, but also pride and wealth (Lefebvre and Lefebvre, 1998). High-tech and regulated products, such as civil aircraft, military aircraft, missiles, land and space vehicles, have contributed to some specific characteristics of the industry and its supply chain. Thus, the purpose of the report is to introduce the aerospace industry, based on some relevant data adapted from the American and European official institutions. It consists of three parts: Part 1 will focus on the industry structure. In Part 2, some characteristics of the supply chain of the industry will be represented. Finally, Part 3 will display the condition of the aircraft market associated with demand/supply, and current comp etitors. Industry structure For several decades, the aerospace industry has been seen as a foundation of Western export leadership in terms of manufacturing sectors. It requires high levels of design, engineering and manufacturing expertise, and is a diverse field which comprises several different product sectors. Basically, the aircraft industry can be categorised into two main parts: commercial and government. The overall industry structure and existing competitors are shown, in Figure 4, below. The commercial sector falls into two categories in terms of the size of aircraft and different target markets: Business General Aircraft (BGA) and Air Transportation Regional (ATR). The smaller aircraft belong to the BGA sector, such as business jets and private aircraft. The target customers of the BGA sector are personal users. As for the ATR sectors, it is known as commercial aviation and the main customers airlines or transportation companies. The major products include large civil aircrafts and cargo aircraft. Under the government part, defence aircraft and space products are included. For military aircraft, it contains any products related to the military and defence, for example, defence aircraft, guided missiles, military transports. The space vehicles sector mainly includes three types of products: satellite operators (and any other unmanned spacecraft), launchers, and ground systems (for satellite and launch operations or any space system) (Eurospace). Other related products in the sector are planetary exploration systems (e.g. landers, rovers) or space infrastructure elements. According to the classification of Standard and Poors Market Analysis, space vehicles sectors can also be classified by different scopes of use: commercial, non-defense government/university, and military (Collegian, 2004). Other related products play an essential role in the smooth functioning of the aerospace industry, such as testers, samplers, and inspectors. These products are responsible for quality control and safety examinations. However, there is another important part that covers the entire aerospace field, providing maintenance, repair and overhaul services (MROs). MRO services are one of the profitable sectors in the industry catering to the aerospace aftermarket (Simons, 2009). MRO firms can be divided into three groups: Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), airlines and independent contractors. Supply chain The complexity of aerospace products has created several distinctive characteristics visible in the products and supply chain. One example would be the long product life- time. Due to the complexity of aerospace products, the manufacturing process is inevitably prolonged. For example, it can take around 18 months to manufacture a commercial aircraft. Thus, under such circumstances, the cost of work-in-process inventories is somewhat higher than in other industries. In addition, given the long product lifetimes, a largely fixed network of tiers of suppliers exists in the aerospace industry, and new entrants might find it very difficult to enter the industry (Humphreys, 2000). Barriers to entry in the aerospace industry are very high due to the high capital investment required. The high capital commitments is not only in designing and producing products, companies also need to invest a lot in processes and quality management systems in order to meet the stringent regulatory requirements. Another factor which might explain the high entry barriers is the specific characteristics of aerospace products high value and low volumes. The dominant characteristic of the aerospace products is that the value of each component is high and each type of products is required in low volume (Simons, 2009). To make aerospace products in small quantities does put manufacturers under pressure to deliver a range of sophisticated products. Smaller quantities and complex products translate into more frequent product line changeovers which might result in errors and higher costs. For any potential entrant, it could be a factor that raises the entry barrier higher. On the other hand, engineering tolerances in the aerospace industry are extremely small, since great precision and high quality are required in aviation products (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). For example, in other manufacturing industries, engineering tolerances might allow fitting errors of one-eighth of an inch or more, but the very limited error tolerances in the high-performance aerospace industry might not allow fitting errors to exceed one-thousandth of an inch (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). Although the plant size of a typical aerospace manufacturing unit and aircraft belonging to the high technology product category is hugh, the assembly tasks are not all completed by high-tech production techniques or automotive machines (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). Instead, the assembly process is moderately labour intensive. Two reasons account for this. First of all, most buyers request customised products which significantly limit the possibility for extensive automation (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). Secondly, the unit volumes of production are much lower than most manufacturing industries (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). In sum, its production process type is closer to job shop or batch production. The aerospace industry is regarded as one of the cutting-edge high-technology sectors in the world. It complex manufacturing process differs from other manufacturing industries which needs many suppliers to offer support capability providing the ability to develop advanced product technologies. For example, there are at least 300 suppliers delivering about 1,000 to 2,000 components to build an aircraft engines (Simons, 2009). Corresponding to the advanced technology requirement, the industry has a highly research-intensive sector. Research budgets absorb a considerable share of the industrys value added (Vekeman, 2006). Generally, when comparing the share of RD expenditures of the aerospace industry in the value-added chain and the share of RD expense of other manufacturing industries, it shows that the aerospace industry is more RD-intensive than others high-technology industries (OECD, 2004). For example, in France, the industrys value-added allocation for RD expenses is 28%, while for other manufacturing industries it is only 7%; 17% of value-added expense in the UK is devoted to RD, 12% more than the 5% average of manufacturing industry as a whole (Vekeman, 2006). Concerning these distinctive characteristics, supplier selection for the major aircraft companies is a vital step in sourcing externally. Generally, in order to serve the aerospace industry, suppliers need to meet several requirements. Craig (2009) has highlighted the following three requirements: (1) implementing information systems that provide for detailed traceability of components and raw materials, for example, the items on suppliers purchase orders are required to be compliant with the Berry Amendment which asks for the documentation to ensure the traceability of any source of supply (Simons, 2009); (2) products need to be tested to meet certain certification requirements, for example, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC); (3) quality management systems which can capture and track inspections and certification testing. The widely adopted and standardized quality management system for the aerospace industry is known as AS9100. Furthermore, it is apparent that technological superiority would be one of the important factors for evaluating suppliers from a design perspective (Simons, 2009); and significant investment RD could help a subcontractor in his candidacy on the supplier selection process in the aerospace industry. Lefebvre and Lefebvre (1998) focused their attention on five performance dimensions in aircraft manufacturing that are considered in the subcontractor selection process. Firstly, since a high quality requirement is implemented throughout the whole supply chain in the aerospace industry, quality is an essential requirement and the highest quality standard must be met. Second, subcontractors should have the ability to offer high quality customer service. For example, Airbus might directly ask their suppliers to provide technical services to the final customers, usually airlines. Thirdly, although aerospace products have longer lead times than other manufacturing industries, the ability to shorten lead times is still required from subcontractors. Fourth, flexibility is clearly essential to keep long-term relationships intact with prime contractors. As the industry frequently requires high-variety and customised goods, subcontractors would need to maintain high flexibility to handle cust omer requirements and adapt to any special conditions. Finally, cost is undoubtedly one of the major considerations for evaluating subcontractors. In fact, it is believed that competition will inevitably arise among the subcontractors in an industry due to the recent increasing numbers of subcontractors in developing countries. Thus, a lower-cost competitive advantage of subcontractors in the developing countries can be one thing attracting OEM companies attentions. However, there are still some concerns over whether subcontractors in low-cost countries can meet the technology requirements and offer sufficient product support for their customers, and whether the general infrastructure in developing countries can provide efficient logistics systems and sufficient information technology infrastructure (Simons, 2009). In recent years, most the US aircraft companies have moved towards the systems integration which have been used by its European competitors Airbus has done for decades (ITA, 2009). Apart from the traditional manufacturing process, the adoption of a systems integration approach relies to a great extent on external suppliers participation in the process of product development. With the drift towards systems integration, design and engineering tasks for aircraft development will be distributed across an international network to risk-sharing partners (Pritchard and MacPherson, 2007). One of the advantages is that this approach significantly reduces the initial capital investment into new launch projects compared to the self-funded launch programmes that have traditionally been adopted in this industry in the past (Pritchard and MacPherson, 2007). At the same time, the supply chain of the industry is reorganised and rationalised (Niosi and Zhegu, 2005). Therefore, original manufacturers ( e.g. Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Leer and Lockheed) can concentrate on their core competencies through increasing their outsourcing percentages. Suppliers in this industry would be required to share risks in engineering, testing and manufacturing. Following this trend, the extra vital factors for selecting suitable external suppliers nowadays would include potential suppliers being successful risk-sharing partners with financial and technical capabilities and a sufficient engineering workforce (Pritchard and MacPherson, 2007). The aircraft market The aircraft market is rapidly changing and highly competitive. Market demand in different sectors is varies with different aspects: in the military sector, the factors driving demand are the current political climate, military strategies, and economic factors (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). Defence spending is one driver in military sector sales, while the Russian collapse and a decreased in large-scale war could be major reasons for reduced defence spending (Simons, 2009). As for the space vehicle sector, government funding for space exploration in each country could be an important factor influencing market demand. On the other hand, the demand for commercial aircraft is more susceptible to market trends. According to Kronemer and Henneberger (1993), although the demand for new civil aircraft clearly depends on the circumstances of air transportation, such as passenger and cargo shipper demand, wide swings in demand still exists in the market due to the imbalance between passeng er demand and available aeroplane seats. The number of passengers increases at a particular rate, while the number of aircraft seats remains fixed in a given time period. As a result, to meet market demand, most airlines place orders which create more seats than current demand from passengers in consideration of the long lead times required for the delivery of aviation products. Then, substantial backlogs are generated in aircraft manufacturing which causes delivery dates to be pushed back to years later. In the end, widely fluctuating demand for commercial aircraft is produced. On the one hand, the industry may respond to changes slowly under general economic conditions (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). For example, despite the tough economic situation in the USA in 2008, total sales of the US aerospace industry have not been seriously affected and achieved a 2.1 % increase in sales (AIA 2009). One of the reasons might be that the great number of orders during the last few years has created significant backlogs for aircraft manufacturing companies (AIA Research Centre, 2009). On the other hand, the industry is also shaped by sudden and often unpredictable volatility in demand (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). For example, the attacks on the US on 11 September 2001 have had a severe impact on the aerospace industry. The 9/11 terrorist attacks have caused a decrease in airline passenger numbers which led airline companies to cut capacity and routes. Thus, the STR sector has suffered a serious drop in demand as most airlines have tempered their aircraft replac ement and expansion plans, extending delivery dates. However, in contrast to the STR sector, sales in the BGA sector grew significantly owing to an increase in demand for business jets and private aircrafts. One reason accounting for this is that as flight security became a major issue after the terrorist attacks, more people preferred buying a private aircraft to taking commercial flights (Simons, 2009). In addition, the value proposition for investing in a private jet changed at that time (Simons, 2009). On the other hand, the boost in demand from the US government for military aircrafts has increased the sales of military aircrafts. But at the same time, the attack and the subsequent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused downward pressure on the military and defence sectors because of the US governments restriction on exports of military products to other countries; it thus balances the demand for military aircrafts (Collegian, 2004).Overall, the market concentration level in the aerospace industry is high. For each sector (BGA, ATR, military aircraft, and space vehicles) there are only a few competitors. In the BGA market, it is lead by the following major companies: Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier and Embraer. As for the ATR market, Dassault, Gulfstream and Leer are three leading companies (Simons, 2009). Then, there are four US leading companies in the space vehicle sector: Boeings satellite systems division, Lockheed Martins space systems segment, Loral Space Communications Ltd.s Space Systems/Loral (SS/L), and Orbital Science Corp. Contrary to the civil aircraft and space vehicle sector that have many competitors, in the military aircraft sector, this is still dominated by a handful of major OEM companies, such as Lockheed Martin Corp., the Boeing Co., Northrop Grumman Corp., and BAE Systems (AIA Research Centre). Moreover, there are some aftermarket players which play a vital role in providing aftermarket products and services: General Electric (GE), U nited Technologies, Honeywells aerospace unit, Goodrichs aerospace segment, and Boeings aviation support services division (Collegian, 2004). Although market concentration in the industry is high, rivalry among firms in the global aerospace industry is however strong (Niosi and Zhegu, 2005). One of the reasons explaining this phenomenon is that an aircraft contract, usually associated with billions of dollars, is often at stake (Kronemer and Henneberger, 1993). In addition, the global aerospace market contains significant market uncertainty deriving from fiercely high-tech competition, unpredictable market demand, timeliness requirements and strong cyclical evolutions. Thus, it involves highly technical and financial risks, and increases market competition in the aerospace industry (Hollanders et al., 2008). Furthermore, the positive relationship between RD intensity and competition in the aerospace sector also shows that the highly RD-intensive trend might build up the intensity of competition pressures in the industry (Hollanders et al., 2008). According to a market analysis report from Datamonitor (2009), the US remains the largest aerospace market accounting for 51.9% of the market value in 2008. The US aerospace industry had total sales reaching $204bn. in 2008, followed by the EU, Canada and Japan (AIA Research Centre, 2009). Also, a report conducted by RNCOS (2009) indicated that developing countries such as China, Mexico, India and Brazil are expected to emerge as big marketplaces for aerospace products due to their increasing demand in air traffic. However, there is insufficient evidence to show whether these emerging markets will dominate the growth of the global aerospace industry in the future (Simons, 2009). References AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION (AIA). 2009. [online]. [Accessed 22 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: AIA RESEARCH CENTRE. 2009. 2008 Year End Review and 2009 Forecast An Analysis. [online]. [Accessed 22 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: AMID, A., Ghodsypour, S.H., OBrien, C. 2006. Fuzzy multiobjective linear model for supplier selection in a supply chain.. International Journal of Production Economics. 104 (2), p.394407. BAYAZIT, O. 2006. Use of analytic network process in vendor selection decisions. Benchmarking: An International Journal. 13 (5), p.566579. BHUTTA, K. S. and Huq, F. 2002. Supplier selection problem: a comparison of total cost of ownership and analytical hierarchy process approach. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. 7(3), pp.126-135. BRAGLIA M., Petroni A. 2000. A Quality Assurance Oriented methodology for handling trade-offs in supplier selection. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management. 30(2), pp.96-111. CHAN F.T.S., Chan H.K. 2004. Development of Supplier selection model- A case study in the advanced technology industry. Journal of Engineering Manufacture. 218(2), pp.1807-1824. CHAN, F.T.S., Kumar, N.. 2007. Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach.. OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 35 (4), p.417431. CHARLES A. WEBER, John R. Current and W.C. Benton. 1991. Vendor selection criteria and methods. European Journal of Operational Research. 50, pp.2-18. CHEN, C.T., Lin, C.T., Huang, S.F. 2006. A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management.. International Journal of Production Economics. 102 (2), p.289301. CHOY, K. L., Lee, W. B. and Lo, V. 2002. Development of a case based intelligent customer-supplier relationship management system. Expert Systems with Applications. 23(3), pp.281-297. CHOY, K. L., Lee, W. B., Lau, H. C. W. and Choy, L. C. 2005. A knowledge-based supplier intelligence retrieval system for outsource manufacturing. Knowledge-Based Systems. 18(1), pp.1-17. COLLEGIAN, B. 2004. INDUSTRY REPORT: Aerospace and Defence. [online]. [Accessed 31 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: CRAIG, A. Aerospace needs to leverage automotive industry supply chain to meet customer demands. [online]. [Accessed 31 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: CURRENT, J. and Weber, C. 1994. Application of facility location modeling constructs to vendor selection problems. European Journal of Operation Research. 76, pp.387-392. DA SILVA, R.V., Davies, G. and Naude, P. 2002. Assessing customer orientation in the context of buyer/supplier relationships using judgmental modelling. Industrial Marketing Management. 31(3), pp.241-252. DATAMONITOR. 2009. Aerospace and Defense: Global Industry Guide. [online]. [Accessed 27 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: DE BOER, L., van der Wegen, L. and Telgen, J. 1998. Outranking methods in support of supplier selection. European Journal of Purchasing Supply Management. 4, pp.109-118. DEMIRTAS, E.A., 2009. Analytic network process and multi-period goal programming integration in purchasing decisions.. Computer and Industrial Engineering. 56 (2), p.677690. DEMIRTAS, E.A., 2008. An integrated multi-objective decision making process for supplier selection and order allocation.. OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 36 (1), p.7690. DICKSON, G.W. 1966. An analysis of vendor selection systems and decisions. Journal of Purchasing. 2(1), pp.5-17. DULMIN, R. and Mininno, V. 2003. Supplier selection using a multi-criteria decision aid method. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. 9(4), pp.177-187. Eurospace: Eurospace 2008 Facts and Figures survey report. [online]. [Accessed 22 Jul 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: F.T.S., Chan. 2003. Interactive selection model for supply selection process: An analytical hierarchy process approach. International Journal of Production Research. 41(15), pp.3549-3579. GENCER, C., D.. 2007. Analytic network process in supplier selection: A case study in an electronic firm.. Applied Mathematical Modeling. 31(11), p.24752486. GHODSYPOUR S.H., OBrien C. International Journal Of Production Economics. The total cost of logistics in supplier selection, under conditions of multiple sourcing, multiple criteria, and capacity constraint. 2001. 73(1), pp.15-27. HAN, C. H. and Ahn, B. S. 2005. Interactive group decision-making procedure using weak strength of preference. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 56(10), pp.1204-1212. HOLLANDERS, H. 2008. Sectoral innovation systems in Europe: the case of the aerospace sector. [online]. [Accessed 07 Aug 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: HONG G. H., Park S. C., Jang D. S., Rho H. M. 2005. An effective suplier selection method for constructing a competitive supply relationship. Expert Systems with Applications. 28(4), pp.629-639. HOU J., Su D.. 2007. EJB MVC oriented supply selection system for mass customization. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management. 105(2), pp.510-523. HOUSHYAR, A. and Lyth, D. 1992. A systematic supplier selection procedure. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 23(4), pp.173-176. HUMPHREYS, P.K. 2000. A decision support framework for strategic purchasing. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 107, pp.353-362. HUMPHREYS, P., McIvor, R. and Chan, F. 2003. Using case-based reasoning to evaluate supplier environmental management performance. Expert Systems with Applications. 25(2), pp.141-153. I, Ng W. 2008. An efficient and simple model for mutilple criteria supplier selection problem. European Journal Of Operational Research. 186(3), pp.1059-1067. J., Seydal. 2006. Data envelopement analysis for decision support. Industrial Management And Data Systems. 106(1), pp.81-95. KAHRAMAN, C., Cebeci, U., Ulukan, Z. 2003. Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP.. Logistics Information Management. 16 (6), p.382394. KARPAK B., Kamcu E., Kasunganti R.R.. 2001. Purchasing Materials in Supply chain : managing a multiobjective task. European Journal of Purchasing Supply Management. 7(3), pp.209-216. KARPAK, B., Kasuganti, R. R. and Kumcn, E. 1999. Multi-objective decision making in supplier selection: an application of visual interactive goal programming. The Journal of Applied Business Research. 15(2), pp.57-71. KRAUSE, D. R., Pagell, M. and Curkovic, S. 2001. Toward a measure of competitive priorities for purchasing. Journal of Operations Management. 19(4), pp.497-512. KRENG, V. B. and Chang, C.-H. 2003. Bayesian network based multiagent systemapplication in e-marketplace. Computers Mathematics with Applications. 46(2), pp.429-444. KRONEMER, A and Henneberger, J.E. June 1993. Productivity in aircraft manufacturing. Monthly Labour Review. L., Saaty T. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. NY: McGraw- Hill. LEE, M. S., Lee, Y. H. and Jeong, C. S. 2003. A high-quality-supplier selection model for supply chain management and ISO 9001 system. Production Planning Control. 14(3), pp.225-232. LEFEBVRE, E. and Lefebvre, L. 1998. Global strategic benchmark critical capabilities and performance of aerospace subcontractors. Technovation. 18(4), pp.223-234. LI CC, Fun Y.P. 1997. A new measure for supply performance evaluation. IIE Transactions. 29(1), pp.753-758. LIN, C., Chow, W. S., Madu, C. N., Kuei, C.-H. and Yu, P. P. 2005. A structural equation model of supply chain quality management and organizational performance. International Journal of Production Economics. 96(3), pp.355-365. LIU F.H.F., Hai H.L. 2005. The voting analytic hierarchy process method for selecting suppliers. International Journal of Production Economics. 97(3), pp.308-317. LIU J., Ding F.Y., Lal V. 2000. Using Data envelopment analysis to compare suppliers for supplier selection and performance improvement. Supply Chain Management : An International Journal. 5(3), pp.143-150. LUITZEN DE BOER, Eva Labro, Piearngela Morlacchi. 2001. A Review of methods supporting Supplier Selection. European Journal of Purchasing And Supply Management. 7, pp.75-89. MANDAL, A. and Deshmukh, S. G. 1994. Vendor Selection Using Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM). International Journal of Operations and Production Management. 14(6), pp.52-59. MENDOZA A., Ventura J.A. 2008. An effective method to supplier selection an order quantity allocation. International Journal of Business and Systems Research. 2(1), pp.1-15. MURALIDHARAN, C., Anantharaman, N. and Deshmukh, S. G. 2001. Vendor rating in purchasing scenario: a confidence interval approach. International Journal of Operations and Production Management. 21(10), pp.1306-1325. MURLIDHARAN C., Ananthraman N., Deshmukh S.G. 2002. A multi-criteria group decision-making model for supply rating. Journal of Supply Chain Management. 38(4), pp.22-33. NARSIMHAN R R., Talluri S., Mendez D. 2001. Supplier evaluation and rationalization via data envelopment analysis : and emperical examination. Journal Of Supply Chain Management. 37(3), pp.28-37. NAUDE, P. and Lockett, G. 1999. Market Analysis via Judgemental Modelling: An Application in the UK Chemical Industry. European Journal of Marketing. 27(3), pp.5-22. NIOSI, J. and Zhegu,M. 2005. Aerospace Clusters: Local or Global Knowledge Spillovers? Industry and Innovation. 12(1), pp.1-25. PRITCHARD, D. and MacPherson, A. Strategic Destruction of the North American and European Commercial Aircraft Industry: Implications of the System Integration Business Model. Canada-United States Trade Centre Occasional Paper. 35. R., Ramanathan. 2007. Supplier selection problem: integrating DEA with approaches of total cost of ownership and AHP. Supply Chain Management : An International Journal. 12(4), pp.258-261. RNCOS. 2009. Aerospace Industry Forecast to 2013. [online]. [Accessed 02 Aug 2009]. Available form World Wide Web: ROSS A., Buffa F.P., Droge C.,Carrington D. 2006. Supplier evaluation in a dynamic relationship : an Action research approach. Journal of Business Logistics. 27(2), pp.75-102. S., Percin. 2006. An application of the integrated AHP-PGP model in supplier selection. Measuring Business Excellence. 10(4), pp.34-49. SARKAR, A., Mohapatra, P.K.J.. 2006. Evaluation of supplier capability and performance: A method for supply base reduction.. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management. 12 (3), p.148163. SARKIS, J., Talluri, S. 2002. A model for strategic supplier selection.. Journal of Supply Chain Management. 38(1), pp.18-28. SEVKLI M., Koh S.C.L.,Zain S., Demirbag M., Tatoglu E. 2007. An application of data envelopment analytic hierarchy process for supplier selection: a case study of BEKO in Turkey. International Journal Of Production Research. 45(9), pp.1973-2003. SIMONS, B. 2009. Interview with Brian Simons, Senior Director of Transportation, Logistics, and Supply Chain Planning for Honeywell on 11/08/2009. TALLURI S, Narsimha R. 2003. Wendor evaluation with performance variability: A max- men approach. European Journal Of Operational Research. 146(3), pp.543-552. TALLURI S., Sarkis J. 200. A Model for performance monitoring of suppliers. International Journal of Production Research. 40(16), pp.4257-4269. TALURI S., Baker R.C. 2002. A Multi- phase mathematical programming approach for effective supply chain design. European Journal of Operational research. 141(3), pp.544-558. TRACEY, M. and Tan, C. L. 2001. Empirical analysis of supplier selection and involvement, customer satisfaction, and firm performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. 6(4), pp.174-188. VEKEMAN, G. 2006. Manufacture of aerospace equipment in the European Union. Statistics in focus Industry, trade and services. VERMA, R. and Pullman, M. E. 1998. An analysis of the supplier selection process. Omega. 26(6), pp.739-750. WADHWA V., Ravindran A.R.. 2007. Vendor selection in outsourcing. Computers And Operations Research. 34(12), pp.3725-3737. WILLIAM HO, Xiaowei Xu, Prasanta K. Dey. 2009. Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research. ZIA W., Wu Z. 2007. Supplier Selection with multiple criteria in volume discount environment. OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 35(5), pp.494-504.