Analisis Strategi Gudang Suku Cadang Transmisi Berbasis AHP–TOPSIS untuk Mendukung Keandalan Sistem
(Studi Kasus: PT PLN (Persero))
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55826/jtmit.v5i3.1950Keywords:
Strategi Gudang, Suku Cadang Transmisi, AHP–TOPSIS, Risiko Stockout, Keandalan SistemAbstract
Keandalan sistem transmisi tenaga listrik sangat bergantung pada ketersediaan suku cadang kritis untuk kegiatan pemeliharaan dan pemulihan gangguan. PT PLN (Persero) saat ini mengoperasikan jaringan gudang terdesentralisasi yang menghadapi permasalahan berupa duplikasi persediaan, akumulasi deadstock, distribusi stok yang tidak merata, serta risiko kehabisan persediaan (stockout). Penelitian ini bertujuan mengevaluasi strategi gudang desentralisasi, sentralisasi, dan hybrid menggunakan kerangka Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) yang mengintegrasikan metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) dan Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). Penelitian dilakukan pada PT PLN (Persero) Unit Induk Transmisi Jawa Bagian Tengah (UIT JBT) dengan menggunakan data operasional gudang dan penilaian pakar. Evaluasi dilakukan berdasarkan enam kriteria, yaitu biaya logistik, tingkat pelayanan, lead time distribusi, risiko stockout, utilisasi kapasitas gudang, dan fleksibilitas operasional. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa risiko stockout (0,305) merupakan kriteria paling berpengaruh, diikuti tingkat pelayanan (0,262) dan lead time distribusi (0,186). Strategi gudang hybrid memperoleh nilai TOPSIS tertinggi (Ci = 0,650), sedangkan analisis sensitivitas menunjukkan konfigurasi 60% Hub–40% Buffer sebagai skenario terbaik. Penelitian ini menghasilkan kerangka pengambilan keputusan berorientasi keandalan untuk mendukung pemilihan strategi gudang suku cadang transmisi.
References
[1] R. J. I. Basten and G. J. van Houtum, “System-oriented inventory models for spare parts,” Surv. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 34–55, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.sorms.2014.05.002.
[2] A. J. Muckstadt, Analysis and Algorithms for Service Parts Supply Chains. New York: Springer, 2005.
[3] E. A. Silver, D. F. Pyke, and R. Peterson, Inventory Management and Production Planning and Scheduling, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley, 1998.
[4] J. Huiskonen, “Maintenance spare parts logistics: Special characteristics and strategic choices,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 71, no. 1–3, pp. 125–133, May 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0925-5273(00)00112-2.
[5] P. B. Alan Rushton, Phil Croucher, The Handbook of Logistics and Distribution Management, 5th ed. London: Kogan Page, 2014.
[6] M. Christopher, Logistics and Supply Chain Management, 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson, 2016.
[7] A. M. Freitas, F. J. G. Silva, L. P. Ferreira, J. C. Sá, M. T. Pereira, and J. Pereira, “Improving efficiency in a hybrid warehouse: A case study,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 38, no. 2019, pp. 1074–1084, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2020.01.195.
[8] B. M. Mohsen, Y. A. Nahleh, and M. Mohsen, “Sustainable digitalization of manufacturing supply chains: An integrated framework for resilience, efficiency, and circularity,” Clean. Logist. Supply Chain, vol. 19, no. September 2025, p. 100325, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.clscn.2026.100325.
[9] P. Li, Y. Chen, and X. Guo, “Digital transformation and supply chain resilience,” Int. Rev. Econ. Financ., vol. 99, no. March, p. 104033, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.iref.2025.104033.
[10] S. Winkelhaus and E. H. Grosse, “Logistics 4.0: a systematic review towards a new logistics system,” Int. J. Prod. Res., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 18–43, 2020, doi: 10.1080/00207543.2019.1612964.
[11] Yong Cao and Y. Sun, “Data Analysis and Forecasting,” IETI Trans. Data Anal. Forecast., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 4–11, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3991/itdaf.v2i3.51413
[12] E. H. Frazelle, World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2016.
[13] R. W. Saaty, “The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used,” Math. Model., vol. 9, no. 3–5, pp. 161–176, 1987, doi: 10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8.
[14] C.-L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1981.
[15] H. S. Shih, H. J. Shyur, and E. S. Lee, “An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making,” Math. Comput. Model., vol. 45, no. 7–8, pp. 801–813, 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.mcm.2006.03.023.
[16] M. Behzadian, S. Khanmohammadi Otaghsara, M. Yazdani, and J. Ignatius, “A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 39, no. 17, pp. 13051–13069, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056.
[17] A. Mohammed, I. Harris, and K. Govindan, “A hybrid MCDM-FMOO approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 217, pp. 171–184, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.02.003.
[18] D. Ivanov and A. Dolgui, “A digital supply chain twin for managing the disruption risks and resilience in the era of Industry 4.0,” Prod. Plan. Control, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 775–788, 2021, doi: 10.1080/09537287.2020.1768450.
[19] M. Christopher and H. Peck, “Building the Resilient Supply Chain," International Journal of Logistics Management,” vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 1–13, 2004.
[20] S. Chopra and P. Meindl, Supply Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation, 6th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2016.
[21] C. Teixeira, I. Lopes, and M. Figueiredo, “Multi-criteria Classification for Spare Parts Management: A Case Study,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 11, no. June, pp. 1560–1567, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.295.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Andri Setiawan, Erwin Widodo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
