Optimizing Warehouse Management System Selection for Agricultural Third-Party Logistics Providers: A CRITIC–CoCoSo Decision-Making Framework
Keywords:
Agricultural Logistics; Third-Party Logistics; Warehouse Management System (WMS); WMS selection; CRITIC; CoCoSo.Abstract
Agricultural supply chains rely heavily on warehouses to manage the receipt, storage, picking, packing, and distribution of products to their final destinations. Warehouse management becomes particularly demanding in the agricultural context because product availability is strongly influenced by seasonality, supply is received from multiple sources, and reliable information concerning inventory levels and product movement must be maintained. In response to these operational requirements, agricultural Third-Party Logistics (3PL) providers may adopt a Warehouse Management System (WMS) to facilitate the coordination of warehouse processes and enhance overall operational performance. Nevertheless, determining the most appropriate WMS remains a complex decision-making problem. This study therefore developed a systematic evaluation framework to support agricultural 3PL providers in selecting a WMS that is compatible with their operational requirements. The framework employed the Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) method to establish the relative importance of nine evaluation criteria, followed by the Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method to assess and rank six alternative WMS solutions. The criteria considered in the evaluation comprised API access, barcode support, pricing, mobile compatibility, trial availability, integration with other systems, user-friendly interface, scalability, and data security. According to the CRITIC weighting results, trial availability emerged as the most influential criterion, receiving a weight of 0.154, while barcode support obtained the lowest weight of 0.068. The subsequent CoCoSo evaluation identified A4 as the leading alternative, achieving a final score of 2.7414. The remaining alternatives were ordered as A1, A2, A6, A3, and A5. The resulting framework offers agricultural 3PL providers a systematic basis for evaluating and prioritising WMS alternatives in accordance with their specific operational and technological requirements.
Downloads
References
[1] Purnomo, H., Aminuddin A. P., R. A., Immawan, T., & Firdaus, F. (2026). Socio-technical transformation of Indonesia’s national food system: An integrated approach based on circular supply chain management, human factors, and Agent-Based modeling. Challenges in Sustainability, 14(1), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.56578/cis140110
[2] Savin, A. (2017). Market research on warehouse management system solutions for medium wholesale companies with 3 Party Logistics opportunities [Bachelor's thesis, JAMK University of Applied Sciences]. Jyväskylä, Finland. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2017060312209
[3] Pajić, V., Andrejić, M., & Chatterjee, P. (2024). Enhancing cold chain logistics: A framework for advanced temperature monitoring in transportation and storage. Mechatronics and Intelligent Transportation Systems, 3(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.56578/mits030102
[4] Whiting, G. (2024). WMS implementation guide including checklist & project plan. Explore WMS. https://www.explorewms.com/wms-implementation-checklist.html
[5] Friedman, D. (2006). WMS pros and cons. Electrical Wholesaling, 87, 46–47. http://www.ewweb.com/archive/wms-pros-and-cons
[6] Marak, S. (2025). Top warehouse management system benefits and more. SelectHub. https://www.selecthub.com/warehouse-management/warehouse-management-system-software-benefits/
[7] Samsudin, A. F., Darmawan, B., Dwiyanti, V., & Mupita, J. (2023). Attributes and effect of implementation of warehouse management system (WMS) for company sustainability. Jurnal Teknologi Transportasi dan Logistik, 4(2), 199-212. https://doi.org/10.52920/jttl.v4i2.202
[8] Dabic-Miletic, S. (2024). The challenges of integrating AI and robotics in sustainable WMS to improve supply chain economic resilience. Journal of Industrial Intelligence, 2(2), 119-131. https://doi.org/10.56578/jii020205
[9] Lorenc, A., & Burinskiene, A. (2021). Improve the orders picking in e-commerce by using WMS data and BigData analysis. FME Transactions, 49(1), 233-243. https://doi.org/10.5937/fme2101233l
[10] Minashkina, D., & Happonen, A. (2020). Systematic literature review and research gap issues on third party logistics operators selecting WMS for efficient operations for customers. International Journal of Supply Chain and Inventory Management, 3(2), 142-166. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijscim.2020.107282
[11] Baruffaldi, G., Accorsi, R., & Manzini, R. (2019). Warehouse management system customization and information availability in 3PL companies: A decision-support tool. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 119(2), 251-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/imds-01-2018-0033
[12] Andiyappillai, N. (2020). Factors influencing the successful implementation of the warehouse management system (WMS). International Journal of Computer Applications, 177(32), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2020919787
[13] Apak, S., Tozan, H., & Vayvay, O. (2016). A new systematic approach for warehouse management system evaluation. Tehnički vjesnik – Technical Gazette, 23(5), 1439–1446. https://doi.org/10.17559/TV-20141029094700
[14] kozoderović, j., pajić, v., & andrejić, m. (2025). A Multi-Criteria analysis for e-commerce warehouse location selection using SWARA and ARAS methods. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, 4(2), 122-132. https://doi.org/10.56578/jemse040204
[15] Krstić, M., Tadić, S., Čvorović, A., & Veljović, M. (2025). Optimization of Last-Mile delivery alternatives using the fuzzy FARE and ADAM multi-criteria decision-making methods. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, 4(2), 98-108. https://doi.org/10.56578/jemse040202
[16] Minashkina, D., & Happonen, A. (2023). A systematic literature mapping of current academic research linking warehouse management systems to the third-party logistics context. Acta logistica, 10(2), 209-228. https://doi.org/10.22306/al.v10i2.377
[17] Kmiecik, M. (2024). Stock management in e-commerce by 3PL – case study. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology Organization and Management Series, 192. https://doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2024.192.34
[18] Vatumalae, V., Rajagopal, P., & Kaliani Sundram, V. P. (2020). Warehouse management system of a third party logistics provider in Malaysia. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 12(9), 73. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v12n9p73
[19] Folinas, D., Gialamaidis, P., Aidonis, D., Achillas, C., & Triantafyllou, D. (2022). What are managers thinking about WMS? 5th Logistics International Conference (LOGIC 2022), https://logic.sf.bg.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/LOGIC-2022-Proceedings-website.pdf
[20] Kozoderović, J., Andrejić, M., & Pajić, V. (2024). Strategic selection of crowd logistics platforms: A multi-criteria decision-making approach. Mechatronics and Intelligent Transportation Systems, 3(4), 235-253. https://doi.org/10.56578/mits030404
[21] Jovčić, S., & Průša, P. (2021). A hybrid MCDM approach in Third-Party logistics (3PL) provider selection. Mathematics, 9(21), 2729. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9212729
[22] Jamasbi, N., Olfat, L., Amiri, M., & Pishvaee, M. (2023). Presenting a model for evaluation and selection of sustainable third-party logistics service providers in the supply chain based on the combined approach of fuzzy analytical hierarchy and CoCoSo technique: A case study of the dairy industry. Iranian Journal of Management Sciences, 17(68), 45–74. http://journal.iams.ir/article_391_en.html
[23] Švadlenka, L., Bošković, S., Jovčić, S., Simic, V., Kumar, S., & Zanne, M. (2023). Third-party logistics provider selection for sustainable Last-Mile delivery: A case study of e-shop in Belgrade. Journal of Urban Development and Management, 2(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.56578/judm020101
[24] Hidayati, B., Atikawati, D., Koentjoro, M. P., Setiawan, E., & Radzi, N. A. M. (2026). A robust multi criteria framework for assessing agricultural technology competitiveness and sustainability: Evidence from East Java, Indonesia. Challenges in Sustainability, 14(3), 554-570. https://doi.org/10.56578/cis140308
[25] Adalı, E. A., & Işık, A. T. (2017). Critic and maut methods for the contract manufacturer selection problem. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 5(1), 93-101. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejms.v5i1.p93-101
[26] Madić, M., & Radovanović, M. (2015). Ranking of some most commonly used nontraditional machining processes using ROV and CRITIC methods. U.P.B. Scientific Bulletin, Series D: Mechanical Engineering, 77(2), 193-204. https://www.scientificbulletin.upb.ro/static/pdfs/full4e8_598887.pdf
[27] Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Kazimieras Zavadskas, E., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 57(9), 2501-2519. https://doi.org/10.1108/md-05-2017-0458
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
