Choosing a university is a crucial decision for each field of study, as it significantly influences the quality of graduates. An important factor in this decision is the university’s annual benchmark scores. The benchmark score represents the minimum score required for admission. This study evaluates the benchmark scores in the logistics sector for several prominent universities in Vietnam during the period 2021–2023. The research process utilized data on the benchmark scores for the years 2021, 2022, and 2023. The weights of these benchmark scores were calculated using the Rank Order Centroid (ROC) method, and the Probability method was employed to compare the benchmark scores of the universities. The analysis identified C3 as the criterion with the highest importance, while U3 emerged as the top-ranked alternative. The two-stage comprehensive sensitivity analysis revealed that universities consistently ranked high or low regardless of the method used to calculate benchmark score weights or the method employed for ranking. Additionally, the smallest weight change that affected the overall Probability ranking was 4.61%. This study provides significant guidance for students in selecting a university for logistics studies and serves as a foundational reference for universities to assess their capabilities in logistics education, thereby fostering healthy competition among institutions.

Akhtar, M. (2023). Logistics Services Outsourcing Decision Making: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 11(1), 73-88. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2023.18441

Alazzawi, A., & Zak, J. (2020). MCDM/A Based Design of Sustainable Logistics Corridors Combined with Suppliers Selection. The Case Study of Freight Movement to Iraq, Transportation Research Procedia, 47, 577–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.03.134

Bairagi, B. (2022). A Novel MCDM Model for Warehouse Location Selection in Supply Chain Management. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 5(1), 194-207. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame0314052022b

Barron, F. H., & Barrett, B. E. (1996). The Efficacy of SMARTER Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique Extended to Ranking. Acta Psychol, 93, 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(96)00010-8

Boakai, S., Samanlioglu, F. (2023). An MCDM Approach to Third Party Logistics Provider Selection. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 44(3), 283-299. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLSM.2023.129365

Calık, A., Erdebilli, B., & Ozdemir, Y. S. (2022). Novel Integrated Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Logistics Performance Index. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2677(2), 1392-1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221113314

Cam, T. N., & Hong, N. T. C. (2022). In: Comparison of UEF’s logistics training program with universities in logistics developed countries, annual national scientific symposium: updating digital technology trends in the logistics industry - training site and practice (Vietnamese). Trường đại học kinh tế thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, Nhà xuất bản al động. pp. 152-158.

Chau, T. N. H., & Dat, L. V. (2021). Some Recommendations to Reduce National Logistics Costs in Vietnam. Journal of Economic and Banking Studies, 229, 36-49.

Chejarla, K. C., Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2021). MCDM Applications in Logistics Performance Evaluation: A Literature Review. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1774

Çıkmak, S., Kırbaç, G., Kesici, B. (2023). Analyzing the Challenges to Adoption of Drones in the Logistics Sector Using the Best-Worst Method. Business and Economics Research Journal. 14(2), 227-242. http://dx.doi.org/10.20409/berj.2023.413

Erkan, T. E., & Elsharida, W. M. (2020). Combining AHP and ROC with GIS for Airport Site Selection: A Case Study in Libya. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(5), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9050312

Evcioglu, H. E., & Kabak, M. (2023). Supplier Selection in Supply Chain Network using MCDM Methods. Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 41(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.14744/sigma.2023.00001

Gorcun, O. F., & Kucukonder, H. (2021). An Integrated MCDM Approach for Evaluating the Ro-Ro Marine Port Selection Process: A Case Study in Black Sea Region. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs, 13(3), 203-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2021.1878872

Ha, B. T. T., Kieu, P. T. V., & Mai, N. T. T. (2023). Development of Logistics Vietnam Services: Situation and Solutions. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 6(8), 3849-3855. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v6-i8-59.

Ha, V. T. B. (2023). Factors Affecting the Development of VIETNAM’s Logistics Industry [PhD thesis]. Foreign Trade University.

Hai, P. Q., Phat, P. Q., & Quan, D. H. (2023). Digital Transformation in Vietnamese Logistics Businesses. VNU Journal of Economics and Business, 3(1), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.57110/jebvn.v3i1.160

Hanzl, J. (2020). General Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods for Finding the Optimal Solution in City Logistics. Open Engineering, 10, 147–153. https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2020-0023

Hieu, D. T., & Huy, V. L. (2024). Effects of Logistics Performance on Vietnam’s Exports: A Quantitative Analysis using the PPML Method. Journal of International Economics and Management, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.38203/jiem.024.1.0077

Hoang, X. T. (2023). Multi-Objective Optimization of Turning Process by FUCA Method. Strojnícky Časopis-Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 73(1), 55-66. https://doi.org/10.2478/scjme-2023-0005

Hong, D. T. V., Giang, H. H., Anh, N. M., et al. (2021). The Impact of Macro Environment on VIETNAM’s Logistics Industry. Journal of Science: Hanoi Metropolitan University, 51, 20-29.

Jacek Zak, J., & Węgliński, S. (2014). The Selection of the Logistics Center Location based on MCDM/A Methodology. Transportation Research Procedia, 3, 555–564. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2014.10.034

Jovcic, S., & Prusa, P. (2021). A Hybrid MCDM Approach in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection. Mathematics, 9(21), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9212729

Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., et al. (2022). MCDM Approaches for Evaluating Urban and Public Transportation Systems: A Short Review of Recent Studies. Transport, 37(6), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2022.18376

Komchornrit, K. (2017). The Selection of Dry Port Location by a Hybrid CFA-MACBETH-PROMETHEE Method: A Case Study of Southern Thailand. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 33(3), 141-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.09.004

Kumar, G., & Parimala, N. (2019). A Sensitivity Analysis on Weight Sum Method MCDM Approach for Product Recommendation. In: Distributed Computing and Internet Technology: 15th International Conference. Springer International Publishing.

Lee, P. T. V., & Yang, Z. (2018). Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Maritime Studies and Logistics: Applications and Cases. In: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-62338-2

Luyen, L. A., & Thanh, N. V. (2022). Logistics Service Provider Evaluation and Selection: Hybrid SERVQUAL-FAHP-TOPSIS Model. Processes, 10(5), 1024. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10051024

Mesic, A., Miskic, S., Stevic, Z., et al. (2022). Hybrid MCDM Solutions for Evaluation of the Logistics Performance Index of the WESTERN BALKAN Countries. Economics, 10(1), 13-34. https://doi.org/10.2478/eoik-2022-0004

Nguyen, H. P. (2020). Sustainable Development of Logistics in Vietnam in the Period 2020–2025. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 11(3), 665-682.

Nguyen, H. T. H. (2021). Impacts of Covid-19 on Logistics Industry: Challenges and Opportunities for Vietnam. Huflit Journal of Science, 6(4), 58-66.

Nguyen, T. (2023). Vietnam logistics industry: Developing technology and increasing value-added services. The ministry of Finace.

Nila, B., & Roy, J. (2023). A New Hybrid MCDM Framework for Third-Party Logistics Provider Selection under Sustainability Perspectives. Expert Systems with Applications, 234, 121009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121009.

Norkaew, K., & Sureeyatanapas, P. (2019). A Survey of Criteria for a Selection of Logistics Service Providers: A Case of Thailand’s Automotive Industry. International Conference on Engineering, Applied Sciences and Technology, 639, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/639/1/012002

Osintsev, N. A. (2021). Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Green Logistics. World of Transport and Transportation, 19(5), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.30932/1992-3252-2021-19-5-13

Pamucar, D., Zizovic, M., Biswas, S., et al. (2021). A New Logarithm Methodology of Additive Weights (LMAW) for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making: Application in Logistics, Facta Universitatis—Series: Mechanical Engineering, 19(3), 361-380, https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210214031P

Paul, A., Shukla, N., Paul, S. K., et al. (2021). Sustainable Supply Chain Management and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Systematic Review. Sustainability, 13, 7104. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137104

Servait, D., Uzupyte, R., & Krilavicius, T. (2020). Logistics Service Provider Selection using TOPSIS and VIKOR Methods. Information Society and University Studies, 23, 96-91.

Stopka, O., Drozdziel, P., & Luptak, V. (2022). Modeling The Designs in terms of Logistics Service Center Placement: A Case Study. Archives of Transport, 64(4), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.1049

Tai, P. V. (2019). Developing Vietnam seaport system to meet economic growth in international integration period. Journal of science and transport technology, 34, 95-100.

Thinh, H. X. (2023). Multi-Objective Optimization of Turning Process by FUCA Method. Strojnícky časopis—Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 73(1), 55-66. http:// doi.org/10.2478/scjme-2023-0005

Trung, D. D. (2022). Multi-Criteria Decision Making under the MARCOS Method and the Weighting Methods: Applied to Milling, Grinding and Turning Processes. Manufacturing Review, 9(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1051/mfreview/2022003

Tubis, A., & Wojciechowska, S. W. (2023). Fuzzy TOPSIS in Selecting Logistic Handling Operator: Case Study from POLAND. Transport, 38(1), 12-30. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2023.17074

Ulutas, A. (2021). A Grey Hybrid Model to Select the Optimal Third-Party Logistics Provider. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 32(1), 171-181, http://doi.org/10.7166/32-1-2126

Ulutas, A., Balo, F., Sua, L., et al. (2021). A new integrated grey MCDM model: case of warehouse location selection. Facta Universitatis—Series: Mechanical Engineering, 19(3), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME210424060U

Wang, M. H., Lee, H. S., Chu, C. W. (2010). Evaluation of Logistic Distribution Center Selection using the Fuzzy MCDM approach. International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control, 6(12), 5785-5796.

Widjaja, W., Suprihartini, Y., Dirgantoro, G. P., et al. (2024). Application of ROC Criteria Prioritization Technique in Employee Performance Appraisal Evaluation. Jurnal Galaksi, 1(1), 62-69. https://doi.org/10.70103/galaksi.v1i1.7

Wijaya, B. K., Sudipa, I. G. I., Waas, D. V., et al. (2022). Selection of Online Sales Platforms for MSMEs using the OCRA Method with ROC Weighting. Journal of Intelligent Decision Support System (IDSS), 5(4), 146-152.

Yildirim, B.F., Onder, E. (2014). Evaluating Potential Freight Villages in Istanbul Using Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques. Journal of Logistics Management, 3(1), 1-10. http://doi.org/10.5923/j.logistics.20140301.01

Żak, J. (2019). The Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making/Aiding Methodology in the Evaluation and Redesign of Logistics Systems. Decision Making in Manufacturing and Services, 13(1-2), 53-71. https://doi.org/10.7494/dmms.2019.13.1-2.3328

Zhang, X., Lu, J., & Pen, Y. (2021). Hybrid MCDM Model for Location of Logistics Hub: A Case in China Under the Belt and Road Initiative. IEEE Access, 9, 41227-41245, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3065100

Zheng, M., Teng, H., & Wang, Y. (2021). A Simple Approach for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making on basis of Probability Theory. Engineering Structures and Technologies, 13(1), 26-30. https://doi.org/10.3846/est.2021.18404