汽车零部件行业风险评估的混合集成多准则决策方法研究

Ammar Chakhrit, Mohammed Bougofa, Islam Hadj Mohamed Guetarni, Abderraouf Bouafia, Rabeh Kharzi, Naima Nehal, Mohammed Chennoufi
{"title":"汽车零部件行业风险评估的混合集成多准则决策方法研究","authors":"Ammar Chakhrit, Mohammed Bougofa, Islam Hadj Mohamed Guetarni, Abderraouf Bouafia, Rabeh Kharzi, Naima Nehal, Mohammed Chennoufi","doi":"10.1108/ijqrm-01-2023-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This paper aims to enable the analysts of reliability and safety systems to evaluate the risk and prioritize failure modes ideally to prefer measures for reducing the risk of undesired events. Design/methodology/approach To address the constraints considered in the conventional failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method for criticality assessment, the authors propose a new hybrid model combining different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used to construct a criticality matrix and calculate the weights of different criteria based on five criticalities: personnel, equipment, time, cost and quality. In addition, a preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) method is used to improve the prioritization of the failure modes. A comparative work in which the robust data envelopment analysis (RDEA)-FMEA approach was used to evaluate the validity and effectiveness of the suggested approach and simplify the comparative analysis. Findings This work aims to highlight the real case study of the automotive parts industry. Using this analysis enables assessing the risk efficiently and gives an alternative ranking to that acquired by the traditional FMEA method. The obtained findings offer that combining of two multi-criteria decision approaches and integrating their outcomes allow for instilling confidence in decision-makers concerning the risk assessment and the ranking of the different failure modes. Originality/value This research gives encouraging outcomes concerning the risk assessment and failure modes ranking in order to reduce the frequency of occurrence and gravity of the undesired events by handling different forms of uncertainty and divergent judgments of experts.","PeriodicalId":14193,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A hybrid integrated multi-criteria decision-making approach for risk assessment: a study of automotive parts industry\",\"authors\":\"Ammar Chakhrit, Mohammed Bougofa, Islam Hadj Mohamed Guetarni, Abderraouf Bouafia, Rabeh Kharzi, Naima Nehal, Mohammed Chennoufi\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijqrm-01-2023-0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose This paper aims to enable the analysts of reliability and safety systems to evaluate the risk and prioritize failure modes ideally to prefer measures for reducing the risk of undesired events. Design/methodology/approach To address the constraints considered in the conventional failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method for criticality assessment, the authors propose a new hybrid model combining different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used to construct a criticality matrix and calculate the weights of different criteria based on five criticalities: personnel, equipment, time, cost and quality. In addition, a preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) method is used to improve the prioritization of the failure modes. A comparative work in which the robust data envelopment analysis (RDEA)-FMEA approach was used to evaluate the validity and effectiveness of the suggested approach and simplify the comparative analysis. Findings This work aims to highlight the real case study of the automotive parts industry. Using this analysis enables assessing the risk efficiently and gives an alternative ranking to that acquired by the traditional FMEA method. The obtained findings offer that combining of two multi-criteria decision approaches and integrating their outcomes allow for instilling confidence in decision-makers concerning the risk assessment and the ranking of the different failure modes. Originality/value This research gives encouraging outcomes concerning the risk assessment and failure modes ranking in order to reduce the frequency of occurrence and gravity of the undesired events by handling different forms of uncertainty and divergent judgments of experts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqrm-01-2023-0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqrm-01-2023-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文旨在使可靠性和安全系统的分析人员能够评估风险并确定理想的失效模式,以选择减少意外事件风险的措施。设计/方法/途径为解决传统失效模式与影响分析(FMEA)方法在临界性评估中所考虑的约束,作者提出了一种结合不同多准则决策(MCDM)方法的混合模型。采用层次分析法(AHP)构建关键度矩阵,并根据人员、设备、时间、成本和质量五个关键度计算不同准则的权重。此外,利用富集评价的偏好排序组织方法(PROMETHEE)提高了失效模式的优先级。采用稳健数据包络分析(RDEA)-FMEA方法对建议方法的有效性和有效性进行了评价,简化了比较分析。本研究旨在突出汽车零部件行业的真实案例研究。使用这种分析可以有效地评估风险,并提供了传统FMEA方法所获得的替代排名。所获得的研究结果表明,将两种多准则决策方法结合起来并整合其结果,可以使决策者对风险评估和不同失效模式的排序产生信心。独创性/价值本研究通过处理不同形式的不确定性和专家判断的分歧,在风险评估和失效模式排序方面取得了令人鼓舞的结果,以减少不良事件的发生频率和严重性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A hybrid integrated multi-criteria decision-making approach for risk assessment: a study of automotive parts industry
Purpose This paper aims to enable the analysts of reliability and safety systems to evaluate the risk and prioritize failure modes ideally to prefer measures for reducing the risk of undesired events. Design/methodology/approach To address the constraints considered in the conventional failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method for criticality assessment, the authors propose a new hybrid model combining different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used to construct a criticality matrix and calculate the weights of different criteria based on five criticalities: personnel, equipment, time, cost and quality. In addition, a preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) method is used to improve the prioritization of the failure modes. A comparative work in which the robust data envelopment analysis (RDEA)-FMEA approach was used to evaluate the validity and effectiveness of the suggested approach and simplify the comparative analysis. Findings This work aims to highlight the real case study of the automotive parts industry. Using this analysis enables assessing the risk efficiently and gives an alternative ranking to that acquired by the traditional FMEA method. The obtained findings offer that combining of two multi-criteria decision approaches and integrating their outcomes allow for instilling confidence in decision-makers concerning the risk assessment and the ranking of the different failure modes. Originality/value This research gives encouraging outcomes concerning the risk assessment and failure modes ranking in order to reduce the frequency of occurrence and gravity of the undesired events by handling different forms of uncertainty and divergent judgments of experts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: In today''s competitive business and industrial environment, it is essential to have an academic journal offering the most current theoretical knowledge on quality and reliability to ensure that top management is fully conversant with new thinking, techniques and developments in the field. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management (IJQRM) deals with all aspects of business improvements and with all aspects of manufacturing and services, from the training of (senior) managers, to innovations in organising and processing to raise standards of product and service quality. It is this unique blend of theoretical knowledge and managerial relevance that makes IJQRM a valuable resource for managers striving for higher standards.Coverage includes: -Reliability, availability & maintenance -Gauging, calibration & measurement -Life cycle costing & sustainability -Reliability Management of Systems -Service Quality -Green Marketing -Product liability -Product testing techniques & systems -Quality function deployment -Reliability & quality education & training -Productivity improvement -Performance improvement -(Regulatory) standards for quality & Quality Awards -Statistical process control -System modelling -Teamwork -Quality data & datamining
期刊最新文献
Appraise the role of novelty-seeking on consumers’ satisfaction using online food delivery applications The influence of library service quality, library image, place, personal control and trust on loyalty: the mediating role of perceived service value and satisfaction The impact of quality on health-insurance users' satisfaction in Saudi Arabia: the mediating role of brand image and utilitarian value Proposal of a facilitating methodology for fuzzy FMEA implementation with application in process risk analysis in the aeronautical sector Critical failure factors for Quality 4.0: an exploratory qualitative study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1