A minimum cost consensus-based failure mode and effect analysis framework considering experts’ limited compromise and tolerance behaviors

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.This study proposes a minimum cost consensus-based failure mode and effect analysis (MCC-FMEA) framework considering experts’ limited compromise and tolerance behaviors, where the first behavior indicates that an FMEA expert might not tolerate modifying his/her risk assessment without limitations, and the second behavior indicates that an FMEA expert will accept risk assessment suggestions without being paid for any cost if the suggested risk assessments fall within his/her tolerance threshold. First, an MCC-FMEA with limited compromise behaviors is presented. Second, experts’ tolerance behaviors are added to the MCC-FMEA with limited compromise behaviors. Theoretical results indicate that in some cases, this MCC-FMEA with limited compromise and tolerance behaviors has no solution. Thus, a minimum compromise adjustment consensus model and a maximum consensus model with limited compromise behaviors are developed and analyzed, and an interactive MCC-FMEA framework, resulting in a FMEA problem consensual collective solution, is designed. A case study, regarding the assessment of COVID-19-related risk in radiation oncology, and a detailed sensitivity and comparative analysis with existing FMEA approaches are provided to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach to FMEA consensus- reachin

A perceptual computing-based method to prioritize failure modes in failure mode and effect analysis and its application to edible bird nest farming

A failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) procedure that incorporates a novel Perceptual Computing (Per-C)–based Risk Priority Number (RPN) model is proposed in this paper. The proposed model considers linguistic uncertainties and vagueness of words, because it is more natural to use words, instead of numerals, for an FMEA user to express his/her knowledge when he/she provides an assessment. Therefore, it is important to consider the inherited uncertainties in words used by humans for assessment as an additional risk factor in the entire FMEA reasoning process. As such, we propose to use Per-C to analyze the uncertainties in words provided by different FMEA users. There are three potential sources of risks. Firstly, the risk factors of Severity (S), Occurrence (O), and Detection (D) are graded using words by each FMEA user, and indicated as interval type-2 fuzzy sets (IT2FSs). Secondly, the relative importance of S, O, and D are reflected by the weights given by each FMEA user in words, which are indicated as IT2FSs. Thirdly, the expertise level of each FMEA user is reflected by words, which are expressed as IT2FSs too. The proposed Per-C-RPN model allows these three sources of risks from each FMEA user to be considered and combined in terms of IT2FSs. A case study related to edible bird nest farming in Borneo Island is reported. The results indicate the effectiveness of the proposed model. In summary, this paper contributes to a new Per-C-RPN model that utilizes imprecise assessment grades pertaining to group decision making in FMEA

Analisis Konsistensi Hasil Risiko Teknologi Informasi Failure Mode And Effect Analysis (FMEA)

Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) merupakan salah satu metode dalam manajemen risiko yang dapat digunakan dalam berbagai bidang seperti industri manufaktur dan jasa, organisasi profit dan non profit, organisasi private, publik, ataupun organisasi pemerintahan. Beberapa penelitian mengkritisi metode FMEA karena terdapatnya limitasi atau kelemahan dari penggunaan FMEA terutama pada isu konsistensi. Jika FMEA digunakan secara tidak tepat atau terdapatnya hasil yang tidak konsisten, akan memberikan kerugian pada organisasi. Hal ini dikarenakan, prioritas risiko membutuhkan biaya yang lebih besar pada risiko peringkat tertinggi. Perbedaan peringkat risiko tersebut dapat terjadi kesalahan dalam pencegahan atau fokus penanganan. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk memberikan kontribusi penelitian dengan mensintesis kerangka FMEA untuk meminimalisir isu konsistensi dan subjektifitas dalam manajemen risiko. Penelitian ini menggunakan dua siklus action resereach (plan, act, observe, reflect). Siklus pertama pada action research untuk menguji dan membuktikan konsistensi FMEA Tradisional. Tahapan dalam analisis konsistensi adalah dengan menganalisa risiko TI oleh dua tim yang berbeda pada studi kasus yang sama. Perbedaan peringkat risiko yang dilakukan oleh kedua tim akan dianalisis kesenjangannya dan diberikan usulan perbaikan. Kemudian dilanjutkan dengan siklus action research yang kedua, yaitu untuk mengimplementasikan kerangka FMEA yang telah disintesiskan. Tahapan awal dengan melakukan sintesis kerangka FMEA yang diperbaiki berdasarkan hasil analisis gap dan studi literatur yang dilakukan. Kemudian, perbaikan kerangka FMEA tersebut diimplementasikan kembali sebagai validasi empiris. FMEA Tradisional berdasarkan hasil action research siklus pertama terbukti tidak konsisten. Hal ini dikarenakan hasil RPN tim pertama terdapat 3 risiko pada tingkatan very high sedangkan tim kedua terdapat 7 risiko pada tingkatan very high. Pada siklus action research 2 terbukti bahwa hasil pengukuran risiko dengan FMEA improvement lebih konsisten. Hasil RPN yang didapatkan oleh kedua tim adalah sama, sehingga dapat disimpulkan kelemahan FMEA dapat terminimalisir dengan menerapkan kerangka perbaikan FMEA Improvement. ========================================================================================================== Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) was one of the methods in risk management that could be used in various fields such as manufacturing and service industries, profit and non profit organizations, private organizations, public, or governmental organizations. Some studies have criticized the FMEA method because of the limitation or weakness of FMEA usage, especially on the issue of consistency. If FMEA is used improperly or inconsistent results will result in loss to the organization. This was because, the priority of risk requires a greater cost at the highest risk of ranking. These risk ranking differences could occur errors in prevention or focus on handling. The purpose of this study was to contribute research by synthesizing the FMEA framework to minimize the issue of consistency and subjectivity in risk management. This research used two cycles of action resereach (plan, act, observe, reflect). The first cycle in action research to test and prove the consistency of Traditional FMEA. The stages in the consistency analysis were to analyze IT risk by two different teams in the same case study. Differences in risk ratings made by both teams would be analyzed for gaps and proposed improvements. In the second action research cycle, the process was to implement the synthesized FMEA framework. Initial stages by performing an improved FMEA frame synthesis based on gap analysis results and literature studies conducted. Then, the improvement of the FMEA framework was re-implemented as empirical validation. Traditional FMEA based on the results of the first action research cycle proved inconsistent. This was because the first team RPN had 3 risks at very high levels while the second team had 7 risks at very high levels. In the second action research cycle, it was proven that risk measurement result with FMEA improvement was more consistent. The RPN results obtained by both teams were similar, so it could be concluded that FMEA weakness could be minimized by applying the FMEA Improvement methodology