Alternative sweetener from curculigo fruits

This study gives an overview on the advantages of Curculigo Latifolia as an alternative sweetener and a health product. The purpose of this research is to provide another option to the people who suffer from diabetes. In this research, Curculigo Latifolia was chosen, due to its unique properties and widely known species in Malaysia. In order to obtain the sweet protein from the fruit, it must go through a couple of procedures. First we harvested the fruits from the Curculigo trees that grow wildly in the garden. Next, the Curculigo fruits were dried in the oven at 50 0C for 3 days. Finally, the dried fruits were blended in order to get a fine powder. Curculin is a sweet protein with a taste-modifying activity of converting sourness to sweetness. The curculin content from the sample shown are directly proportional to the mass of the Curculigo fine powder. While the FTIR result shows that the sample spectrum at peak 1634 cm–1 contains secondary amines. At peak 3307 cm–1 contains alkynes

Prioritizing Human Factors in Emergency Conditions Using AHP Model and FMEA

One of the most critical issues related to safety in industrial plant is to manage accidents that occur in industries. In general, the causes of accidents are twofold: the presence of dangerous equipment and human errors. The aim of this study is to propose a novel approach to ensure safety in emergency conditions in industrial plant considering both of these factors. The proposed idea aims to integrate the human reliability analysis (HRA) and the failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA). The human errors and failure modes are categorized using a multicriteria approach based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The final aim is to present a novel methodological approach based on AHP to prioritize actions to carry out in emergency conditions taking into account both qualitative and quantitative factors. A real case study is analyzed. The analysis allowed to identify possible failure modes connected with human error process

A MODIFIED FMEA APPROACH BASED INTEGRATED DECISION FRAMEWORK FOR OVERCOMING THE PROBLEMS OF SUDDEN FAILURE AND ACCIDENTAL HAZARDS IN TURBINE AND ALTERNATOR UNIT

The proposed work presents a novel integrated decision framework, based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy (IF)- Failure Mode & Effect Analysis (IF-FMEA), and IF-Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (IF-TOPSIS) approaches for analysing the failure risk issues of Turbine and Alternator Unit (TAU) in a chemical treatment-based sugar process industry. The proposed novel IF-FMEA approach-based modelling overcomes the various demerits of traditional FMEA approaches which are faced during the identification of critical failure causes based on Risk Priority Number (RPN) outputs. On the basis of detailed qualitative information related to plant operation, FMEA sheet was developed and linguistic ratings were collected against three risk factors such as probability of Occurrence (O), Severity (S), and Detection (D). IF- Hybrid Weighted Euclidean Distance (IFHWED) score has been computed to rank all listed failure causes under three risk factors. The ranking results based on IF-FMEA approach has been compared with the well existed IF-TOPSIS approach for evaluating the accuracy of proposed modelling results. Sensitivity analysis has been also done for checking the robustness of the framework. The analysis results were provided to maintenance executives of the TAU unit to frame optimum maintenance plan for overcoming the problems of sudden breakdown. The analysis results are also applicable to TAU systems which are installed in other chemical process industries globally.

Integrated Risk Assessment on Argon Purification Unit Based on FMECA and Fuzzy-AHP

Argon Purification Unit is a processing unit to purify the crude argon using hydrogen gas through an automatic machinery process. Based on the hazardous material and its automatic machinery process, the argon purification unit needs to be assessed for risk control consideration and business performance. This research proposed risk assessment of argon purification unit based on the failure modes using Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) with Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy-AHP) approach to minimize the risks and losses. In this research, FMECA is used to identify the potential failure modes, failure mechanism (causes), potential failure effects for each unit component and evaluate the risk by determining risk priority number (RPN). The RPN is the product of severity, occurrence, and detection variables. Then, Fuzzy-AHP is used to determine the weight of each variable based on its hierarchy. The fuzzy-AHP approach aims to increase validity and decrease expert judgment subjectivity in the risk assessment process for each failure mode by considering variables’ weight. The result of RPN is gained by multiplying each failure mode’s variables by considering the importance of variables. This research results weight of severity is 0.43, which is the highest of all variables. The highest RPN is 8.76, shown by the leaked joint of the argon compressor. This research indicates that the application of the fuzzy-AHP approach in FMECA can identify and evaluate the potential risk of the Argon Purification Unit validly and objectively, which provides the different weight of RPN variables

Fuzzy FMECA Process Analysis for Managing the Risks in the Lifecycle of a CBCT Scanner

The Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) is one of the risk analysis techniques proposed by the ISO 14971 Standard. This analysis allows to identify and assess the consequences of faults that affect each component of a complex system. The FMECA is a forward-type technique used for highlighting critical points and classifying them by priority. It also makes it possible to evaluate the extent of failures by means of numerical indices. It can be applied to a product or to a work process. In the latter case we talk about Process-FMECA. The application of the Process-FMECA to bioengineering is of particular interest because this procedure provides an analysis related to risk management during all the different phases of the medical device life cycle. However, practical applications of this method have revealed some shortcomings that can lead to inaccuracies and inconsistencies regarding the risk analysis and consequent risk prioritization. This paper presents an example of application of a Fuzzy Process-FMECA, an improved Process-FMECA based on fuzzy logic, to a small computerized tomography (CT) device prototype designed for studying the extremities of the human body. This prototype is a CT device that uses the Cone Beam CT (CBCT) technology. The Fuzzy Process-FMECA analysis has made it possible to produce a table of risks, that are quantified according to the specifications of the method. The analysis has shown that each phase or activity is fundamental to guarantee a correct functioning of the device. The methodology applied to this specific device can be paradigmatic for analyzing the process risks for any other medical device

Assessing Supply Chain Risks in the Automotive Industry through a Modified MCDM-Based FMECA

[EN] Supply chains are complex networks that receive assiduous attention in the literature. Like any complex network, a supply chain is subject to a wide variety of risks that can result in significant economic losses and negative impacts in terms of image and prestige for companies. In circumstances of aggressive competition among companies, effective management of supply chain risks (SCRs) is crucial, and is currently a very active field of research. Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) has been recently extended to SCR identification and prioritization, aiming at reducing potential losses caused by lack of risk control. This article has a twofold objective. First, SCR assessment is investigated, and a comprehensive list of specific risks related to the automotive industry is compiled to extend the set of most commonly considered risks. Second, an alternative way of calculating the Risk Priority Number (RPN) is proposed within the FMECA framework by means of an integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach. We give a new calculation procedure by making use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to derive factors weights, and then the fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) to evaluate the new factor of "dependence" among the risks. The developed joint analysis constitutes a risk analysis support tool for criticality in systems engineering. The approach also deals with uncertainty and vagueness associated with input data through the use of fuzzy numbers. The results obtained from a relevant case study in the automotive industry showcase the effectiveness of this approach, which brings important value to those companies: When planning interventions of prevention/mitigation, primary importance should be given to (1) supply chain disruptions due to natural disasters; (2) manufacturing facilities, human resources, policies and breakdown processes; and (3) inefficient transport.Mzougui, I.; Carpitella, S.; Certa, A.; El Felsoufi, Z.; Izquierdo Sebastián, J. (2020). Assessing Supply Chain Risks in the Automotive Industry through a Modified MCDM-Based FMECA. Processes. 8(5):1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8050579S12285Tian, Q., & Guo, W. (2019). Reconfiguration of manufacturing supply chains considering outsourcing decisions and supply chain risks. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 52, 217-226. doi:10.1016/j.jmsy.2019.04.005Wu, Y., Jia, W., Li, L., Song, Z., Xu, C., & Liu, F. (2019). Risk assessment of electric vehicle supply chain based on fuzzy synthetic evaluation. Energy, 182, 397-411. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.007Garvey, M. D., & Carnovale, S. (2020). The rippled newsvendor: A new inventory framework for modeling supply chain risk severity in the presence of risk propagation. International Journal of Production Economics, 228, 107752. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107752Kern, D., Moser, R., Hartmann, E., & Moder, M. (2012). Supply risk management: model development and empirical analysis. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 42(1), 60-82. doi:10.1108/09600031211202472Wang, H., Gu, T., Jin, M., Zhao, R., & Wang, G. (2018). The complexity measurement and evolution analysis of supply chain network under disruption risks. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 116, 72-78. doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2018.09.018Ghoshal, S. (1987). Global strategy: An organizing framework. Strategic Management Journal, 8(5), 425-440. doi:10.1002/smj.4250080503Schoenherr, T., Rao Tummala, V. M., & Harrison, T. P. (2008). Assessing supply chain risks with the analytic hierarchy process: Providing decision support for the offshoring decision by a US manufacturing company. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 14(2), 100-111. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.008Xu, M., Cui, Y., Hu, M., Xu, X., Zhang, Z., Liang, S., & Qu, S. (2019). Supply chain sustainability risk and assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 225, 857-867. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.307Tang, C., & Tomlin, B. (2008). The power of flexibility for mitigating supply chain risks. International Journal of Production Economics, 116(1), 12-27. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.07.008Ghadge, A., Dani, S., & Kalawsky, R. (2012). Supply chain risk management: present and future scope. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 23(3), 313-339. doi:10.1108/09574091211289200Ho, W. (2008). Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications – A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(1), 211-228. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.004Lolli, F., Ishizaka, A., Gamberini, R., & Rimini, B. (2017). A multicriteria framework for inventory classification and control with application to intermittent demand. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 24(5-6), 275-285. doi:10.1002/mcda.1620Żak, J., & Kruszyński, M. (2015). Application of AHP and ELECTRE III/IV Methods to Multiple Level, Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Urban Transportation Projects. Transportation Research Procedia, 10, 820-830. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2015.09.035Zaidan, A. A., Zaidan, B. B., Al-Haiqi, A., Kiah, M. L. M., Hussain, M., & Abdulnabi, M. (2015). Evaluation and selection of open-source EMR software packages based on integrated AHP and TOPSIS. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 53, 390-404. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2014.11.012Chang, K.-H., Chang, Y.-C., & Lee, Y.-T. (2014). Integrating TOPSIS and DEMATEL Methods to Rank the Risk of Failure of FMEA. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 13(06), 1229-1257. doi:10.1142/s0219622014500758Nazeri, A., & Naderikia, R. (2017). A new fuzzy approach to identify the critical risk factors in maintenance management. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 92(9-12), 3749-3783. doi:10.1007/s00170-017-0222-4Liu, H.-C., You, J.-X., Lin, Q.-L., & Li, H. (2014). Risk assessment in system FMEA combining fuzzy weighted average with fuzzy decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 28(7), 701-714. doi:10.1080/0951192x.2014.900865Muhammad, M. N., & Cavus, N. (2017). Fuzzy DEMATEL method for identifying LMS evaluation criteria. Procedia Computer Science, 120, 742-749. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.304Chang, K.-H., & Cheng, C.-H. (2009). Evaluating the risk of failure using the fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL method. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(2), 113-129. doi:10.1007/s10845-009-0266-xMarch, J. G., & Shapira, Z. (1987). Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking. Management Science, 33(11), 1404-1418. doi:10.1287/mnsc.33.11.1404Blos, M. F., Quaddus, M., Wee, H. M., & Watanabe, K. (2009). Supply chain risk management (SCRM): a case study on the automotive and electronic industries in Brazil. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(4), 247-252. doi:10.1108/13598540910970072Hallikas, J., Karvonen, I., Pulkkinen, U., Virolainen, V.-M., & Tuominen, M. (2004). Risk management processes in supplier networks. International Journal of Production Economics, 90(1), 47-58. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.02.007Jüttner, U. (2005). Supply chain risk management. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 16(1), 120-141. doi:10.1108/09574090510617385Gary Teng, S., Ho, S. M., Shumar, D., & Liu, P. C. (2006). Implementing FMEA in a collaborative supply chain environment. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 23(2), 179-196. doi:10.1108/02656710610640943Jüttner, U., Peck, H., & Christopher, M. (2003). Supply chain risk management: outlining an agenda for future research. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 6(4), 197-210. doi:10.1080/13675560310001627016Sodhi, M. S., Son, B.-G., & Tang, C. S. (2011). Researchers’ Perspectives on Supply Chain Risk Management. Production and Operations Management, 21(1), 1-13. doi:10.1111/j.1937-5956.2011.01251.xWagner, S. M., & Bode, C. (2006). An empirical investigation into supply chain vulnerability. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 12(6), 301-312. doi:10.1016/j.pursup.2007.01.004Manuj, I., & Mentzer, J. T. (2008). Global supply chain risk management strategies. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(3), 192-223. doi:10.1108/09600030810866986Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., Marcucci, G., & Mazzuto, G. (2019). Fuzzy cognitive maps approach for analysing the domino effect of factors affecting supply chain resilience: a fashion industry case study. International Journal of Production Research, 58(20), 6370-6398. doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1680893Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., Marcucci, G., & Mazzuto, G. (2018). Conceptual model for analysing domino effect among concepts affecting supply chain resilience. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 19(4), 282-299. doi:10.1080/16258312.2018.1537504Hsieh, C. Y., Wee, H. M., & Chen, A. (2016). Resilient logistics to mitigate supply chain uncertainty: A case study of an automotive company. Scientia Iranica, 23(5), 2287-2296. doi:10.24200/sci.2016.3957Lotfi, M., & Saghiri, S. (2018). Disentangling resilience, agility and leanness. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 29(1), 168-197. doi:10.1108/jmtm-01-2017-0014Marasova, D., Andrejiova, M., & Grincova, A. (2017). Applying the Heuristic to the Risk Assessment within the Automotive Industry Supply Chain. Open Engineering, 7(1), 43-49. doi:10.1515/eng-2017-0007Pandey, A. K., & Sharma, R. K. (2017). FMEA-based interpretive structural modelling approach to model automotive supply chain risk. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 27(4), 395. doi:10.1504/ijlsm.2017.085221Vujović, A., Đorđević, A., Gojković, R., & Borota, M. (2017). ABC Classification of Risk Factors in Production Supply Chains with Uncertain Data. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2017, 1-11. doi:10.1155/2017/4931797Aven, T. (2012). The risk concept—historical and recent development trends. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 99, 33-44. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.006Chang, D., & Paul Sun, K. (2009). Applying DEA to enhance assessment capability of FMEA. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(6), 629-643. doi:10.1108/02656710910966165Chin, K.-S., Wang, Y.-M., Ka Kwai Poon, G., & Yang, J.-B. (2009). Failure mode and effects analysis using a group-based evidential reasoning approach. Computers & Operations Research, 36(6), 1768-1779. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2008.05.002Chang, B., Chang, C.-W., & Wu, C.-H. (2011). Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1850-1858. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.114Zhang, Z., & Chu, X. (2011). Risk prioritization in failure mode and effects analysis under uncertainty. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 206-214. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.046Zhang, Y. F., Zhou, R. B., Yang, J. M., & Zhang, Z. (2014). Application of FTA-FMEA Method in Fault Diagnosis of Tracked Vehicle. Advanced Materials Research, 940, 112-115. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.940.112Liu, H.-C., Liu, L., Bian, Q.-H., Lin, Q.-L., Dong, N., & Xu, P.-C. (2011). Failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy evidential reasoning approach and grey theory. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(4), 4403-4415. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.09.110Liu, H.-C., Liu, L., Liu, N., & Mao, L.-X. (2012). Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 12926-12934. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.031Liu, Y., Fan, Z.-P., Yuan, Y., & Li, H. (2014). A FTA-based method for risk decision-making in emergency response. Computers & Operations Research, 42, 49-57. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2012.08.015Kutlu, A. C., & Ekmekçioğlu, M. (2012). Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 61-67. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.044Chang, C., Liu, P., & Wei, C. (2001). Failure mode and effects analysis using grey theory. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 12(3), 211-216. doi:10.1108/09576060110391174Bevilacqua, M., Braglia, M., & Gabbrielli, R. (2000). Monte Carlo simulation approach for a modified FMECA in a power plant. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 16(4), 313-324. doi:10.1002/1099-1638(200007/08)16:43.0.co;2-uLai, G., Debo, L. G., & Sycara, K. (2009). Sharing inventory risk in supply chain: The implication of financial constraint. Omega, 37(4), 811-825. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2008.06.003Carpitella, S., Certa, A., Izquierdo, J., & La Fata, C. M. (2018). A combined multi-criteria approach to support FMECA analyses: A real-world case. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 169, 394-402. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2017.09.017Mahmoudi, S., Jalali, A., Ahmadi, M., Abasi, P., & Salari, N. (2019). Identifying critical success factors in Heart Failure Self-Care using fuzzy DEMATEL method. Applied Soft Computing, 84, 105729. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2019.10572

Statistical Process Control (SPC) and Fuzzy-Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (F-FMEA) Approaches to Reduce Reject Products in Wine Bottle Rack Production Process at PT Alis Jaya Ciptatama

PT Alis Jaya Ciptatama (AJC) is a company engaged in the furniture industry, where the products are exported. One of the products from PT AJC is a wine bottle rack. In the production of wine bottle racks at PT AJC, many product defects were found. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct further research to determine the quality of the product, so that the correct product quality improvement is obtained. The purpose of this study was to determine the limits of statistical control and the factors causing defects in wine bottle racks so that the quality improvement provided was right on target. The methods used in this research are Statistical Process Control (SPC) and Fuzzy Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (F-FMEA). SPC method is used to determine statistical control limits and factors causing product defects. The F-FMEA method is used to determine the priority of improvement in improving the quality of wine bottle racks. The results of the research related to the statistical control limits of the SPC method were obtained that the defective data were outside the statistical control limits. While the results of research related to the causes of product failure using the SPC method are human, machine, material, environmental, method, and measurement factors. Factors causing product failure were analyzed using the F-FMEA method so that improvement priorities were obtained, namely the lack of experience of workers with an FRPN value of 269.33. Improvements that need to be made by PT AJC include providing training to mill 1 workers and splitting the logs

RISK PRIORITY EVALUATION OF POWER TRANSFORMER PARTS BASED ON HYBRID FMEA FRAMEWORK UNDER HESITANT FUZZY ENVIRONMENT

The power transformer is one of the most critical facilities in the power system, and its running status directly impacts the power system's security. It is essential to research the risk priority evaluation of the power transformer parts. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a methodology for analyzing the potential failure modes (FMs) within a system in various industrial devices. This study puts forward a hybrid FMEA framework integrating novel hesitant fuzzy aggregation tools and CRITIC (Criteria Importance Through Inter-criteria Correlation) method. In this framework, the hesitant fuzzy sets (HFSs) are used to depict the uncertainty in risk evaluation. Then, an improved HFWA (hesitant fuzzy weighted averaging) operator is adopted to fuse risk evaluation for FMEA experts. This aggregation manner can consider different lengths of HFSs and the support degrees among the FMEA experts. Next, the novel HFWGA (hesitant fuzzy weighted geometric averaging) operator with CRITIC weights is developed to determine the risk priority of each FM. This method can satisfy the multiplicative characteristic of the RPN (risk priority number) method of the conventional FMEA model and reflect the correlations between risk indicators. Finally, a real example of the risk priority evaluation of power transformer parts is given to show the applicability and feasibility of the proposed hybrid FMEA framework. Comparison and sensitivity studies are also offered to verify the effectiveness of the improved risk assessment approach

A Hybrid Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Model to Evaluate the Overall Performance of Public Emergency Departments: A Case Study

[EN] Performance evaluation is relevant for supporting managerial decisions related to the improvement of public emergency departments (EDs). As different criteria from ED context and several alternatives need to be considered, selecting a suitable Multicriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach has become a crucial step for ED performance evaluation. Although some methodologies have been proposed to address this challenge, a more complete approach is still lacking. This paper bridges this gap by integrating three potent MCDM methods. First, the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) is used to determine the criteria and sub-criteria weights under uncertainty, followed by the interdependence evaluation via fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory(FDEMATEL). The fuzzy logic is merged with AHP and DEMATEL to illustrate vague judgments. Finally, the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is used for ranking EDs. This approach is validated in a real 3-ED cluster. The results revealed the critical role of Infrastructure (21.5%) in ED performance and the interactive nature of Patient safety (C+R =12.771). Furthermore, this paper evidences the weaknesses to be tackled for upgrading the performance of each ED.Ortiz-Barrios, M.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ. (2020). A Hybrid Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Model to Evaluate the Overall Performance of Public Emergency Departments: A Case Study. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making. 19(6):1485-1548. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622020500364S14851548196Lord, K., Parwani, V., Ulrich, A., Finn, E. B., Rothenberg, C., Emerson, B., … Venkatesh, A. K. (2018). Emergency department boarding and adverse hospitalization outcomes among patients admitted to a general medical service. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 36(7), 1246-1248. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2018.03.043Sørup, C. M., Jacobsen, P., & Forberg, J. L. (2013). Evaluation of emergency department performance – a systematic review on recommended performance and quality-in-care measures. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 21(1). doi:10.1186/1757-7241-21-62Farokhi, S., & Roghanian, E. (2018). Determining quantitative targets for performance measures in the balanced scorecard method using response surface methodology. Management Decision, 56(9), 2006-2037. doi:10.1108/md-08-2017-0772Ortiz Barrios, M. A., & Felizzola Jiménez, H. (2016). Use of Six Sigma Methodology to Reduce Appointment Lead-Time in Obstetrics Outpatient Department. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(10). doi:10.1007/s10916-016-0577-3Sunder M., V., Ganesh, L. S., & Marathe, R. R. (2018). A morphological analysis of research literature on Lean Six Sigma for services. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(1), 149-182. doi:10.1108/ijopm-05-2016-0273Bergeron, B. P. (2017). Performance Management in Healthcare. doi:10.4324/9781315102214Santos, S. P., Belton, V., Howick, S., & Pilkington, M. (2018). Measuring organisational performance using a mix of OR methods. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 18-30. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.028Ho, W., & Ma, X. (2018). The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 267(2), 399-414. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.09.007Dargi, A., Anjomshoae, A., Galankashi, M. R., Memari, A., & Tap, M. B. M. (2014). Supplier Selection: A Fuzzy-ANP Approach. Procedia Computer Science, 31, 691-700. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.317Jing, M., Jie, Y., Shou-yi, L., & Lu, W. (2015). Application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process in the risk assessment of dangerous small-sized reservoirs. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 9(1), 113-123. doi:10.1007/s13042-015-0363-4Samanlioglu, F., Taskaya, Y. E., Gulen, U. C., & Cokcan, O. (2018). A Fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS-Based Group Decision-Making Approach to IT Personnel Selection. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 20(5), 1576-1591. doi:10.1007/s40815-018-0474-7CHEN, M.-F., TZENG, G.-H., & TANG, T.-I. (2005). FUZZY MCDM APPROACH FOR EVALUATION OF EXPATRIATE ASSIGNMENTS. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 04(02), 277-296. doi:10.1142/s0219622005001520Gul, M., Celik, E., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2016). Emergency department performance evaluation by an integrated simulation and interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM-based scenario analysis. European J. of Industrial Engineering, 10(2), 196. doi:10.1504/ejie.2016.075846Jovčić, Průša, Dobrodolac, & Švadlenka. (2019). A Proposal for a Decision-Making Tool in Third-Party Logistics (3PL) Provider Selection Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis and the Fuzzy Approach. Sustainability, 11(15), 4236. doi:10.3390/su11154236Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2012). Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3597-6Vargas, L. G. (2016). Voting with Intensity of Preferences. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(04), 839-859. doi:10.1142/s0219622016400058Lee, K.-C., Tsai, W.-H., Yang, C.-H., & Lin, Y.-Z. (2018). An MCDM approach for selecting green aviation fleet program management strategies under multi-resource limitations. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 76-85. doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.06.011Labib, A., & Read, M. (2015). A hybrid model for learning from failures: The Hurricane Katrina disaster. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(21), 7869-7881. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.06.020Hosseini, S., & Khaled, A. A. (2016). A hybrid ensemble and AHP approach for resilient supplier selection. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 30(1), 207-228. doi:10.1007/s10845-016-1241-yZavadskas, E. K., Govindan, K., Antucheviciene, J., & Turskis, Z. (2016). Hybrid multiple criteria decision-making methods: a review of applications for sustainability issues. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 29(1), 857-887. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2016.1237302Lolli, F., Balugani, E., Ishizaka, A., Gamberini, R., Butturi, M. A., Marinello, S., & Rimini, B. (2019). On the elicitation of criteria weights in PROMETHEE-based ranking methods for a mobile application. Expert Systems with Applications, 120, 217-227. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.11.030De Almeida Filho, A. T., Clemente, T. R. N., Morais, D. C., & de Almeida, A. T. (2018). Preference modeling experiments with surrogate weighting procedures for the PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research, 264(2), 453-461. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.006Sun, G., Guan, X., Yi, X., & Zhou, Z. (2018). An innovative TOPSIS approach based on hesitant fuzzy correlation coefficient and its applications. Applied Soft Computing, 68, 249-267. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2018.04.004Frazão, T. D. C., Camilo, D. G. G., Cabral, E. L. S., & Souza, R. P. (2018). Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in health care: a systematic review of the main characteristics and methodological steps. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 18(1). doi:10.1186/s12911-018-0663-1Ortiz-Barrios, M. A., Herrera-Fontalvo, Z., Rúa-Muñoz, J., Ojeda-Gutiérrez, S., De Felice, F., & Petrillo, A. (2018). An integrated approach to evaluate the risk of adverse events in hospital sector. Management Decision, 56(10), 2187-2224. doi:10.1108/md-09-2017-0917Al Salem, A. A., & Awasthi, A. (2018). Investigating rank reversal in reciprocal fuzzy preference relation based on additive consistency: Causes and solutions. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 115, 573-581. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2017.11.027Aires, R. F. de F., & Ferreira, L. (2019). A new approach to avoid rank reversal cases in the TOPSIS method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 132, 84-97. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2019.04.023Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. (2018). A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 61, 4-8. doi:10.1016/j.seps.2017.01.008Arya, A., & Yadav, S. P. (2017). Development of FDEA Models to Measure the Performance Efficiencies of DMUs. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 20(1), 163-173. doi:10.1007/s40815-017-0325-yMufazzal, S., & Muzakkir, S. M. (2018). A new multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 119, 427-438. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.045Kaliszewski, I., & Podkopaev, D. (2016). Simple additive weighting—A metamodel for multiple criteria decision analysis methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 54, 155-161. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.01.042Mousavi-Nasab, S. H., & Sotoudeh-Anvari, A. (2018). A new multi-criteria decision making approach for sustainable material selection problem: A critical study on rank reversal problem. Journal of Cleaner Production, 182, 466-484. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.062Chen, Z., Ming, X., Zhang, X., Yin, D., & Sun, Z. (2019). A rough-fuzzy DEMATEL-ANP method for evaluating sustainable value requirement of product service system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 228, 485-508. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.145Jumaah, F. M., Zadain, A. A., Zaidan, B. B., Hamzah, A. K., & Bahbibi, R. (2018). Decision-making solution based multi-measurement design parameter for optimization of GPS receiver tracking channels in static and dynamic real-time positioning multipath environment. Measurement, 118, 83-95. doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2018.01.011Singh, A., & Prasher, A. (2017). Measuring healthcare service quality from patients’ perspective: using Fuzzy AHP application. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(3-4), 284-300. doi:10.1080/14783363.2017.1302794Otay, İ., Oztaysi, B., Cevik Onar, S., & Kahraman, C. (2017). Multi-expert performance evaluation of healthcare institutions using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy AHP&DEA methodology. Knowledge-Based Systems, 133, 90-106. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2017.06.028Awasthi, A., Govindan, K., & Gold, S. (2018). Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 106-117. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.10.013Gul, M., Guneri, A. F., & Nasirli, S. M. (2018). A fuzzy-based model for risk assessment of routes in oil transportation. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 16(8), 4671-4686. doi:10.1007/s13762-018-2078-zKazancoglu, Y., Kazancoglu, I., & Sagnak, M. (2018). Fuzzy DEMATEL-based green supply chain management performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 118(2), 412-431. doi:10.1108/imds-03-2017-0121Abdullah, L., & Zulkifli, N. (2015). Integration of fuzzy AHP and interval type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL: An application to human resource management. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(9), 4397-4409. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.021Ashtiani, M., & Azgomi, M. A. (2016). A hesitant fuzzy model of computational trust considering hesitancy, vagueness and uncertainty. Applied Soft Computing, 42, 18-37. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2016.01.023Zyoud, S. H., & Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2017). A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Systems with Applications, 78, 158-181. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016Scholz, S., Ngoli, B., & Flessa, S. (2015). Rapid assessment of infrastructure of primary health care facilities – a relevant instrument for health care systems management. BMC Health Services Research, 15(1). doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0838-8Ivlev, I., Vacek, J., & Kneppo, P. (2015). Multi-criteria decision analysis for supporting the selection of medical devices under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 247(1), 216-228. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.075Kovacs, E., Strobl, R., Phillips, A., Stephan, A.-J., Müller, M., Gensichen, J., & Grill, E. (2018). Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Implementation Strategies for Non-communicable Disease Guidelines in Primary Health Care. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(7), 1142-1154. doi:10.1007/s11606-018-4435-5Morley, C., Unwin, M., Peterson, G. M., Stankovich, J., & Kinsman, L. (2018). Emergency department crowding: A systematic review of causes, consequences and solutions. PLOS ONE, 13(8), e0203316. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203316Hermann, R. M., Long, E., & Trotta, R. L. (2019). Improving Patients’ Experiences Communicating With Nurses and Providers in the Emergency Department. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 45(5), 523-530. doi:10.1016/j.jen.2018.12.001Hawley, K. L., Mazer-Amirshahi, M., Zocchi, M. S., Fox, E. R., & Pines, J. M. (2015). Longitudinal Trends in U.S. Drug Shortages for Medications Used in Emergency Departments (2001-2014). Academic Emergency Medicine, 23(1), 63-69. doi:10.1111/acem.12838Stang, A. S., Crotts, J., Johnson, D. W., Hartling, L., & Guttmann, A. (2015). Crowding Measures Associated With the Quality of Emergency Department Care: A Systematic Review. Academic Emergency Medicine, 22(6), 643-656. doi:10.1111/acem.12682Chanamool, N., & Naenna, T. (2016). Fuzzy FMEA application to improve decision-making process in an emergency department. Applied Soft Computing, 43, 441-453. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2016.01.007Farup, P. G. (2015). Are measurements of patient safety culture and adverse events valid and reliable? Results from a cross sectional study. BMC Health Services Research, 15(1). doi:10.1186/s12913-015-0852-xCarter, E. J., Pouch, S. M., & Larson, E. L. (2013). The Relationship Between Emergency Department Crowding and Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 46(2), 106-115. doi:10.1111/jnu.12055Ebben, R. H. A., Siqeca, F., Madsen, U. R., Vloet, L. C. M., & van Achterberg, T. (2018). Effectiveness of implementation strategies for the improvement of guideline and protocol adherence in emergency care: a systematic review. BMJ Open, 8(11), e017572. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017572Innes, G. D., Sivilotti, M. L. A., Ovens, H., McLelland, K., Dukelow, A., Kwok, E., … Chochinov, A. (2018). Emergency overcrowding and access block: A smaller problem than we think. CJEM, 21(2), 177-185. doi:10.1017/cem.2018.446Di Somma, S., Paladino, L., Vaughan, L., Lalle, I., Magrini, L., & Magnanti, M. (2014). Overcrowding in emergency department: an international issue. Internal and Emergency Medicine, 10(2), 171-175. doi:10.1007/s11739-014-1154-8Uthman, O. A., Walker, C., Lahiri, S., Jenkinson, D., Adekanmbi, V., Robertson, W., & Clarke, A. (2018). General practitioners providing non-urgent care in emergency department: a natural experiment. BMJ Open, 8(5), e019736. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019736Razzak, J. A., Baqir, S. M., Khan, U. R., Heller, D., Bhatti, J., & Hyder, A. A. (2013). Emergency and trauma care in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study of healthcare levels. Emergency Medicine Journal, 32(3), 207-213. doi:10.1136/emermed-2013-202590Dart, R. C., Goldfrank, L. R., Erstad, B. L., Huang, D. T., Todd, K. H., Weitz, J., … Anderson, V. E. (2018). Expert Consensus Guidelines for Stocking of Antidotes in Hospitals That Provide Emergency Care. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 71(3), 314-325.e1. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.05.021Mkoka, D. A., Goicolea, I., Kiwara, A., Mwangu, M., & Hurtig, A.-K. (2014). Availability of drugs and medical supplies for emergency obstetric care: experience of health facility managers in a rural District of Tanzania. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 14(1). doi:10.1186/1471-2393-14-108Beck, M. J., Okerblom, D., Kumar, A., Bandyopadhyay, S., & Scalzi, L. V. (2016). Lean intervention improves patient discharge times, improves emergency department throughput and reduces congestion. Hospital Practice, 44(5), 252-259. doi:10.1080/21548331.2016.1254559Morais Oliveira, M., Marti, C., Ramlawi, M., Sarasin, F. P., Grosgurin, O., Poletti, P.-A., … Rutschmann, O. T. (2018). Impact of a patient-flow physician coordinator on waiting times and length of stay in an emergency department: A before-after cohort study. PLOS ONE, 13(12), e0209035. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209035Vermeulen, M. J., Stukel, T. A., Boozary, A. S., Guttmann, A., & Schull, M. J. (2016). The Effect of Pay for Performance in the Emergency Department on Patient Waiting Times and Quality of Care in Ontario, Canada: A Difference-in-Differences Analysis. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 67(4), 496-505.e7. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.06.028Singh, S., Lin, Y.-L., Nattinger, A. B., Kuo, Y.-F., & Goodwin, J. S. (2015). Variation in readmission rates by emergency departments and emergency department providers caring for patients after discharge. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 10(11), 705-710. doi:10.1002/jhm.2407Källberg, A.-S., Göransson, K. E., Florin, J., Östergren, J., Brixey, J. J., & Ehrenberg, A. (2015). Contributing factors to errors in Swedish emergency departments. International Emergency Nursing, 23(2), 156-161. doi:10.1016/j.ienj.2014.10.002Riga, M., Vozikis, A., Pollalis, Y., & Souliotis, K. (2015). MERIS (Medical Error Reporting Information System) as an innovative patient safety intervention: A health policy perspective. Health Policy, 119(4), 539-548. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.12.006Norman, G. R., Monteiro, S. D., Sherbino, J., Ilgen, J. S., Schmidt, H. G., & Mamede, S. (2017). The Causes of Errors in Clinical Reasoning. Academic Medicine, 92(1), 23-30. doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001421Lisbon, D., Allin, D., Cleek, C., Roop, L., Brimacombe, M., Downes, C., & Pingleton, S. K. (2014). Improved Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors After Implementation of TeamSTEPPS Training in an Academic Emergency Department. American Journal of Medical Quality, 31(1), 86-90. doi:10.1177/1062860614545123Li, L., Georgiou, A., Vecellio, E., Eigenstetter, A., Toouli, G., Wilson, R., & Westbrook, J. I. (2015). The Effect of Laboratory Testing on Emergency Department Length of Stay: A Multihospital Longitudinal Study Applying a Cross‐classified Random‐effect Modeling Approach. Academic Emergency Medicine, 22(1), 38-46. doi:10.1111/acem.12565Telem, D. A., Yang, J., Altieri, M., Patterson, W., Peoples, B., Chen, H., … Pryor, A. D. (2016). Rates and Risk Factors for Unplanned Emergency Department Utilization and Hospital Readmission Following Bariatric Surgery. Annals of Surgery, 263(5), 956-960. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001536Rigobello, M. C. G., Carvalho, R. E. F. L. de, Guerreiro, J. M., Motta, A. P. G., Atila, E., & Gimenes, F. R. E. (2017). The perception of the patient safety climate by professionals of the emergency department. International Emergency Nursing, 33, 1-6. doi:10.1016/j.ienj.2017.03.003Farmer, B. (2016). Patient Safety in the Emergency Department. Emergency Medicine, 48(9), 396-404. doi:10.12788/emed.2016.0052Liu, H.-C., You, J.-X., Zhen, L., & Fan, X.-J. (2014). A novel hybrid multiple criteria decision making model for material selection with target-based criteria. Materials & Design, 60, 380-390. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2014.03.071Kou, G., Ergu, D., & Shang, J. (2014). Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: Adapting Hadamard model to mitigate judgment contradiction. European Journal of Operational Research, 236(1), 261-271. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.035Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). Supplier evaluation and selection in fuzzy environments: a review of MADM approaches. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 1073-1118. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2017.1314828Barrios, M. A. O., De Felice, F., Negrete, K. P., Romero, B. A., Arenas, A. Y., & Petrillo, A. (2016). An AHP-Topsis Integrated Model for Selecting the Most Appropriate Tomography Equipment. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(04), 861-885. doi:10.1142/s021962201640006xYeh, D.-Y., & Cheng, C.-H. (2016). Performance Management of Taiwan’s National Hospitals. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(01), 187-213. doi:10.1142/s0219622014500199Chen, T.-Y. (2014). An Interactive Signed Distance Approach for Multiple Criteria Group Decision-Making Based on Simple Additive Weighting Method with Incomplete Preference Information Defined by Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Sets. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 13(05), 979-1012. doi:10.1142/s0219622014500229Gou, X., Xu, Z., & Liao, H. (2019). Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Possibility Degree-Based Linear Assignment Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 18(01), 35-63. doi:10.1142/s0219622017500377Saksrisathaporn, K., Bouras, A., Reeveerakul, N., & Charles, A. (2016). Application of a Decision Model by Using an Integration of AHP and TOPSIS Approaches within Humanitarian Operation Life Cycle. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(04), 887-918. doi:10.1142/s0219622015500261Hsiao, B., & Chen, L.-H. (2019). Performance Evaluation for Taiwanese Hospitals by Multi-Activity Network Data Envelopment Analysis. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 18(03), 1009-1043. doi:10.1142/s0219622018500165Saaty, T. L., & Ergu, D. (2015). When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 14(06), 1171-1187. doi:10.1142/s021962201550025xChang, K.-H., Chang, Y.-C., & Lee, Y.-T. (2014). Integrating TOPSIS and DEMATEL Methods to Rank the Risk of Failure of FMEA. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 13(06), 1229-1257. doi:10.1142/s0219622014500758Yeh, T.-M., & Huang, Y.-L. (2014). Factors in determining wind farm location: Integrating GQM, fuzzy DEMATEL, and ANP. Renewable Energy, 66, 159-169. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2013.12.003Ortíz, M. A., Felizzola, H. A., & Isaza, S. N. (2015). A contrast between DEMATEL-ANP an

Assessing supply chain risks in the automotive industry through a modified MCDM-based FMECA

Supply chains are complex networks that receive assiduous attention in the literature. Like any complex network, a supply chain is subject to a wide variety of risks that can result in significant economic losses and negative impacts in terms of image and prestige for companies. In circumstances of aggressive competition among companies, effective management of supply chain risks (SCR) is crucial, and is currently a very active field of research. Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) has been recently extended to SCR identification and prioritization, aiming at reducing potential losses caused by lack of risk control. This article has a twofold objective. First, SCR assessment is investigated, and a comprehensive list of specific risks related to the automotive industry is compiled to extend the set of most commonly considered risks. Second, an alternative way of calculating the risk priority number (RPN) is proposed within the FMECA framework by means of an integrated multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach. We give a new calculation procedure by making use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to derive factors weights, and then the fuzzy DEcision-MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) to evaluate the new factor of “dependence” among risks. The developed joint analysis constitutes a risk analysis support tool for criticality in systems engineering. The approach also deals with uncertainty and vagueness associated to input data through the use of fuzzy numbers. The results obtained from a relevant case study in the automotive industry showcase the effectiveness of this approach, which brings important value to those companies: when planning interventions of prevention/mitigation, primary importance should be given to 1) supply chain disruptions due to natural disasters, 2) manufacturing facilities, human resources, policies and breakdown processes, and 3) inefficient transport