IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/vs10y2017i18p181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Analysis of Poor Quality Using a Software Simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Jana Fabianová

    (Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia)

  • Jaroslava Janeková

    (Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia)

  • Daniela Onofrejová

    (Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia)

Abstract

The issues of quality, cost of poor quality and factors affecting quality are crucial to maintaining a competitiveness regarding to business activities. Use of software applications and computer simulation enables more effective quality management. Simulation tools offer incorporating the variability of more variables in experiments and evaluating their common impact on the final output. The article presents a case study focused on the possibility of using computer simulation Monte Carlo in the field of quality management. Two approaches for determining the cost of poor quality are introduced here. One from retrospective scope of view, where the cost of poor quality and production process are calculated based on historical data. The second approach uses the probabilistic characteristics of the input variables by means of simulation, and reflects as a perspective view of the costs of poor quality. Simulation output in the form of a tornado and sensitivity charts complement the risk analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana Fabianová & Jaroslava Janeková & Daniela Onofrejová, 2017. "Cost Analysis of Poor Quality Using a Software Simulation," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(44), pages 181-181, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:s10:y:2017:i:18:p:181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_2601.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arumugam, V. & Antony, Jiju & Kumar, Maneesh, 2013. "Linking learning and knowledge creation to project success in Six Sigma projects: An empirical investigation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 388-402.
    2. Hsu, Ya-Chen & Pearn, W.L. & Wu, Pei-Ching, 2008. "Capability adjustment for gamma processes with mean shift consideration in implementing Six Sigma program," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 517-529, December.
    3. Nourelfath, Mustapha & Hassan, Jawad, 2015. "Six Sigma performance for non-normal processesAuthor-Name: Aldowaisan, Tariq," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 968-977.
    4. Arumugam, V. & Antony, Jiju & Linderman, Kevin, 2016. "The influence of challenging goals and structured method on Six Sigma project performance: A mediated moderation analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(1), pages 202-213.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lepore, A. & Palumbo, B. & Castagliola, P., 2018. "A note on decision making method for product acceptance based on process capability indices Cpk and Cpmk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 393-398.
    2. Andrea Sujova & Lubica Simanova & Katarina Marcinekova, 2016. "Sustainable Process Performance by Application of Six Sigma Concepts: The Research Study of Two Industrial Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-21, March.
    3. CHEN, Piao & YE, Zhi-Sheng, 2018. "A systematic look at the gamma process capability indices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 589-597.
    4. Mustapha Nourelfath & Tariq Aldowaisan & Jawad Hassan, 2016. "Evaluating Six Sigma failure rate for inverse Gaussian cycle times," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(20), pages 6092-6101, October.
    5. Knoppen, Desirée & Sáenz, María Jesús, 2017. "Interorganizational teams in low-versus high-dependence contexts," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 15-25.
    6. Wang, Xiaofei & Wang, Bing Xing & Hong, Yili & Jiang, Pei Hua, 2021. "Degradation data analysis based on gamma process with random effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1200-1208.
    7. Jorge L. García-Alcaraz & Liliana Avelar-Sosa & Juan I. Latorre-Biel & Emilio Jiménez-Macías & Giner Alor-Hernández, 2017. "Role of Human Knowledge and Communication on Operational Benefits Gained from Six Sigma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-19, September.
    8. Yuzhakov, Vladimir (Южаков, Владимир) & Startsev, Y (Старцев, Я.), 2015. "Development of a Concept of an Interdisciplinary Research Program of Formation of Complex Methodologies and Techniques of Management Development in Public Administration [Разработка Концепции Межди," Published Papers mn37, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    9. Pérez-González, Carlos J. & Fernández, Arturo J. & Kohansal, Akram, 2020. "Efficient truncated repetitive lot inspection using Poisson defect counts and prior information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 964-974.
    10. Mitra, Sovan & Lim, Sungmook & Karathanasopoulos, Andreas, 2019. "Regression based scenario generation: Applications for performance management," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    11. Boon Sin, Ang & Zailani, Suhaiza & Iranmanesh, Mohammad & Ramayah, T., 2015. "Structural equation modelling on knowledge creation in Six Sigma DMAIC project and its impact on organizational performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 105-117.
    12. Nourelfath, Mustapha & Hassan, Jawad, 2015. "Six Sigma performance for non-normal processesAuthor-Name: Aldowaisan, Tariq," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 968-977.
    13. Swain, Ajaya K. & Cao, Qing Ray & Gardner, William L., 2018. "Six Sigma success: Looking through authentic leadership and behavioral integrity theoretical lenses," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 120-132.
    14. Awe, Olajumoke A. & Woodside, Arch G. & Nerur, Sridhar & Prater, Edmund, 2020. "Capturing heterogeneities in orchestrating resources for accurately forecasting high (separately low) project management performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    15. V�ctor Leiva & Carolina Marchant & Helton Saulo & Muhammad Aslam & Fernando Rojas, 2014. "Capability indices for Birnbaum-Saunders processes applied to electronic and food industries," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(9), pages 1881-1902, September.
    16. Adcock, C J & Meade, N, 2017. "Using parametric classification trees for model selection with applications to financial risk management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 746-765.
    17. Jorge Luis García-Alcaraz & Giner Alor-Hernández & Cuauhtémoc Sánchez-Ramírez & Emilio Jiménez-Macías & Julio Blanco-Fernández & Juan I. Latorre-Biel, 2018. "Mediating Role of the Six Sigma Implementation Strategy and Investment in Human Resources in Economic Success and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, June.
    18. Amrik Sohal & Tharaka Vass & Tristan Vasquez & Greg J. Bamber & Timothy Bartram & Pauline Stanton, 2022. "Success factors for lean six sigma projects in healthcare," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 215-240, June.
    19. Ambra Galeazzo & Andrea Furlan & Andrea Vinelli, 2017. "The organizational infrastructure of continuous improvement – an empirical analysis," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 33-46, June.
    20. Solak, Senay & Li, Zhuoxin & Gumus, Mehmet & Zhuo, Yueran, 2024. "A budgeting resource allocation model for capacity expansion," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    poor quality cost analysis; Monte Carlo simulation;

    JEL classification:

    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • C88 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other Computer Software
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:s10:y:2017:i:18:p:181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.