IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i5p794-d98112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Smartness Assessment Framework for Smart Factories Using Analytic Network Process

Author

Listed:
  • Jeongcheol Lee

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea)

  • Sungbum Jun

    (School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA)

  • Tai-Woo Chang

    (Department of Industrial & Management Engineering, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Korea)

  • Jinwoo Park

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea)

Abstract

The so-called smart factory is a novel paradigm that is rapidly gaining ground in scenarios for factories of the future. Many manufacturing companies try to raise the level of smartness by considering a number of aspects related to the smart factory. However, there is a lack of field-oriented systematic research to help them fit the interest of industry for promoting interest and diffusion of smart factory. Moreover, it is still difficult to assess whether the vision of the future factory that incorporates information and communication technologies is implemented. Therefore, in this study, we propose a smartness assessment framework for smart factories which is based on the concept of operation management so as to be easy to make manufacturing companies to understand and apply. The framework is composed of evaluation criteria and sets the weightings of the criteria using analytic network processes. From a case study based on 20 small and medium-sized manufacturing enterprises, the effectiveness of the proposed framework has been verified.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeongcheol Lee & Sungbum Jun & Tai-Woo Chang & Jinwoo Park, 2017. "A Smartness Assessment Framework for Smart Factories Using Analytic Network Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:5:p:794-:d:98112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/794/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/794/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gyusun Hwang & Jeongcheol Lee & Jinwoo Park & Tai-Woo Chang, 2017. "Developing performance measurement system for Internet of Things and smart factory environment," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(9), pages 2590-2602, May.
    2. Gunasekaran, A. & Patel, C. & McGaughey, Ronald E., 2004. "A framework for supply chain performance measurement," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 333-347, February.
    3. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rafael, Lizarralde Dorronsoro & Jaione, Ganzarain Epelde & Cristina, López & Ibon, Serrano Lasa, 2020. "An Industry 4.0 maturity model for machine tool companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    2. Brodny, Jarosław & Tutak, Magdalena, 2023. "Assessing the level of digital maturity in the Three Seas Initiative countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    3. Jian Xu & Jae-Woo Sim, 2018. "Characteristics of Corporate R&D Investment in Emerging Markets: Evidence from Manufacturing Industry in China and South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Jong Hun Woo & Haoyu Zhu & Dong Kun Lee & Hyun Chung & Yongkuk Jeong, 2021. "Assessment Framework of Smart Shipyard Maturity Level via Data Envelopment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Elibal, Kerem & Özceylan, Eren, 2022. "Comparing industry 4.0 maturity models in the perspective of TQM principles using Fuzzy MCDM methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    6. Zhexuan Zhou & Yajie Dou & Jianbin Sun & Jiang Jiang & Yuejin Tan, 2017. "Sustainable Production Line Evaluation Based on Evidential Reasoning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-14, October.
    7. Rimalini Gadekar & Bijan Sarkar & Ashish Gadekar, 2022. "Key performance indicator based dynamic decision-making framework for sustainable Industry 4.0 implementation risks evaluation: reference to the Indian manufacturing industries," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(1), pages 189-249, November.
    8. Melissa Liborio Zapata & Lamia Berrah & Laurent Tabourot, 2019. "Is a digital transformation framework enough for manufacturing smart products? The case of Small and Medium Enterprises," Post-Print hal-02389603, HAL.
    9. Diogo Rodrigues & Radu Godina & Pedro Espadinha da Cruz, 2021. "Key Performance Indicators Selection through an Analytic Network Process Model for Tooling and Die Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Bhatia, Purvee & Diaz-Elsayed, Nancy, 2023. "Facilitating decision-making for the adoption of smart manufacturing technologies by SMEs via fuzzy TOPSIS," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).

    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. Dang, Shuo & Chu, Liangyong, 2016. "Evaluation framework and verification for sustainable container management as reusable packaging," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1949-1955.
    2. Fabio De Felice & Antonella Petrillo & Claudio Autorino, 2015. "Development of a Framework for Sustainable Outsourcing: Analytic Balanced Scorecard Method (A-BSC)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Flavio Martins & Maria Fatima Almeida & Rodrigo Calili & Agatha Oliveira, 2020. "Design Thinking Applied to Smart Home Projects: A User-Centric and Sustainable Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    5. Wu, Zhangsheng & Li, Yue & Wang, Rong & Xu, Xu & Ren, Dongyang & Huang, Quanzhong & Xiong, Yunwu & Huang, Guanhua, 2023. "Evaluation of irrigation water saving and salinity control practices of maize and sunflower in the upper Yellow River basin with an agro-hydrological model based method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    6. D’Inverno, Giovanna & Carosi, Laura & Romano, Giulia & Guerrini, Andrea, 2018. "Water pollution in wastewater treatment plants: An efficiency analysis with undesirable output," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(1), pages 24-34.
    7. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Siti Aisyah Ya?kob & Mohd Uzairi Ahmad Hajazi & Nor Afiza Abu Bakar & Sharizal Hashim, 2019. "The Influence of Information Sharing Linkages on Business Performance: Evidence from Micro and Small Enterprises in Sarawak," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(1), pages 18-26, January.
    9. Schneider, Christian O. & Bremen, Philipp & Schönsleben, Paul & Alard, Robert, 2013. "Transaction cost economics in global sourcing: Assessing regional differences and implications for performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 243-254.
    10. Pathiraja, Erandathie & Griffith, Garry & Farquharson, Robert & Faggia, Rob, 2019. "The Cost of Climate Change to Agricultural Industries: Coconuts in Sri Lanka," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 10(05), December.
    11. Ayodele, T.R. & Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Odigie, O. & Munda, J.L., 2018. "A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1853-1869.
    12. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    13. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2019. "An Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process—Slack Based Measure-Data Envelopment Analysis Model for Evaluating the Efficiency of Logistics Service Providers Considering Undesirable Performance Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Abareshi, Maryam & Zaferanieh, Mehdi, 2019. "A bi-level capacitated P-median facility location problem with the most likely allocation solution," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-20.
    15. Ogulin, R. & Selen, W. & Ashayeri, J., 2010. "Determinants of Informal Coordination in Networked Supply Chains," Discussion Paper 2010-133, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    16. Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Wenjuan Liu & Sinta Sulistyo & Philippe LeBillon & Je'anne Wegner, 2023. "Evaluating sustainability impacts of critical mineral extractions: Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment and SDGs frameworks," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 746-759, June.
    17. Xinxin Liu & Xiaosheng Wang & Haiying Guo & Xiaojie An, 2021. "Benefit Allocation in Shared Water-Saving Management Contract Projects Based on Modified Expected Shapley Value," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(1), pages 39-62, January.
    18. Kroes, James R. & Manikas, Andrew S. & Gattiker, Thomas F., 2018. "Operational leanness and retail firm performance since 1980," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 262-274.
    19. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    20. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:5:p:794-:d:98112. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.