IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joinma/v27y2016i3d10.1007_s10845-014-0895-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-making in the manufacturing environment using a value-risk graph

Author

Listed:
  • L. A. Shah

    (LUNAM University)

  • A. Etienne

    (Arts et Métiers ParisTech)

  • A. Siadat

    (Arts et Métiers ParisTech)

  • F. Vernadat

    (European Court of Auditors
    University of Lorraine)

Abstract

A value-risk based decision-making tool is proposed for performance assessment of manufacturing scenarios. For this purpose, values (i.e. qualitative objective statements) and concerns (i.e. qualitative risk statements) of stakeholders in any given manufacturing scenario are first identified and are made explicit via objective and risk modeling. Next, performance and risk measures are derived from the corresponding objective and risk models to evaluate the scenario under study. After that, upper and lower bounds, and target value is defined for each measure in order to determine goals and constraints for the given scenario. Because of the multidimensionality nature of performance, the identified objectives and risks, and so, their corresponding measures are usually numerous and heterogeneous in nature. These measures are therefore consolidated to obtain a global performance indicator of value and global indicator of risk while keeping in views the inter-criteria influences. Finally, the global indicators are employed to develop minimum acceptable value and maximum acceptable risk for the scenario under study and plotted on the VR-Graph to demarcate zones of “highly desirable”, “feasible”, “and risky” as well as the “unacceptable” one. The global scores of the indicators: (value-risk) pair of the actual scenario is then plotted on the defined VR-Graph to facilitate decision-making by rendering the scenarios’ performance more visible and clearer. The proposed decision-making tool is illustrated with an example from manufacturing setup in the process context but it can be extended to product or systems evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • L. A. Shah & A. Etienne & A. Siadat & F. Vernadat, 2016. "Decision-making in the manufacturing environment using a value-risk graph," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 617-630, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joinma:v:27:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10845-014-0895-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10845-014-0895-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10845-014-0895-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10845-014-0895-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlos A. Bana e Costa & Jean-Marie Corte & Jean-Claude Vansnick, 2005. "On the Mathematical Foundation of MACBETH," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 409-437, Springer.
    2. Durand, Thomas, 1993. "Economy of scope, added value chain and cost dynamics: A tentative optimization model," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 237-247, May.
    3. Tseng, Fang-Mei & Chiu, Yu-Jing & Chen, Ja-Shen, 2009. "Measuring business performance in the high-tech manufacturing industry: A case study of Taiwan's large-sized TFT-LCD panel companies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 686-697, June.
    4. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2010. "A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 247-286, March.
    5. Abdi, M.R., 2009. "Fuzzy multi-criteria decision model for evaluating reconfigurable machines," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Farahani, Reza Zanjirani & Asgari, Nasrin, 2007. "Combination of MCDM and covering techniques in a hierarchical model for facility location: A case study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1839-1858, February.
    7. Amoako-Gyampah, Kwasi & Acquaah, Moses, 2008. "Manufacturing strategy, competitive strategy and firm performance: An empirical study in a developing economy environment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 575-592, February.
    8. Wernz, Christian & Deshmukh, Abhijit, 2012. "Unifying temporal and organizational scales in multiscale decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 739-751.
    9. Pokharel, Shaligram, 2008. "A two objective model for decision making in a supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 378-388, February.
    10. Amid, Amin & Ghodsypour, S.H. & O'Brien, Christopher, 2009. "A weighted additive fuzzy multiobjective model for the supplier selection problem under price breaks in a supply Chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 323-332, October.
    11. Cliville, Vincent & Berrah, Lamia & Mauris, Gilles, 2007. "Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the MACBETH multi-criteria method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 171-189, January.
    12. Fortuin, Leonard, 1988. "Performance indicators -- Why, where and how?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-9, February.
    13. Ho, William & Xu, Xiaowei & Dey, Prasanta K., 2010. "Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 16-24, April.
    14. Keeney, Ralph L., 1996. "Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 537-549, August.
    15. Chan, Felix T. S. & Jiang, Bing & Tang, Nelson K. H., 2000. "The development of intelligent decision support tools to aid the design of flexible manufacturing systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 73-84, April.
    16. Ertay, Tijen & Ruan, Da, 2005. "Data envelopment analysis based decision model for optimal operator allocation in CMS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 800-810, August.
    17. Craig W. Kirkwood & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1980. "Preference Conditions for Multiattribute Value Functions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 225-232, February.
    18. Christophe Labreuche & Michel Grabisch, 2003. "The Choquet integral for the aggregation of interval scales in multicriteria decision making," Post-Print hal-00272090, HAL.
    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. L. Berrah & V. Clivillé & J. Montmain & G. Mauris, 2019. "The Contribution concept for the control of a manufacturing multi-criteria performance improvement," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 47-58, January.

    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. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2009. "A characterization of the 2-additive Choquet integral through cardinal information," Post-Print halshs-00445132, HAL.
    2. Mayag, Brice & Bouyssou, Denis, 2020. "Necessary and possible interaction between criteria in a 2-additive Choquet integral model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 308-320.
    3. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2011. "A representation of preferences by the Choquet integral with respect to a 2-additive capacity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 297-324, September.
    4. Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Sérgio P. Santos, 2021. "Two decades on the MACBETH approach: a bibliometric analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 901-925, January.
    5. Zeki Ayağ & Funda Samanlioglu, 2016. "An intelligent approach to supplier evaluation in automotive sector," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 889-903, August.
    6. Wong, Bo K. & Lai, Vincent S., 2011. "A survey of the application of fuzzy set theory in production and operations management: 1998-2009," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 157-168, January.
    7. Luca Anzilli & Silvio Giove, 2020. "Multi-criteria and medical diagnosis for application to health insurance systems: a general approach through non-additive measures," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 559-582, December.
    8. Ferreira, João J.M. & Jalali, Marjan S. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F., 2018. "Enhancing the decision-making virtuous cycle of ethical banking practices using the Choquet integral," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 492-497.
    9. Mikhail Timonin, 2012. "Maximization of the Choquet integral over a convex set and its application to resource allocation problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 543-579, July.
    10. Guo, Cong & Li, Xueping, 2014. "A multi-echelon inventory system with supplier selection and order allocation under stochastic demand," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 37-47.
    11. Labreuche, Christophe & Grabisch, Michel, 2018. "Using multiple reference levels in Multi-Criteria Decision aid: The Generalized-Additive Independence model and the Choquet integral approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 598-611.
    12. Christophe Labreuche, 2018. "An axiomatization of the Choquet integral in the context of multiple criteria decision making without any commensurability assumption," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 701-735, December.
    13. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    14. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2010. "A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 247-286, March.
    15. Paul Alain Kaldjob Kaldjob & Brice Mayag & Denis Bouyssou, 2023. "On the interpretation of the interaction index between criteria in a Choquet integral model," Post-Print hal-03766372, HAL.
    16. Milad Moradi & Mahmoud Reza Delavar & Behzad Moshiri, 2017. "A GIS-based multi-criteria analysis model for earthquake vulnerability assessment using Choquet integral and game theory," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(3), pages 1377-1398, July.
    17. Irfan Ali & Armin Fügenschuh & Srikant Gupta & Umar Muhammad Modibbo, 2020. "The LR-Type Fuzzy Multi-Objective Vendor Selection Problem in Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-25, September.
    18. Martin Steinrücke & Wolfgang Albrecht, 2016. "A flow-to-equity approach to coordinate supply chain network planning and financial planning with annual cash outflows to an institutional investor," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 9(2), pages 297-333, August.
    19. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    20. Cinzia Colapinto & Raja Jayaraman & Simone Marsiglio, 2017. "Multi-criteria decision analysis with goal programming in engineering, management and social sciences: a state-of-the art review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 251(1), pages 7-40, April.

    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:spr:joinma:v:27:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10845-014-0895-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.