IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tprsxx/v54y2016i15p4520-4536.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An improved fuzzy-AHP (IFAHP) approach to compare SECI modes

Author

Listed:
  • Satish Tyagi

Abstract

Mental models and knowledge base of an employee are two key resources of an organisation that are imperative to develop innovative products. Effective utilisation of socialisation (S), externalisation (E), combination (C) and internalisation (I) modes within any product development (PD) phase plays an important role in creating new knowledge and updating the mental models. In order to investigate the influence of SECI modes on a specific PD phase, an improved fuzzy analytical hierarchy process approach is presented. In simple fuzzy analytical hierarchy process, the numbers are either normalised or a zero value is assigned to the degree of possibility when two triangles are not intersecting with each other. This approach calculates distorted values of degree of possibility and thus very likely produces false ranking of alternatives. The article proposes to extend the triangle edges about x -axis until they intersect when the pessimistic value of one triangle is more than the optimistic value of other triangle. It allows developing a mathematical formulation to estimate the true values of degree of possibility instead of zero. An example of conceptual design phase is discussed to illustrate the applicability and usefulness of proposed framework. In order to evaluate the performance of underlying phase in terms of knowledge creation, five criteria are selected based on the literature search and discussion with subject matter experts from strategic decision areas. After stringent analysis and exhaustive experimentation, it is found that internalisation mode highly influences the conceptual design phase.

Suggested Citation

  • Satish Tyagi, 2016. "An improved fuzzy-AHP (IFAHP) approach to compare SECI modes," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(15), pages 4520-4536, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tprsxx:v:54:y:2016:i:15:p:4520-4536
    DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2015.1067378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00207543.2015.1067378
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00207543.2015.1067378?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. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    2. James S. Dyer, 1990. "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 249-258, March.
    3. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    4. Vadde, Srikanth & Zeid, Abe & Kamarthi, Sagar V., 2011. "Pricing decisions in a multi-criteria setting for product recovery facilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 186-193, April.
    5. Meløn, Mønica García & Aragonés Beltran, Pablo & Carmen González Cruz, M., 2008. "An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 754-765, October.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    8. James S. Dyer, 1990. "A Clarification of "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 274-275, March.
    9. Zhu, Ke-Jun & Jing, Yu & Chang, Da-Yong, 1999. "A discussion on Extent Analysis Method and applications of fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 450-456, July.
    10. Barker, Theresa J. & Zabinsky, Zelda B., 2011. "A multicriteria decision making model for reverse logistics using analytical hierarchy process," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 558-573, October.
    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. Fang-Shii Ning & Kuang-Chang Pien & Wei-Jie Liou & Tsung-Chi Cheng, 2024. "Site Selection for Offshore Wind Power Farms with Natural Disaster Risk Assessment: A Case Study of the Waters off Taiwan’s West Coast," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-24, June.

    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. Faramondi, Luca & Oliva, Gabriele & Setola, Roberto & Bozóki, Sándor, 2023. "Robustness to rank reversal in pairwise comparison matrices based on uncertainty bounds," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(2), pages 676-688.
    2. Zhü, Kèyù, 2014. "Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 209-217.
    3. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    4. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    5. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Fujun Hou, 2016. "Market Competitiveness Evaluation of Mechanical Equipment with a Pairwise Comparisons Hierarchical Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    7. Surendra Kansara & Sachin Modgil & Rupesh Kumar, 2023. "Structural transformation of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process: a relevant case for Covid-19," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 450-465, March.
    8. Shapiro, Arnold F. & Koissi, Marie-Claire, 2017. "Fuzzy logic modifications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 189-202.
    9. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    10. Hoene, Andreas & Jawale, Mandar & Neukirchen, Thomas & Bednorz, Nicole & Schulz, Holger & Hauser, Simon, 2019. "Bewertung von Technologielösungen für Automatisierung und Ergonomieunterstützung der Intralogistik," ild Schriftenreihe 64, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management, Institut für Logistik- & Dienstleistungsmanagement (ild).
    11. Bojan Srdjevic & Yvonilde Medeiros, 2008. "Fuzzy AHP Assessment of Water Management Plans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(7), pages 877-894, July.
    12. Zachary F. Lansdowne, 1996. "Ordinal ranking methods for multicriterion decision making," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(5), pages 613-627, August.
    13. Mohamed Hanine & Omar Boutkhoum & Abderrafie El Maknissi & Abdessadek Tikniouine & Tarik Agouti, 2016. "Decision making under uncertainty using PEES–fuzzy AHP–fuzzy TOPSIS methodology for landfill location selection," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 351-367, December.
    14. Devesh Kumar & Gunjan Soni & Rohit Joshi & Vipul Jain & Amrik Sohal, 2022. "Modelling supply chain viability during COVID-19 disruption: A case of an Indian automobile manufacturing supply chain," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1224-1240, December.
    15. Ramanathan, Usha, 2013. "Aligning supply chain collaboration using Analytic Hierarchy Process," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 431-440.
    16. Yibin Zhang & Kevin W. Li & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Prioritization and Aggregation of Intuitionistic Preference Relations: A Multiplicative-Transitivity-Based Transformation from Intuitionistic Judgment Data to Priority Weights," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 409-436, March.
    17. Sandeep Singh & Jaimal Singh Khamba & Davinder Singh, 2023. "Study of energy-efficient attributes of overall equipment effectiveness in Indian sugar mill industries through analytical hierarchy process (AHP)," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(1), pages 374-384, March.
    18. María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Fuzzy Multicriteria Models for Decision Making in Gamification," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Calabrese, Armando & Costa, Roberta & Levialdi, Nathan & Menichini, Tamara, 2019. "Integrating sustainability into strategic decision-making: A fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 155-168.
    20. Yu-Jie Wang, 2023. "Extending Quality Function Deployment and Analytic Hierarchy Process under Interval-Valued Fuzzy Environment for Evaluating Port Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, March.

    More about this item

    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:taf:tprsxx:v:54:y:2016:i:15:p:4520-4536. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/TPRS20 .

    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.