Decision-making for risk evaluation: integration of prospect theory with failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA)

被引:18
|
作者
Sagnak, Muhittin [1 ]
Kazancoglu, Yigit [2 ]
Ozen, Yesim Deniz Ozkan [2 ]
Garza-Reyes, Jose Arturo [3 ]
机构
[1] Izmir Katip Celebi Univ, Dept Informat & Document Management, Izmir, Turkey
[2] Yasar Univ, Dept Int Logist Management, Izmir, Turkey
[3] Univ Derby, Sch Technol, Derby, England
关键词
Prospect theory; Failure modes and effects analysis; Fuzzy AHP; Fuzzy TODIM; Risk priority number; TOPSIS APPROACH; FUZZY; TODIM; AHP; PRIORITIZATION; SELECTION;
D O I
10.1108/IJQRM-01-2020-0013
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Purpose The aim of the present study is to overcome some of the limitations of the FMEA method by presenting a theoretical base for considering risk evaluation into its assessment methodology and proposing an approach for its implementation. Design/methodology/approach Fuzzy AHP is used to calculate the weights of the likelihood of occurrence (O), severity (S) and difficulty of detection (D). Additionally, the prospect-theory-based TODIM method was integrated with fuzzy logic. Thus, fuzzy TODIM was employed to calculate the ranking of potential failure modes according to their risk priority numbers (RPNs). In order to verify the results of the study, in-depth interviews were conducted with the participation of industry experts. Findings The results are very much in line with prospect theory. Therefore, practitioners may apply the proposed method to FMEA. The most crucial failure mode for a firm's attention is furnace failure followed by generator failure, crane failure, tank failure, kettle failure, dryer failure and operator failure, respectively. Originality/value The originality of this paper consists in integrating prospect theory with the FMEA method in order to overcome the limitations naturally inherent in the calculation of the FMEA's RPNs.
引用
收藏
页码:939 / 956
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] PEM electrolyzer failure scenarios identified by failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA)
    Wismer, Samantha E.
    Jimenez, Alejandro
    Al-Douri, Ahmad
    Grabovetska, Victoriia
    Groth, Katrina M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2024, 89 : 1280 - 1289
  • [42] Risk Analysis of Decision-making on Public Projects Based on Gray Evaluation
    Xie Linlin
    Huang Wenwei
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2010 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON CONSTRUCTION ECONOMY AND MANAGEMENT (ISCEM2010), 2010, : 122 - 126
  • [43] On the use of risk and decision analysis to support decision-making
    Aven, T
    Korte, J
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2003, 79 (03) : 289 - 299
  • [44] Pythagorean fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making based on prospect theory
    Chen L.
    Luo N.
    Xitong Gongcheng Lilun yu Shijian/System Engineering Theory and Practice, 2020, 40 (03): : 726 - 735
  • [45] Application of Cumulative Prospect Theory to Optimal Inspection Decision-Making for Ship Structures
    Gong, Changqing
    Frangopol, Dan M.
    Cheng, Minghui
    MODEL VALIDATION AND UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION, VOL 3, 2020, : 65 - 74
  • [46] ESCALATING COMMITMENT IN INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP DECISION-MAKING - A PROSPECT-THEORY APPROACH
    WHYTE, G
    ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1993, 54 (03) : 430 - 455
  • [47] Decision-Making for Fire Emergency of Urban Rail Transit Based on Prospect Theory
    Wang, Yuning
    Liang, Yingzi
    Sun, Hui
    Yang, Yufei
    Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021, 2021
  • [48] TESTING PROSPECT-THEORY IN A DETERMINISTIC MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING ENVIRONMENT
    SALMINEN, P
    WALLENIUS, J
    DECISION SCIENCES, 1993, 24 (02) : 279 - 294
  • [49] Decision-Making for Fire Emergency of Urban Rail Transit Based on Prospect Theory
    Wang, Yuning
    Liang, Yingzi
    Sun, Hui
    Yang, Yufei
    MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING, 2021, 2021
  • [50] A DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK BASED ON THE PROSPECT THEORY UNDER AN INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY ENVIRONMENT
    Gu, Jing
    Wang, Zijian
    Xu, Zeshui
    Chen, Xuezheng
    TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMY, 2018, 24 (06) : 2374 - 2396