Email this article The usefulness of Multi-criteria sorting methods: a case study in the automotive sector
Abstract
A variety of Multi-criteria Decision Aiding methods (MCDA) have been proposed in the literature and their applications are increasingly wide spreading in several sectors. However, the use of such methods is very limited and rarely considered in manufacturing companies. The aim of this paper is to understand how useful MCDA methods are and how they can actually contribute to the performance improvement of manufacturing processes. More in detail, we aim to understand the practical impact of MCDA methods and their shortcomings when applied to classify manufacturing anomalies in automotive companies. In this sense, we compare the use of two sorting MCDA methods, the AHPSort and the ELECTRE TRI method with the procedure adopted by an automotive manufacturing company to sort manufacturing anomalies in one of the biggest plants in the South of Italy. We show that, despite the methods requiring an interactive process and the involvement of the decision maker, the procedure was well accepted by the management of the plant and helped them to reflect on how the classification of the anomalies was conducted.
References
Abastante, F., Corrente, S., Greco, S., Lami, I., Mecca, B., 2020. Multiple criteria decision analysis with the srf-ii method to compare hypotheses of adaptive reuse for an iconic historical building. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.01964 .
Alvarez, P.A., Ishizaka, A., Mart__nez, L., 2021. Multiple-criteria decisionmaking sorting methods: A survey. Expert Systems with Applications ,115368.
Bernroider, E.W., Schmollerl, P., 2013. A technological, organisational, and environmental analysis of decision making methodologies and satisfaction in the context of it induced business transformations. European Journal of Operational Research 224, 141{153.
Bouyssou, D., Marchant, T., 2015. On the relations between electre tri-b and electre tri-c and on a new variant of electre tri-b. European Journal of Operational Research 242, 201-211.
Brans, J.P., Mareschal, B., 1994. The promcalc & gaia decision support system for multicriteria decision aid. Decision support systems 12, 297-310.
Cavallo, B., Ishizaka, A., Olivieri, M.G., Squillante, M., 2019. Comparing inconsistency of pairwise comparison matrices depending on entries. Journal of the Operational Research Society 70, 842-850.
Cinelli, M., Kadzinski, M., Gonzalez, M., S lowi_nski, R., 2020. How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy. Omega 96, 102261.
e Costa, C.A.B., De Corte, J.M., Vansnick, J.C., 2016. On the mathematical foundations of macbeth, in: Multiple criteria decision analysis. Springer, pp.421-463.
Doumpos, M., Figueira, J.R., 2019. A multicriteria outranking approach for modeling corporate credit ratings: An application of the electre tri-nc method. Omega 82, 166-180.
Fattoruso, G., Marcarelli, G., Olivieri, M.G., Squillante, M., 2019. Using electre to analyse the behaviour of economic agents. Soft Computing , 1-9.
Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., 2005. Multiple criteria decision analysis:state of the art surveys .
Figueira, J.R., Greco, S., Roy, B., 2009. Electre methods with interaction between criteria: An extension of the concordance index. European Journal of Operational Research 199, 478-495.
Figueira, J.R., Greco, S., Roy, B., S lowi_nski, R., 2013. An overview of electre methods and their recent extensions. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 20, 61-85.
Greco, S., Mousseau, V., S lowi_nski, R., 2010. Multiple criteria sorting with a set of additive value functions. European Journal of Operational Research 207, 1455-1470.
Ishizaka, A., Gordon, M., 2017. Macbethsort: a multiple criteria decision aid procedure for sorting strategic products. Journal of the Operational Research Society 68, 53-61.
Ishizaka, A., Nemery, P., 2013. Multi-criteria decision analysis: methods and software. John Wiley & Sons.
Ishizaka, A., Pearman, C., Nemery, P., 2012. Ahpsort: an ahp-based method for sorting problems. International Journal of Production Research 50, 4767-4784.
Ishizaka, A., Siraj, S., 2018. Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? an experimental comparative study of three methods. European Journal of Operational Research 264, 462-471.
Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., Martinez, L., 2020. Analytic hierarchy process-fuzzy sorting: An analytic hierarchy processbased method for fuzzy classifcation in sorting problems. Journal of the Operational Research Society 71, 928- 947.
Karande, P., Zavadskas, E., Chakraborty, S., 2016. A study on the ranking performance of some mcdm methods for industrial robot selection problems. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations 7, 399-422.
Kolios, A., Mytilinou, V., Lozano-Minguez, E., Salonitis, K., 2016. A comparative study of multiple-criteria decision-making methods under stochastic inputs. Energies 9, 566.
Larichev, O.I., 2001. Ranking multicriteria alternatives: The method zapros iii.European Journal of Operational Research 131, 550-558.
Leal, J.E., 2020. Ahp-express: A simplified version of the analytical hierarchy process method. MethodsX 7, 100748.
Lee, H.C., Chang, C.T., 2018. Comparative analysis of mcdm methods for ranking renewable energy sources in taiwan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 92, 883-896.
Madhooshiarzanagh, P., Abi-Zeid, I., 2021. A disaggregation approach for indirect preference elicitation in electre tri-nc: Application and validation. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis .
Marcarelli, G., Squillante, M., 2020. A group-ahp-based approach for selecting the best public tender. Soft Computing 24, 13717-13724.
Mela, K., Tiainen, T., Heinisuo, M., 2012. Comparative study of multiple criteria decision making methods for building design. Advanced engineering informatics 26, 716-726.
Meshram, S.G., Alvandi, E., Singh, V.P., Meshram, C., 2019. Comparison of ahp and fuzzy ahp models for prioritization of watersheds. Soft Computing 23, 13615-13625.
Miettinen, K., Ruiz, F., Wierzbicki, A.P., 2008. Introduction to multiobjective optimization: interactive approaches, in: Multiobjective Optimization. Springer, pp. 27-57.
de Miranda Mota, C.M., de Almeida, A.T., 2012. A multicriteria decision model for assigning priority classes to activities in project management. Annals of Operations Research 199, 361-372.
Moradian, M., Modanloo, V., Aghaiee, S., 2019. Comparative analysis of multi criteria decision making techniques for material selection of brake booster valve body. Journal of Traffc and Transportation Engineering (English Edition)
, 526-534.
Mousseau, V., Slowinski, R., Zielniewicz, P., 2000. A user-oriented implementation of the electre-tri method integrating preference elicitation support. Computers & operations research 27, 757-777.
Mulliner, E., Malys, N., Maliene, V., 2016. Comparative analysis of mcdm methods for the assessment of sustainable housing a_ordability. Omega 59, 146-156.
Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H., 2004. Compromise solution by mcdm methods: A comparative analysis of vikor and topsis. European journal of operational research 156, 445-455.
Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H., 2007. Extended vikor method in comparison with outranking methods. European journal of operational research 178, 514-529.
Ozernoy, V.M., 1987. A framework for choosing the most appropriate discrete alternative multiple criteria decision-making method in decision support systems and expert systems, in: Toward Interactive and Intelligent Decision
Support Systems. Springer, pp. 56-64.
Pavic, Z., Novoselac, V., 2013. Notes on topsis method. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Science 1, 5-12.
Pelissari, R., Oliveira, M.C., Amor, S.B., Abackerli, A.J., 2019. A new owsortbased method to deal with information imperfections in sorting decisionmaking problems. European Journal of Operational Research 276, 235-246.
Ramkumar, N., Subramanian, P., Rajmohan, M., 2009. A multi-criteria decision making model for outsourcing inbound logistics of an automotive industry using the ahp and topsis. International Journal of Enterprise Network Management 3, 223- 245.
Risawandi, R.R., Rahim, R., 2016. Study of the simple multi-attribute rating technique for decision support. Decision-making 4, C4.
Roy, B., Figueira, J., Almeida-Dias, J., 2014. Discriminating thresholds as a tool to cope with imperfect knowledge in multiple criteria decision aiding:Theoretical results and practical issues. Omega 43, 9-20.
Saaty, T., 1980. The analytic hierarchy process (ahp) for decision making, in:Kobe, Japan, pp. 1-69.
Saaty, T.L., 2003. Decision-making with the ahp: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European journal of operational research 145, 85-91.
Sarrazin, R., De Smet, Y., Rosenfeld, J., 2018. An extension of promethee to interval clustering. Omega 80, 12-21.
Silva Neves, A.J., Camanho, R., 2015. The use of ahp for it project priorization{a case study for oil & gas company. Procedia Computer Science 55, 1097-1105.
Stanujkic, D., Djordjevic, B., Djordjevic, M., 2013. Comparative analysis of some prominent mcdm methods: A case of ranking serbian banks. Serbian journal of management 8, 213-241.
Triantaphyllou, E., 2000. Multi-criteria decision making methods, in: Multicriteria decision making methods: A comparative study. Springer, pp. 5-21.
Uz Zaman, U.K., Rivette, M., Siadat, A., Mousavi, S.M., 2018. Integrated product-process design: Material and manufacturing process selection for additive manufacturing using multi-criteria decision making. Robotics and
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 51, 169-180.
Zopounidis, C., Doumpos, M., 2002. Multicriteria classi_cation and sorting methods: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 138, 229-246.
Full Text: pdf
