4.7 Article

Six-Sigma project selection using national quality award criteria and Delphi fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making method

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 36, 期 4, 页码 7594-7603

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.09.045

关键词

Delphi method; Fuzzy set; Multiple criteria decision-making; National quality award; Six-Sigma project

资金

  1. National Science Council of Taiwan, Republic of China [NSC-95-2221-E-006-349-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Six-Sigma is a tactical tool of significant value in achieving operational excellence. The project selection decision, under a resources constraint, is the early stage of implementation for a Six-Sigma intervention. The project selection decision is challenging due to its fuzzy group decision-making aspect inherent to the problem. The present study proposes to adopt national quality award criteria as the Six-Sigma project selection criteria, and proposes a hierarchical criteria evaluation process. The strategic criteria are evaluated by the management team using a Delphi fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making method. Then, the tactical sub-criteria which contain additional operational issues are evaluated by the Six-Sigma Champion. The proposed methodology is successfully applied in solving the project selection problem deriving from a component manufacturer. The empirical outcomes are promising. Moreover, the results show that the higher a project's priority is, the greater the financial gains will be on completion of the project. Accordingly, the proposed methodology can prioritize the financial gain - which is the key performance indicator for a Six-Sigma project. Additionally, the quality status of the case company has been significantly improved through implementation of the Six-Sigma project. The systematic evaluation process also influences employees to adopt an analytical operations philosophy. Moreover, the commercial objectives of the company are brought into focus by the proposed methodology. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据