Abstract
Traditionally, decisions on how to improve an operation are based on risk priority number (RPN) in the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA). Many scholars questioned the RPN method and proposed some new methods to improve the decision process, but these methods are only measuring from the risks viewpoint while ignoring the importance of corrective actions. The corrective actions may be interdependent; hence, if the implementation of corrective actions is in proper order, selection may maximize the improvement effect, bring favorable results in the shortest times, and provide the lowest cost. This study aims to evaluate the structure of hierarchy and interdependence of corrective action by interpretive structural model (ISM), then to calculate the weight of a corrective action through the analytic network process (ANP), then to combine the utility of corrective actions and make a decision on improvement priority order of FMEA by utility priority number (UPN). Finally, it verifies the feasibility and effectiveness of this method by application to a case study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Hung, G.Q., Nie, M., Mark, K.L.: Web-based failure mode and effect analysis, Comput. Ind. Eng., 37, 177–180 (1999).
Stamatis D.H.: Failure Mode and Effect Analysis: FMEA from Theory to Execution, ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI (1995).
Onodera, K.: Effective techniques of FMEA at each life-cycle stage, Proceeding Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 50–56 (1997).
Linton, J.D.: Facing the challenges of service automation: An enabler for e-commerce and productivity gain in traditional services, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 50(4), 478–484 (2003).
Reiling, J.G., Knutzen, B.L., Stoecklein, M.: FMEA—the cure for medical errors, Qual. Progr., 36(8), 67–71 (2003).
Shahin, A.: Integration of FMEA and the Kano model: An exploratory examination, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage., 21(6/7), 731–746 (2005).
Reliey, T.T.: FMEA in preventing medical accidents, ASQ Annual Quality Congress Proceedings, 657–664 (2002).
Vandenbrande, W.: The FMEA method in environment management systems, Stand. Kach., 2, 98–101 (2003).
Sawhney, R., Padiyar, A. Li, Y.: FMEA based approach for supplier development, IIE Annual Conference and Exhibition, 7–16 (2004).
Gilchrist, W.: Modeling failure modes and effects analysis, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manage., 10(5), 16–23 (1993).
Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, 2nd ed., Automotive Industry Action Group, Chrysler Corporation, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation (1995).
Ben-Daya, M., Raouf, A.: A revised failure mode and effects analysis model, Int. J. Qual. Reliabil. Manage., 13, 43–47 (1993).
Kara-Zaitri, C., Fleming, P.V.: Applications of fizzy inference methods to failure modes effects and criticality analysis IFMECA, International Conference on Safety and Reliability, 2403–2414 (1997).
Bowles, J.B.: The new SAE FMECA standard, Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 48–53 (1998).
Sankar, N.R., Prabhu, B.S.: Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis, Int. J. Qual. Reliabil. Manage., 18(3), 324–335 (2001).
Bowles, J.B.: An assessment of RPN prioritization in a failure modes effects and criticality analysis, Proceeding Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 380–386 (2003).
Warfield, J.N.: On arranging elements of a hierarchy in graphic form, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybernet., 2, 121–132 (1973).
Saaty T.L.: Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, RWS, Pittsburgh, PA (1996).
Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchical Process, McGraw-Hill, New York (1980).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11668-007-9072-y