Uncertain Quality Function Deployment Using a Hybrid Group Decision Making Model

Wang, Ze-Ling; You, Jing; Liu, Hu‐Chen

doi:10.3390/sym8110119

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wang et al . (2016) presented a new hybrid group decision-making model based on hesitant 2-tuple linguistic term sets and an extended QUALIFLEX (qualitative flexible multiple criteria method) approach to handle the QFD problems under incomplete weight values.…”

Section: Proposed Advanced Qfd Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, the proposed method is adopted for improving education quality in a university in Singapore. Wang et al (2016) presented a new hybrid group decision-making model based on hesitant 2-tuple linguistic term sets and an extended QUALIFLEX (qualitative flexible multiple criteria method) approach to handle the QFD problems under incomplete weight values. For this purpose, at the first stage, they integrated hesitant linguistic term sets into interval 2-tuple linguistic variables to express various uncertainties available in the assessment information of QFD team members.…”

Section: Applications Of Advanced Hybrid Qfd-mcdm In Different Indust...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Integration of multi-criteria decision-making approaches adapted for quality function deployment: an analytical literature review and future research agenda

Hariri

Domingues

Sampaio

2023

IJQRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper aims to classify journal papers in the context of hybrid quality function deployment QFD and multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods published during 2004–2021.Design/methodology/approachA conceptual classification scheme is presented to analyze the hybrid QFD-MCDM methods. Then some recommendations are given to introduce directions for future research.FindingsThe results show that among all related areas, the manufacturing application has the most frequency of published papers regarding hybrid QFD-MCDM methods. Moreover, using uncertainty to establish a hybrid QFD-MCDM the relevant papers have been considered during the time interval 2004–2021.Originality/valueThere are various shortcomings in conventional QFD which limit its efficiency and potential applications. Since 2004, when MCDM methods were frequently adopted in the quality management context, increasing attention has been drawn from both practical and academic perspectives. Recently, the integration of MCDM techniques into the QFD model has played an important role in designing new products and services, supplier selection, green manufacturing systems and sustainability topics. Hence, this survey reviewed hybrid QFD-MCDM methods during 2004–2021.

show abstract

Section: Proposed Advanced Qfd Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Applications Of Advanced Hybrid Qfd-mcdm In Different Indust...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of multi-criteria decision-making approaches adapted for quality function deployment: an analytical literature review and future research agenda

Hariri

Domingues

Sampaio

2023

IJQRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, QFD applies to the abovementioned problem, since project teams need to tailor their requirements to meet clients' project demands. Nevertheless, the conventional QFD has shortcomings that impact the results of this study's analysis (Wang et al. , 2016), which are enumerated below.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk response decisions for projects in project portfolios considering objective adjustments and project interdependencies

Zhang

Goh

Bai

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeRisk response decisions (RRDs) are vital for project risk mitigation. Although past research has focused on RRDs for independent single projects, it has scarcely explored how to make RRDs for single projects in project portfolios (SPPPs). Consequently, this study aims to bridge the gap in extant literature by developing an integrated approach to select risk response strategies (RRSs) for SPPPs considering objective adjustments and project interdependencies (PIs).Design/methodology/approachAn integrated quality function deployment (QFD) method was used throughout this study. More so, a balanced score card (BSC) and stratified-Z-numbers-full consistency method (SZFUCOM) was applied to identify SPPP success criteria (SP3SC) to determine their weights. In addition, a spherical fuzzy set-design structure matrix (SFDSM) was used to quantify the correlation between the risks and the relationship between the risks and the predecessor projects. Consequently, the relationships between the risks and SP3SC and RRSs were described by the spherical fuzzy set (SFS) and Z-numbers, respectively. Besides, the results are weaved into QFD to transform SP3SC into risks and then into RRSs, while a linear optimization model is used to obtain the optimal RRSs. Lastly, a construction project portfolio (PP) was used to test the veracity of the results to prove their validity.FindingsThe approach to RRDs for single projects is observed to be different from that of SPPPs. In addition, this study finds that project portfolio objective adjustments (PPOAs) and PIs have significant impacts on RRDs given that they influence the risk priorities of independent single projects and SPPPs. Moreover, the application of an integrated QFD effectively synthesized the results from the findings of this study, as well as enabled companies to determine robust RRSs. Finally, the consistency results of the SZFUCOM were better than those of the triangular fuzzy number-full consistency method.Originality/valueThe study innovatively explores the method of RRDs for SPPP, which has been ignored by past research. SP3SC highly compatible with PP success is determined. Z-numbers are first used to evaluate the effect of RRSs to enhance the robustness of RRDs. The study proposes a method of RRDs comprehensively considering PPOAs and PIs, which provides robust methodological guidance for SPPP managers to control risks.

show abstract

“…It could be implemented to select the most suitable alternative from a given set of decision variants or their subset [5,6]. The essential prerequisite of the MCGDM is the combination of experts' preferences and judgments about the candidate alternatives versus the conflicting criteria [7], which is a popular trend of present research to develop new group MCDM methods [8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group Decision-Making for Hesitant Fuzzy Sets Based on Characteristic Objects Method

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:There are many real-life problems that, because of the need to involve a wide domain of knowledge, are beyond a single expert. This is especially true for complex problems. Therefore, it is usually necessary to allocate more than one expert to a decision process. In such situations, we can observe an increasing importance of uncertainty. In this paper, the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) method called the Characteristic Objects Method (COMET) is extended to solve problems for Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making (MCGDM) in a hesitant fuzzy environment. It is a completely new idea for solving problems of group decision-making under uncertainty. In this approach, we use L-R-type Generalized Fuzzy Numbers (GFNs) to get the degree of hesitancy for an alternative under a certain criterion. Therefore, the classical COMET method was adapted to work with GFNs in group decision-making problems. The proposed extension is presented in detail, along with the necessary background information. Finally, an illustrative numerical example is provided to elaborate the proposed method with respect to the support of a decision process. The presented extension of the COMET method, as opposed to others' group decision-making methods, is completely free of the rank reversal phenomenon, which is identified as one of the most important MCDM challenges.

show abstract

Uncertain Quality Function Deployment Using a Hybrid Group Decision Making Model

Cited by 15 publications

References 52 publications

Integration of multi-criteria decision-making approaches adapted for quality function deployment: an analytical literature review and future research agenda

Integration of multi-criteria decision-making approaches adapted for quality function deployment: an analytical literature review and future research agenda

Risk response decisions for projects in project portfolios considering objective adjustments and project interdependencies

Group Decision-Making for Hesitant Fuzzy Sets Based on Characteristic Objects Method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About