IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v217y2012i2p381-393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multi-criteria model for auditing a Predictive Maintenance Programme

Author

Listed:
  • Bana e Costa, Carlos A.
  • Carnero, María Carmen
  • Oliveira, Mónica Duarte

Abstract

Auditing tools can play a key role in the continuous improvement of maintenance policies, in particular to enhance predictive maintenance (PM). This paper proposes a multi-criteria model for auditing a Predictive Maintenance Programme (PMP) developed and implemented in the General Hospital of Ciudad Real (GHCR) in Spain. The model has a two-level structure, with top level auditing areas specified by second level auditing criteria on which the performance of the PMP should be appraised. This structure resulted from the analysis and discussion of an internal questionnaire to the management, technical and consulting staff of GHCR. This also guided the association of a performance scale with each criterion, describing several reference levels of accomplishment. Using the MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique) approach, a hierarchical additive value model was constructed, with criteria weights and value scales derived from staff judgments of comparison of different reference levels and profiles of performance. This model enables managers to measure the performance of the PMP and its added value for the hospital, not only against each audit criterion individually, but also on each area and in overall terms. Integrated in a management “tableau de bord”, the model outputs permit the identification of PMP deficiencies requiring urgent intervention and corrective measures for its continuous improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Carnero, María Carmen & Oliveira, Mónica Duarte, 2012. "A multi-criteria model for auditing a Predictive Maintenance Programme," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 381-393.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:217:y:2012:i:2:p:381-393
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2011.09.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221711008472
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lebas, Michel J., 1995. "Performance measurement and performance management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-3), pages 23-35, October.
    2. Edwards, Ward & Barron, F. Hutton, 1994. "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 306-325, December.
    3. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Nunes da Silva, Fernando & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2001. "Conflict dissolution in the public sector: A case-study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 388-401, April.
    4. Pasiouras, Fotios & Gaganis, Chrysovalantis & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2007. "Multicriteria decision support methodologies for auditing decisions: The case of qualified audit reports in the UK," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(3), pages 1317-1330, August.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, April.
    6. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2010. "A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 247-286, March.
    7. Scarf, Philip A., 1997. "On the application of mathematical models in maintenance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 493-506, June.
    8. Katrin Borcherding & Thomas Eppel & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1991. "Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(12), pages 1603-1619, December.
    9. Cliville, Vincent & Berrah, Lamia & Mauris, Gilles, 2007. "Quantitative expression and aggregation of performance measurements based on the MACBETH multi-criteria method," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 171-189, January.
    10. Bottomley, Paul A. & Doyle, John R., 2001. "A comparison of three weight elicitation methods: good, better, and best," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 553-560, December.
    11. Bayraktar, Demet, 1998. "A knowledge-based expert system approach for the auditing process of some elements in the quality assurance system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 37-46, September.
    12. Waeyenbergh, Geert & Pintelon, Liliane, 2002. "A framework for maintenance concept development," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 299-313, June.
    13. James S. Dyer & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1979. "Group Preference Aggregation Rules Based on Strength of Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(9), pages 822-832, September.
    14. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Rui Carvalho, 2002. "Assigning priorities for maintenance, repair and refurbishment in managing a municipal housing stock," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 380-391, April.
    15. Swanson, Laura, 2001. "Linking maintenance strategies to performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 237-244, April.
    16. Angilella, Silvia & Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto, 2010. "Non-additive robust ordinal regression: A multiple criteria decision model based on the Choquet integral," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 277-288, February.
    17. Wang, Hongzhou, 2002. "A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 469-489, June.
    18. Christer, A. H. & Wang, W. & Sharp, J. M., 1997. "A state space condition monitoring model for furnace erosion prediction and replacement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 1-14, August.
    19. Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2009. "Building a set of additive value functions representing a reference preorder and intensities of preference: GRIP method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 460-486, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:reensy:v:166:y:2017:i:c:p:87-98 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    3. Alessio Ishizaka & Maynard Gordon, 2017. "MACBETHSort: a multiple criteria decision aid procedure for sorting strategic products," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(1), pages 53-61, January.
    4. Xia, Tangbin & Xi, Lifeng & Zhou, Xiaojun & Lee, Jay, 2012. "Dynamic maintenance decision-making for series–parallel manufacturing system based on MAM–MTW methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 221(1), pages 231-240.
    5. Xia, Tangbin & Jin, Xiaoning & Xi, Lifeng & Ni, Jun, 2015. "Production-driven opportunistic maintenance for batch production based on MAM–APB scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 781-790.
    6. repec:eee:energy:v:129:y:2017:i:c:p:255-272 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:217:y:2012:i:2:p:381-393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.