IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i22p4174-d966361.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality Performance Indicators Evaluation and Ranking by Using TOPSIS with the Interval-Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets in Project-Oriented Manufacturing Companies

Author

Listed:
  • Snežana Nestić

    (Faculty of Engineering, University of Kragujevac, 34000 Kragujevac, Serbia)

  • Ranka Gojković

    (Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of East Sarajevo, 71123 East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

  • Tijana Petrović

    (Faculty of Engineering, University of Kragujevac, 34000 Kragujevac, Serbia)

  • Danijela Tadić

    (Faculty of Engineering, University of Kragujevac, 34000 Kragujevac, Serbia)

  • Predrag Mimović

    (Faculty of Economics, University of Kragujevac, Liceja Kneževine Srbije 3, 34000 Kragujevac, Serbia)

Abstract

Project-oriented manufacturing companies aim to produce high-quality products according to customer requirements and a minimum rate of complaints. In order to achieve this, performance indicators, especially those related to product quality, must be measured and monitored by managers. This research proposes a fuzzy multi-criteria model for the selection of key performance indicators that are critical to product quality. The uncertainties in the relative importance of decision-makers, performance indicators, and their values are described by sets of natural language words that are modeled by the interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. The assessment of the relative importance of the decision-makers and the determination of their weights are based on the inclusion comparison probability between the closeness intuitionistic fuzzy sets. The determination of the weights vector of performance indicators is based on the integration of an interval-value fuzzy weighted geometric operator and the inclusion comparison probability between the closeness intuitionistic fuzzy sets. TOPSIS expanded with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers for ranking performance indicators is proposed. The developed model was tested on the real data collected from three manufacturing companies in the Republic of Serbia. Based on the obtained results, the top-ranked performance indicators were marked as critical for product quality and selected as quality key performance indicators.

Suggested Citation

  • Snežana Nestić & Ranka Gojković & Tijana Petrović & Danijela Tadić & Predrag Mimović, 2022. "Quality Performance Indicators Evaluation and Ranking by Using TOPSIS with the Interval-Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets in Project-Oriented Manufacturing Companies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(22), pages 1-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:22:p:4174-:d:966361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/22/4174/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/22/4174/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ningxuan Kang & Cong Zhao & Jingshan Li & John A. Horst, 2016. "A Hierarchical structure of key performance indicators for operation management and continuous improvement in production systems," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(21), pages 6333-6350, November.
    2. Kailash & Rajeev Kumar Saha & Sanjeev Goyal, 2019. "Benchmarking model to analyse ISCM performance of selected Indian manufacturing industries using fuzzy AHP technique," International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 33(1), pages 1-16.
    3. Ciprian Cristea & Maria Cristea, 2021. "KPIs for Operational Performance Assessment in Flexible Packaging Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Wohlers, Benedict & Dziwok, Stefan & Pasic, Faruk & Lipsmeier, Andre & Becker, Matthias, 2020. "Monitoring and control of production processes based on key performance indicators for mechatronic systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    5. S. Amaladhasan & P. Parthiban & R. Dhanalakshmi, 2019. "Green supply chain performance evaluation model for automotive manufacturing industries by using eco-balanced scorecard," International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 33(4), pages 442-467.
    6. Diogo Rodrigues & Radu Godina & Pedro Espadinha da Cruz, 2021. "Key Performance Indicators Selection through an Analytic Network Process Model for Tooling and Die Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Md. Abdul Moktadir & Ashish Dwivedi & Akib Rahman & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Razia Sultana & Jitender Madaan, 2020. "An investigation of key performance indicators for operational excellence towards sustainability in the leather products industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3331-3351, December.
    8. Brint, Andrew & Genovese, Andrea & Piccolo, Carmela & Taboada-Perez, Gerardo J., 2021. "Reducing data requirements when selecting key performance indicators for supply chain management: The case of a multinational automotive component manufacturer," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    9. M. Ishaq Bhatti & H. Awan & Z. Razaq, 2014. "The key performance indicators (KPIs) and their impact on overall organizational performance," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3127-3143, November.
    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. Nikolina Ljepava & Aleksandar Jovanović & Aleksandar Aleksić, 2023. "Industrial Application of the ANFIS Algorithm—Customer Satisfaction Assessment in the Dairy Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-22, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Md. Abdul Moktadir & Ashish Dwivedi & Akib Rahman & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Razia Sultana & Jitender Madaan, 2020. "An investigation of key performance indicators for operational excellence towards sustainability in the leather products industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3331-3351, December.
    2. Ciprian Cristea & Maria Cristea, 2021. "KPIs for Operational Performance Assessment in Flexible Packaging Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Diogo Rodrigues & Radu Godina & Pedro Espadinha da Cruz, 2021. "Key Performance Indicators Selection through an Analytic Network Process Model for Tooling and Die Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    4. Zhang, Haili & Song, Michael & Wang, Yufan, 2023. "Does AI-infused operations capability enhance or impede the relationship between information technology capability and firm performance?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Sharma, Varun & Vijayaraghavan, T.A.S. & Raghu Ram, Tata L., 2023. "Resolving operational paradox of sustainable supply chain: A decision framework approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    6. Bustinza, Oscar F. & Opazo-Basaez, Marco & Tarba, Shlomo, 2022. "Exploring the interplay between Smart Manufacturing and KIBS firms in configuring product-service innovation performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Carmen B. Rosa & Graciele Rediske & Paula D. Rigo & João Francisco M. Wendt & Leandro Michels & Julio Cezar M. Siluk, 2018. "Development of a Computational Tool for Measuring Organizational Competitiveness in the Photovoltaic Power Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-13, April.
    8. Irjayanti Maya & Azis Anton Mulyono, 2021. "Quality Management for Leather Industry to Increase Competitiveness in the Global Market," HOLISTICA – Journal of Business and Public Administration, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 16-30, August.
    9. Jing-Wei Liu & Che-Wei Chang & Yao-Ji Wang & Yi-Hui Liu, 2022. "Constructing a Decision Model for Health Club Members to Purchase Coaching Programs during the COVID-19 Epidemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-13, October.
    10. J. Vicente Tébar-Rubio & F. Javier Ramírez & M. José Ruiz-Ortega, 2023. "Conducting Action Research to Improve Operational Efficiency in Manufacturing: The Case of a First-Tier Automotive Supplier," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 427-459, June.
    11. Md. Tarek Chowdhury & Aditi Sarkar & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Md. Abdul Moktadir, 2022. "A case study on strategies to deal with the impacts of COVID-19 pandemic in the food and beverage industry," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 166-178, June.
    12. Moktadir, Md. Abdul & Rahman, Mohammed Mizanur, 2022. "Energy production from leather solid wastes by anaerobic digestion: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    13. Jones Luís Schaefer & Paulo Roberto Tardio & Ismael Cristofer Baierle & Elpidio Oscar Benitez Nara, 2023. "GIANN—A Methodology for Optimizing Competitiveness Performance Assessment Models for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, February.
    14. Nora CHIRIȚĂ & Andrei VIȘAN & Mihaela POPESCU, 2020. "Measuring Adobe Company performance from the perspective of a Complex Adaptive System," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania - AGER, vol. 0(4(625), W), pages 55-72, Winter.
    15. Ionuț NICA & Nora CHIRIȚĂ & Ștefan IONESCU, 2021. "Using of KPIs and Dashboard in the analysis of Nike company's performance management," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania - AGER, vol. 0(1(626), S), pages 61-84, Spring.
    16. Michael Huber & Nikola Komatina & Vladan Paunović & Snežana Nestić, 2023. "Analysis of the Relationship between the Organizational Resilience Factors and Key Performance Indicators’ Recovery Time in Uncertain Environments in Industrial Enterprises," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Ashish Dwivedi & Sanjoy Kumar Paul, 2022. "A framework for digital supply chains in the era of circular economy: Implications on environmental sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1249-1274, May.
    18. Favi, Claudio & Marconi, Marco & Mandolini, Marco & Germani, Michele, 2022. "Sustainable life cycle and energy management of discrete manufacturing plants in the industry 4.0 framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 312(C).
    19. Tien-Hsiang Chang & Kuei-Ying Hsu & Hsin-Pin Fu & Ying-Hua Teng & Yi-Jhen Li, 2022. "Integrating FSE and AHP to Identify Valuable Customer Needs by Service Quality Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-15, February.
    20. Wen, Xuanhao & Cao, Huajun & Hon, Bernard & Chen, Erheng & Li, Hongcheng, 2021. "Energy value mapping: A novel lean method to integrate energy efficiency into production management," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    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:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:22:p:4174-:d:966361. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.