IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p13703-d950287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Blockchain-Based Platform for Product Lifecycle Management

Author

Listed:
  • Mubashir Hayat

    (Chair of Production and Operations Management, Brandenburg University of Technology, 03046 Cottbus, Germany)

  • Herwig Winkler

    (Chair of Production and Operations Management, Brandenburg University of Technology, 03046 Cottbus, Germany)

Abstract

Blockchain technology has disrupted traditional business processes and hence gained significant attention and popularity in recent years. Consequently, a number of blockchain-based platforms are available today that offer vast applications across multiple sectors and industries. Implementing these blockchain-based platforms as an alternative to traditional product lifecycle management systems (PLMs) is one of the applications. However, before any platform is adopted, its nature, functionalities, and adaptability need to be clearly defined, evaluated, and verified. In this context, the proposed work explores the available blockchain-based platforms that can be used for the purpose of product lifecycle management. We then apply one of the multi-criteria decision-making techniques, i.e., the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), to select the best possible blockchain-based platform for PLM. As transaction speed, data privacy, and scalability are our prime concerns in PLM, we only considered the permissioned (private) blockchain platforms as available alternatives in the final selection process. Results achieved on the basis of considered criteria show that Hyperledger Fabric is the top-ranked among available alternatives to be used for PLM. Furthermore, as blockchain is a new technology, a clear comparison of the available platforms based on the performance-based metrics and key performance indicators is not completely matured and is still in the development stage. However, our proposed approach can be considered an attempt to create a procedure for evaluating blockchain-based platform implementation in any sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Mubashir Hayat & Herwig Winkler, 2022. "An Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Blockchain-Based Platform for Product Lifecycle Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13703-:d:950287
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13703/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13703/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Singh, Shikha & Chandra Misra, Subhas & Kumar, Sameer, 2020. "Identification and ranking of the risk factors involved in PLM implementation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Wang, Yingli & Singgih, Meita & Wang, Jingyao & Rit, Mihaela, 2019. "Making sense of blockchain technology: How will it transform supply chains?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 221-236.
    3. Moritz Berneis & Devis Bartsch & Herwig Winkler, 2021. "Applications of Blockchain Technology in Logistics and Supply Chain Management—Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    5. Moritz Berneis & Herwig Winkler, 2021. "Value Proposition Assessment of Blockchain Technology for Luxury, Food, and Healthcare Supply Chains," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Leng, Jiewu & Ruan, Guolei & Jiang, Pingyu & Xu, Kailin & Liu, Qiang & Zhou, Xueliang & Liu, Chao, 2020. "Blockchain-empowered sustainable manufacturing and product lifecycle management in industry 4.0: A survey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Yousefi, Samuel & Mohamadpour Tosarkani, Babak, 2022. "An analytical approach for evaluating the impact of blockchain technology on sustainable supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    8. Tsan-Ming Choi, 2021. "Creating all-win by blockchain technology in supply chains: Impacts of agents’ risk attitudes towards cryptocurrency," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(11), pages 2580-2595, November.
    9. Bartsch, Devis & Winkler, Herwig, 2020. "Blockchain technology in Germany: An excerpt of real use cases in logistics industry," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Kersten, Wolfgang & Blecker, Thorsten & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Data Science and Innovation in Supply Chain Management: How Data Transforms the Value Chain. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Lo, volume 29, pages 699-735, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    10. James S. Dyer, 1990. "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 249-258, March.
    11. Abderahman Rejeb & John G. Keogh & Horst Treiblmaier, 2019. "Leveraging the Internet of Things and Blockchain Technology in Supply Chain Management," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, July.
    12. James S. Dyer, 1990. "A Clarification of "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 274-275, March.
    13. Mubashir Hayat & Herwig Winkler, 2022. "From Traditional Product Lifecycle Management Systems to Blockchain-Based Platforms," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-14, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mubashir Hayat & Herwig Winkler, 2022. "From Traditional Product Lifecycle Management Systems to Blockchain-Based Platforms," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Jacob Lohmer & Elias Ribeiro da Silva & Rainer Lasch, 2022. "Blockchain Technology in Operations & Supply Chain Management: A Content Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-88, May.
    3. Shanshan Hu & Xiangjun Cheng & Demin Zhou & Hong Zhang, 2017. "GIS-based flood risk assessment in suburban areas: a case study of the Fangshan District, Beijing," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(3), pages 1525-1543, July.
    4. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    5. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    6. Suwignjo, P. & Bititci, U. S & Carrie, A. S, 2000. "Quantitative models for performance measurement system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-3), pages 231-241, March.
    7. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    8. Huang, Samuel H. & Keskar, Harshal, 2007. "Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 510-523, February.
    9. Hoene, Andreas & Jawale, Mandar & Neukirchen, Thomas & Bednorz, Nicole & Schulz, Holger & Hauser, Simon, 2019. "Bewertung von Technologielösungen für Automatisierung und Ergonomieunterstützung der Intralogistik," ild Schriftenreihe 64, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management, Institut für Logistik- & Dienstleistungsmanagement (ild).
    10. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    11. Seyyed-Alireza Radmanesh & Alireza Haji & Omid Fatahi Valilai, 2023. "Blockchain-Based Architecture for a Sustainable Supply Chain in Cloud Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, June.
    12. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    13. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Bert De Reyck & Zeger Degraeve, 2008. "An Integrated Decision-Making Approach for Improving European Air Traffic Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(8), pages 1395-1409, August.
    14. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.
    15. Jain, Bharat A. & Nag, Barin N., 1996. "A decision-support model for investment decisions in new ventures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 473-486, May.
    16. Kevin Kam Fung Yuen, 2022. "Decision models for information systems planning using primitive cognitive network process: comparisons with analytic hierarchy process," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1759-1785, July.
    17. K. Madan Shankar & P. Udhaya Kumar & Devika Kannan, 2016. "Analyzing the Drivers of Advanced Sustainable Manufacturing System Using AHP Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-10, August.
    18. Siraj, Sajid & Mikhailov, Ludmil & Keane, John A., 2015. "Contribution of individual judgments toward inconsistency in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 557-567.
    19. Tavana, M. & Kennedy, D. T. & Joglekar, P., 1996. "A group decision support framework for consensus ranking of technical manager candidates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 523-538, October.
    20. Tomasz Witold Trojanowski & Pawel Tadeusz Kazibudzki, 2021. "Prospects and Constraints of Sustainable Marketing Mix Development for Poland’s High-Energy Consumer Goods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13703-:d:950287. 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.