臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：應用DEMATEL和TOPSIS評估物流中心作業與設施的事故風險項目–以零售商物流中心為例
作者：鄒伯衡
作者(外文)：Tsou, Po-Heng
校院名稱：朝陽科技大學
系所名稱：企業管理系台灣產業策略發展博士班
指導教授：黃明弘
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2023
主題關鍵詞：物流中心作業設施；人為因素分析與分類系統；失效模式與效應分析；決策實驗室分析法；理想解相似度順序偏好法；Distribution Center；Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFCAS)；Failure Mode and effects Analysis (FMEA)；Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory, (DEMATEL)；Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:0
物流中心的功能是幫助生產者與零售商持續合作的重要橋樑，形成一套良好生產、銷售與消費的生態系統，其中具有影響因素則是如何維持物流中心作業與設施的安全運行至關重要。因此，在物流中心作業與設施運作流程中，建立適當的風險降低策略以避免事故發生，將是決策者關注的重點。本研究旨在應用HFACS，FMEA，DEMATEL，TOPSIS等方法來評估物流中心作業與設施事故的風險及降低失效風險。本研究透過與臺灣最大連鎖超市PX Mart 零售商物流中心專業經理人進行標竿案例研究，陳述零售商型物流中心作業與設施事故的風險因素。本研究建立20種可能的失效模式給受訪的專業經理人並彙整以上的分類和模式，以評估潛在風險。除此之外，本研究還收集了失效模式與效應分析（FMEA）模型中的四個風險指標為嚴重程度、發生機率、檢測率和預期成本，用於評估風險因素。使用決策實驗室分析法（DEMATEL）技術確定影響風險指標（Wi）的權重結果，然後應用理想解相似度順序偏好法 (TOPSIS)方法使獲得每種失效模式的優先順序。本研究得到研究結果可從零售商型物流中心作業與設施事故各失效模式的排名結果可以看出，其中「人員工作不當」是首要的失效模式，其次是「火災災害」、「環境受到危害」也就是廢棄物隨意處置造成物流中心經常性環境危害，其次「員工犯罪行為」與「消防設備失效」。本研究主要貢獻是，透過實證分析，建立零售商型物流中心作業與設施事故關聯重要的20個關鍵風險因素以彌補了過去研究的不足，因為過去這些研究缺乏提出對物流中心間設施事故風險因素的實證分析及有效降低風險方法的執行優先順序的建議。
Distribution center is especially important solution for helping manufacturers collaborate with retailers by improving mutual trust and communication and connection. Therefore, the safe operation of distribution center facility is crucial to the national economic development and people's daily needs. Therefore, establishing properly risk mitigation strategies in distribution center facility to avoid accidents occurred is essential. To reduce risks of failure, this paper is aimed at the application of Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFCAS), Failure Mode and effects Analysis (FMEA), Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory, (DEMATEL), Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) to assess the risk of distribution center operation and facility accidents. A benchmark case using data from PX Mart, a supermarket chain store in Taiwan, is used to illustrate the risk factors of distribution center operation and facility accident. Based on the HFACS method, the interviewee of the professional technicians provides 20 failure modes which are classified into this paper for assessing potential risks. Also, the four risk indicators are Severity, Occurrence, Detection, expected cost from FMEA model, which are collected by this paper to assess risk factors. The result of the influential weights of the risk indicators (Wi) are determined using DEMATEL technique, followed by application of the TOPSIS method to obtain the priority for each failure mode by using Excel tool. The ranking results of each failure mode of retail distribution center operation and facility accidents can be seeing that “Incorrect Work by Personnel” is the most critical failure mode and be followed by “Fire Disaster” and “Environmental Hazards occur frequently in the random disposal of wastes.” The main contribution is that a proposed suggestion of important 20 crucial risk factors make up the insufficiency of past research that lack an empirical analysis of risk factors of retail distribution center operation and facility accidents and indicate implementation priorities of effective risk reduction methods.
期刊及研討會
1.Addy, T. N., “Improving warehouse and inventory management: Operational Efficiency and Transport Safety.”, Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences, Jyväskylä, Finland, (2012). Available online: https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/52246/Addy-Tayie_Nicholas+Ewiene.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 30 August 2022).
2.Agrawal, D. P. and Kamble, D. N., “GRA and ANN integrated approach for photochemical machining of Al/Sic composite.” Mater. Today: Proc. 4 (2017) :7177–7188.
3.Alban RF, Anania EC, Cohen TN, Fabri PJ, Gewertz BL, Jain M, Jopling JK, Maggio PM, Sanchez JA, Sax HC. Performance Improvement in Surgery. Curr Probl Surg. 56.6 (2019): 204–208.
4.Breiing, A., & Kunz, A, “Critical consideration and improvement of the FMEA.” Proceedings of Tools and Methods of Competitive Engineering–TMCE , Wuhan, China, 8 (2002): 519–530..
5.Bera, B., “Susceptibility of deforestation hotspots in Terai–Dooars belt of Himalayan Foothills.”: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS models. Journal of King Saud University–Computer and Information Sciences 34.10 (2022): 8794–8806.
6.Bonsu. and Jude., "A systems approach to mining safety: an application of the Swiss cheese model." Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 116.8 (2016): 776–784.
7.Boral. and Soumava., "An integrated approach for fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MAIRCA." Engineering Failure Analysis 108 (2020): 104–195.
8.Chen, P. J. and Wen, K. L., “The Completeness of Grey Relational Analysis and the Development of Computer Toolbox.” J. Grey Syst. 20 (2017): 79–89.
9.Chin, K. C., "A perceptual computing–based method to prioritize failure modes in failure mode and effect analysis and its application to edible bird nest farming." Applied Soft Computing 49 (2016): 734–747.
10.De Koster, R. B.; Stam, D.; Balk, B. M., Accidents happen: The influence of safety–specific transformational leadership, safety consciousness, and hazard reducing systems on warehouse accidents. J. Oper. Manag. 29 (2011): 753–765.
11.De Vries, J.; De Koster, R.; Stam, D., “Safety does not happen by accident: Antecedents to a safer warehouse.” Prod. Oper. Manag. 25 (2016): 1377–1390.
12.Dong, C., “Failure mode and effects analysis based on fuzzy utility cost estimation.” Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag 24 (2007): 958–971.
13.Gabus, A. and Fontela, C., "World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL." Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland 1.8 (1972): 12–14.
14.Hsu, H. Y.; Hwang, M. H.; Chiu, Y.S.P. “Development of a strategic framework for sustainable supply chain management.” AIMS Environ. Sci. 8 (2021): 532–552.
15.Hu, C. K., Chang, Y. C., Lee Y. T., "Integrating TOPSIS and DEMATEL methods to rank the risk of failure of FMEA." International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 13.06 (2014): 1229–1257.
16.Hu, K. Y., “Assessment of Operational Risks for Cold Chain Distribution.” Journal of Management and Systems Vol. 21, No. 1 (2014): 139–160
17.Huang, C. Y., Shyu, J. Z., Tzeng, G. H., "Reconfiguring the innovation policy portfolios for Taiwan's SIP Mall industry." Technovation 27.12 (2007): 744–765.
18. Hulme. and Adam., "Accident analysis in practice: A review of Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) applications in the peer reviewed academic literature." Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Vol. 63. No. 1. Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, (2019).
19.Hwang, C. L., "Methods for multiple attribute decision making." Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications a state–of–the–art survey (1981):
58–191.
20.Hwang, C. L., Lai, Y. J., Liu, T. Y., "A new approach for multiple objective decision making." Computers & operations research 20.8 (1993): 889–899.
21.Julong, D. Introduction to grey system theory. J. Grey Syst. 1 (1989):1–24.
22.Karim., Rubayet., Karmaker., "Machine selection by AHP and TOPSIS methods." American Journal of Industrial Engineering 4.1 (2016): 7–13.
23.Kmenta, S. and Ishii, K., “Scenario–based failure modes and effects analysis using expected cost.” J. Mech. Des 126 (2004): 1027–1035.
24.Kmenta., Steven., Kosuke Ishii., "Scenario–based FMEA: a life cycle cost perspective." International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Vol. 35159. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, (2000).
25.Lai, K.H.; Pang, Y.; Wong, C.W.; Lun, Y.H.; Ng, Y.N., “Are trade and transport Distribution activities mutually reinforcing? Some empirical evidence from ASEAN countries.” J. Shipp. Trade 4 (2019): 1–17.
26.Lee, H. S., "Revised DEMATEL: resolving the infeasibility of DEMATEL." Applied Mathematical Modelling 37.10–11 (2013): 6746–6757.
27.Leveson. and Nancy., "A new accident model for engineering safer systems." Safety science 42.4 (2004): 237–270.
28.Li, S. S., "DEMATEL technique: A systematic review of the state-of-the-art literature on methodologies and applications." Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2018 (2018): 1-33.
29.Lin, C. J and Wu, W. W., "A causal analytical method for group decision–making under fuzzy environment." Expert systems with applications 34.1 (2008): 205–213.
30.Liou, J. H., "A hybrid model integrating FMEA and HFACS to assess the risk of inter–city bus accidents." Complex & Intelligent Systems 8.3 (2022): 2451–2470.
31.Liou, J. J.; Liu, P. C.; Luo, S. S.; Lo, H. W.; Wu, Y. Z., A hybrid model integrating FMEA and HFACS to assess the risk of inter–city bus accidents. Complex Intel. Syst. 8 (2022): 2451–2470.
32.Liou, J. H., Yen, L., Tzeng, G. H., "Building an effective safety management system for airlines." Journal of Air Transport Management 14.1 (2008): 20–26.
33.Liu, H. C., "Improving risk evaluation in FMEA with a hybrid multiple criteria decision–making method." International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32.7 (2015): 763–782.
34.Liu, H. C., "Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment." Expert Systems with Applications
39.17 (2012): 12926–12934.
35.Liu, H. C., Liu, L., Liu, N., "Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: A literature review." Expert systems with applications 40.2 (2013): 828–838.
36.Liu, R., "An impacting factors analysis of miners' unsafe acts based on HFACS–CM and SEM." Process Safety and Environmental Protection 122 (2019): 221–231.
37.Lo, H. W., "A novel failure mode and effect analysis model for machine tool risk analysis." Reliability Engineering & System Safety 183 (2019): 173–183.
38.Lo, H.W., and Liou J. H., "A novel multiple–criteria decision–making–based FMEA model for risk assessment." Applied soft computing 73 (2018): 684–696.
39.Lo, H.W.; Liaw, C.F.; Gul, M.; Lin, K.Y.,” Sustainable supplier evaluation and transportation planning in multi–level supply chain networks using multi–attribute–and multi–objective decision making”. Comput. Ind. Eng. 162 (2021): 107–756.
40.Lo, H.W. and Liou, J.J., ” A novel multiple–criteria decision–making–based FMEA model for risk assessment”. Appl. Soft Comput.73 (2018): 684–696.
41.Lo, H.W.; Shiue, W.; Liou, J.J.; Tzeng, G.H., “A hybrid MCDM–based FMEA model for identification of critical failure modes in manufacturing”. Appl. Soft Comput. 24 (2020): 15733–15745.
42.Lo, H.W.; Shiue, W.; Liou, J.J.; Tzeng., G.H., “A hybrid MCDM–based FMEA model for identification of critical failure modes in manufacturing.” Appl. Soft Comput. 24 (2020): 15733–15745.
43.Marucci–Wellman, H. R.; Courtney, T.K.; Corns, H.L.; Sorock, G.S.; Webster, B.S.; Wasiak, R.; Noy, Y.I.; Matz, S.; Leamon, T.B. The direct cost burden of 13 years of disabling workplace injuries in the US (1998–2010): Findings from the Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index. J. Saf. Res. 55 (2015): 53–62.
44.Michael, J.; Gorucu, S., “Analysis of Forklift and Pallet Jack Injuries in Wood–Related Industries.” For. Prod. J. 70 (2020): 403–408.
45.Pamučar, D.; Ecer, F.; Cirovic, G.; Arlasheedi, M. A., “Application of improved best worst method (BWM) in real–world problems”. Mathematics 8 (2020): 13–42.
46.Reason, J. and Newport, R. I., “Human Error.” Int. J. Man–Mach. Stud. 39 (1990): 1056–1057.
47.Reinach, S. and Viale, A., “Application of a human error framework to conduct train accident/incident investigations”. Accid. Anal. Prev. 38 (2006): 396–406.
48.Rezaei, J., “Best–worst multi–criteria decision–making method”. Omega 53 (2015): 49–57.
49.Rezaei, J., “Best–worst multi–criteria decision–making method: Some properties and a linear model”. Omega 64 (2016): 126–130.
50.Rostamabadi, A.; Jahangiri, M.; Zarei, E.; Kamalinia, M.; Banaee, S.; Samaei, M.R.,” A novel fuzzy bayesian network–HFACS (FBN–HFACS) model for analyzing human and organization factors (HOFs) in process accidents.” Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 132 (2019): 59–72.
51.Scharski, E., “Want A Safer Warehouse? Start with Forklift Users”. Food Logist. (2015): 36–41.
52.Sharma., Kapil Dev., Shobhit Srivastava., "Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) implementation: a literature review." J Adv Res Aeronaut Space Sci 5.1–2 (2018): 1–17.
53.Swartz, G., “Warehouse safety: A comprehensive review.” Prof. Saf. 43 (1998): 20.
54.Szymonik, A., “Warehouse safety”. Logist. Transp. 38 (2018): 101–112.
55.Taherdoost., Hamed., Mitra Madanchian., "Multi–criteria decision making (MCDM) methods and concepts." Encyclopedia 3.1 (2023): 77–87.
56.Tazi, Nacef., Eric Châtelet., Youcef Bouzidi., "Using a hybrid cost–FMEA analysis for wind turbine reliability analysis." Energies 10.3 (2017): 276.
57.Tzeng, G. H., Chiang, C. H., Li, C. W., "Evaluating intertwined effects in e–learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL." Expert Systems with Applications 32. 4 (2007): 1028–1044.
58.Uzun and Berna., "The technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS)." Application of Multi–Criteria Decision Analysis in Environmental and Civil Engineering 4 (2021): 25–30.
59.Wu, H. H., Chen, H. K., Shieh, J. I., "Evaluating performance criteria of employment service outreach program personnel by DEMATEL method." Expert Systems with Applications 37.7 (2010): 5219–5223.
60.Yoon, Kwangsun.,"A reconciliation among discrete compromise solutions. " Journal of the Operational Research Society 38 (1987): 277–286.
61.Yu, R. and Tzeng, G. H., "A soft computing method for multi–criteria decision making with dependence and feedback." Applied mathematics and computation 180.1 (2006): 63–75.
62.Zarei, E.; Yazdi, M.; Abbassi, R.;” Khan, F., “A hybrid model for human factor analysis in process accidents” FBN–HFACS. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind, 57 (2019): 142–155.
63.Zavadskas., Edmundas Kazimieras., Algimantas Zakarevicius., Jurgita Antucheviciene.,"Evaluation of ranking accuracy in multi–criteria decisions.” Informatica 17.4 (2006): 601–618.
64.Zeng, S. X., Chun M. T., Tam, W. Y., "Integrating safety, environmental and quality risks for project management using a FMEA method." Engineering Economics 66.1 (2010): 44–50
65.Zhang, Y., Jing, L., Sun, C., “A Systems–Based Analysis of China–Tianjin port fire and explosion: A comparison of HFACS” , AcciMap, and STAMP. J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 18 (2018): 1386–1400.
66.Zhijiao, D., Yu, S., Chen, Z., "Enhanced minimum–cost conflict risk mitigation–based FMEA for risk assessment in a probabilistic linguistic context." Computers & Industrial Engineering 174 (2022): 108–789.
 
書籍
1.美國SOLE國際物流協會台灣分會，物流與運籌管理(第七版)，全華圖書，2020。
2.鄭燦堂，風險管理─理論與實務，五南圖書出版公司,1995。
3.凌氤寶、康裕民、陳森松，保險學－理論與實務，華泰文化,1998。
4.筒井信行，風險管理–賴青松譯，日之昇文化事業有限公司, 1999。
5.Contemporary Distribution, Global Edition/ Author Paul R. Murphy / A. Michael Knemeyer Publisher Pearson, 2017.
6.Hoyland., Arnljot., Rausand, M., System reliability theory: models, statistical methods and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
7.Paul Murphy A and Michael Knemeyer ., Contemporary Distribution, Page196h, Publisher Pearson, 2017.
8.Qureshi. And Zahid Hasan., "A review of accident modelling approaches for complex critical sociotechnical systems." Published by Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence Division DSTO Defense Science and Technology Organization, 2008.
9.Shappell, Scott A., Douglas, A. W., "Applying Reason: The human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS)." Human Factors and Aerospace Safety, 2001.
10.Williams, Jr. C., Arthur, G. L., Glendenning, G. W., "Principles of Risk Management and Insurance ", Malvern, 1st ed., 1978.
11.Yoon, K. Paul. and Hwang, C. L., Multiple attribute decision making: an introduction. Sage publications, 1995.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：180（臺灣：157，外國：23） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2413552 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68219050
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上