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：應用資料包絡分析法於失效模式與效應分析以增強評估能力之研究
作者：孫國隆
作者(外文)：Kuo-Lung Sun
校院名稱：國立中央大學
系所名稱：企業管理研究所
指導教授：張東生
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2008
主題關鍵詞：風險優先指數；群集分析；保證區域；資料包絡分析法；失效模式與效應分析；Stratification；Failure Mode and Effects Analysis；FMEA；Data En
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(4) 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:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:321
目的 – 本研究的目的提出一種全新的評估方法以強化『失效模式與效應分析 (FMEA)』的能力；藉由實務例子的再運用，本研究所提出的評估方法能夠求得各模式相對失效的排序以及求出各失效模式的改善配當量。同時針對各失效模式提出具有效益性的管理意涵。
方法 – 雖然『失效模式與效應分析』能提供快速與簡易方法以鑑別產品或系統的所有失效模式的機率排序，但在『失效模式與效應分析』排序方法中係以風險優先指數(RPN)為準則。此風險優先指數為模式的嚴重度、發生率與偵測度的乘積。此嚴重度為第一個輸入因子亦即模式失效後所衍生的後果程度；第二個輸入因子為發生頻率亦即該模式會發生失效的概率；第三個輸入因子為偵測度亦即模式在失效發生前能夠被偵測出來的程度。『失效模式與效應分析』的主要缺點之一為各失效模式從不同嚴重度、發生率與偵測度的組合乘績，可能會有相同的風險優先指數因而造成決策的困擾。另一個缺點為『失效模式與效應分析』不探討各輸入因子的貢獻參數以至於缺乏因子量化的改善。藉由資料包絡分析法(DEA)與其延伸的模式，本研究從既有的嚴重度、發生率與偵測度即可求得風險排序，而不再由RPN做排序。再者DEA提供各因子的改善尺度。本研究方法藉由既有的實務FMEA的原始資料以DEA的模式展開。第一例為電腦軟體程式開發FMEA，當某一執行指令未完全時，軟體會失效。本例在展現DEA工具手法如何運用在FMEA的完全表達。第二例為醫療體系系統FMEA，當監控系統未展開與執行時，醫療糾紛會發生。本例藉由結合FMEA和DEA的方法提供醫療系統的風險管理。
主要發現 - 經由軟體開發以及醫療系統DEA的再運用，本研究發現所提出的研究方法論，證明DEA不但可以如傳統FMEA的風險排序，而且能強化評估能力，較特別的是能提供FMEA所缺乏的因子量化改善方向。這些量化指標對管理者提供更深層的管理意涵，尤其提供資源再分配與風險管理的參考。
實務應用–本研究方法論讓管理者或設計者在開發一新系統或新產品階段即能夠掌握失效模式。檢討各貢獻因子而不是只看RPN的大小。找出新的因子度量與原始因子度量的差異以決定努力的方向。最後群集分析提供最具經濟效益的投資組合。
價值 – 本研究提出具獨特性、穩健、具體的新方法論以做為失效分析的工具。本方法論克服傳統FMEA的缺失，不但考慮到多重條件與因子權重，並且權衡各因子的貢獻度。之外，本論文提供一些未來值得研究的方向。
Purpose - The purpose of present study is to propose a state-of-the-art new approach to enhance assessment capabilities of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA); and demonstrates it through practical examples to show how relative failure rankings can be determined and to identify improving scales for failure modes. Subsequently provides helpful managerial implications for management.
Methodology - Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) offers a quick and easy way for identifying ranking-order for all failure modes in a system or a product. In FMEA the ranking methods is so called risk priority number (RPN), which is a mathematical product of severity (S), occurrence (O), and detection (D). The SODs are input criteria where S is the seriousness of the effect of the failure. The second input is O, which is the probability or frequency of the failure. The third input is D, which is the probability of failure being detected before the impact of the effect is realized. One of major disadvantages of this ranking-order is that the failure mode with different combination of SODs may generate same RPN resulting in difficult decision-making. Another shortfall of FMEA is lacking of discerning contribution factors, which lead to insufficient information about scaling of improving effort. Through data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique and its extension, the proposed approach evolves the current rankings for failure modes by exclusively investigating SOD in lieu of RPN and to furnish with improving scales for SOD. To demonstrate how DEA is implemented to enhance FMEA, the paper examines two real case examples origin in FMEA setting. One is computer software coding where failure could happen during execution if process of coding shall incomplete. The case demonstrates how DEA is applied on existing FMEA. The other case is healthcare discipline where failure could arise if surveillance measures did not fully implement and execute. This case is to provide risk management in healthcare through integration of FMEA and DEA.
Findings - By demonstrating an illustrative example and extended case study, the proposed approach supports that DEA can not only complement traditional FMEA for improving assessment capability but also, especially, to provide corrective information regarding the failure factors – severity, occurrence and detection. Further application of DEA extensions also reveals that the utilization of this methodology is useful to managing resource allocation and risk management.
Practical implications – It is shown that the proposed approach enables manager/designers to prevent system or product failures at early stage of design. Moreover the approach is able to provide managerial insight of SOD more effectively rather than justifying the efforts on RPN alone. Projection of each SOD is determined to help manager examine scale of efforts. Finally the stratification analysis offers the economical allocations of failure modes with respect to the incurred costs and the efficiency.
Originality/value – The paper proposes a state-of-the-art new approach, robust, structured and useful in practice, for failure analysis. The methodology, within a firmed methodology, overcomes some of the largely known shortfalls of traditional FMEA: it takes into account multiple criteria and restricted weighted; and it analyses the failure modes’ ranking considering not only the direct impacts of failure indexes, but also the contribution of these indexes. The paper also provides worthwhile future research directions.
REFERENCES

Adler and Golany (2002), Including principal component weights to improve discrimination in data envelopment analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53, p985-991.
Al-Hamadi, G.M., (1995), A comparative study of multiple-attribute decision-making techniques using a subjective experiment, The George Washington University.
Ali, J., (2007), Productivity and efficiency in Indian meat processing industry: A DEA approach, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 62, 4, p637.
Anderson, P. and Peterson N.C., (1993) A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis, Management Science, 39, p1261-1264.
Bandyopadhyay, T., Dey, P.K., and Gupta, S., (1997), A cost-effective maintenance program through risk analysis, AACE International Transactions, Morgantown, p184.
Banker, R.D., R.F. Charnes, and W.W. Cooper (1984) "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis, Management Science vol. 30, p1078-1092.
Barker K.N., Flynn E.A., and Pepper G.A., (2002), Medication errors observed in 36 health care facilities, Arch Intern Med,162, p1897–1903.
Bates, D.W.,(1999), Frequency, consequences and prevention of adverse drug events. J Qual Clin Pract,19, p13–7.
Bates D.W, Cullen DJ, and Laird N, (1995), Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events. Implications for prevention, ADE Prevention Study Group, JAMA , 274, p29–34.
Battles, J.B., Dixon, N.M, Borotkanics, R.J, Rabin-Fastmen, B. and Kaplan. H.S., (2006), Sensemaking of patient safety risks and hazards, Health Services Research. Vol. 41, Iss. 4p2; p1555.
Bernroider, E. and Stix, V., (2007), A method using weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis for ranking and validity issues in decision making, Computer and Operations Research, New York, Vol. 34, Iss. 9, p2637.
Besterfield, D.H., Besterfield, V.M., Besterfield, G.H. and Besterfield, M.S., (1999), Total Quality Management, 2nd., Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Bojnec, S. and Latruffe, Laure, (2008), Measures of farm business efficiency, Industrial management and Data Systems, Vol. 108, No. 2, p258-270.
Bonnabry, P., Cingria, L., Sadeghipour, F., Ing, H., Fonzo-Christe, C., and Pfister, R.E., (2005), Use of a systematic risk analysis method to improve safety in the production of paediatric parental nutrition solutions, Quality Safety Health Care, 14, p93-98.

Braglia, M., (2000) MAFMA: multi-attribute failure mode analysis, The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17, Iss. 9, p1017.
Byrnes, P. and Freeman, M, (1999), Using DEA measures of efficiency and effectiveness in contractors performance fund allocation, Public Productivity & Management Review, Vol. 23, Iss. 2; p210.
Chang, C.L., Wei, C.C. and Lee, Y.H. (1999), "Failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy method and grey theory", The International journal of Systems and Cybernetics, Vol. 28 No. 9, p1072-80.
Charnes, A., Copper, W.W., and Rhodes, E., (1978), Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operation Research, 2, p429-444.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Lewin, A.Y. and Seiford, L.M., (1994), Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA.
Cherchye, L, Moesen, W., Rogge, N., Puyenbroeck, T.V., Saisana, M., Saltelli, Liska, R., and Tarantola, S., (2008), Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59, p239-251.
Comden, S.C., Carley, M.M., Marx, D., and Yoing, J., (2005), Risk Models to Improve Long-term Care Medication Safety, ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement Proceedings, Vol. 59, p.459.
Cook, W.D. and Zhu, J., (2005), Modeling performance measurement applications and implementation issues in DEA, Springer :New York.
Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M. and Zhu, J., (2004), Handbook on data envelopment analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA.
Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.W. and Tone, K., (2000), Data Envelopment Analysis: A comprehensive text with model, applications, references and DEA-Solver software, Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA.
Daya, M.B. and Raouf, A. (1996), A revised failure mode and effects analysis model, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 43-7.
Despotis, D.K., (2005), A reassessment of the human development index via data envelopment analysis, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56, p969-980.
Deming, W.E. (1986) Out of Crisis, (Cambridge, MA, MIT, Center for Advanced Engineering Study).
Dhillon, B.S., (2003), Methods for performing human reliability and error analysis in health care, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 16, 6/7; pg. 306.
Dillibabu, R. and Krishnaiah, K., (2006), Application of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis to Software Code Reviews, Software Quality Professional, 8, 2.
Fare, Rolf, Grosskopf, and Shawna, (1994), Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 79, Iss. 2; p379.
Farrell, J.M. (1957) "The Measurement of Productive Efficiency," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society vol. 120, pp. 253-281.
Fazard, F., (1989), Priority berthing in congested port: The application of multiple-attribute decision-making methods, University of New South Wales, Australia.
Field, S.W and Swift, K.G., (1996), Effecting a Quality Change: An Engineering Approach,Arnold: London.
Fischer, S., Dornbusch, R. and Schmalensee, R., (1988), Economics: McGraw-Hill, New York.
FMEA Info Centre, 2005, http://www.fmeainfocentre.com/
Ford Motor Company, Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Reference Manual, 1988.
Garcia, P.A.A., Schirru, R. and Frutuoso E Melo, P.F., (2005), A fuzzy data envelopment analysis approach for FMEA, Progress in Nuclear Energy, 46, p359-373.
Goletsis, Y., Psarras, J., and Samouilidis, J.E., (2003), Project ranking in the Armenian energy sector using a multicriteria method for groups, Annals of Operations Research, Basel, Vol., 120, Iss. 1, p135.
Goodman, S.L., (1996), The Basic of FMEA, Productivity, Inc. Copyright 1996 Resource Engineering, Inc.;, Design for manufacturability at Midwest Industries, Harvard Business School, February 2, 1996 Lecture.
Gurwitz, J.H., Field, T.S., and Avorn, J. (2000), Incidence and preventability of adverse drug events in nursing homes, Am J Med., 109, p87-94.
Hambleton, M. (2005), Applying root cause analysis and failure mode and effect analysis to our compliance programs, Journal of Health Care Compliance, Vol. 7, Iss. 2, p5.
Hsu, P.F. and Hu, H.C., (2007), The development and application of a modified data envelopment analysis for assessing the efficiency of different kinds of hospital, International Journal of Management, Poole, Vol. 24, Iss. 2, p318.
Institute of Medicine, (2001), Improving the quality of long term care, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Jackson, H.V. Jr., (1999), A structured approach for classifying and prioritizing product requirements, North Carolina State University.
Juran, J.M. and Gyrna, F.M. (1988) Quality Control Handbook, 4th Edn (New York, McGraw-Hill).
Kohn. L.T., Corrigan, J.M. and Donaldson, M. (Eds), (2000), To err is human: building a safer health system, Institute of Medicine Report, National Academy Press, Washington.
Lesar, T.S., Briceland, L., and Stein, D.S. (1997), Factors related to errors in medication prescribing, JAMA,277:312–7.
Lozano, S., and Villa, G, (2005), Centralized DEA models with the possibility of downsizing, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 56, Iss. 4; p357.
Lunde, K., (2003), Ensuring system safety is more efficient, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Bradford, Vol., 75, Iss. 5; p477.
McCain, C., (2006), Using an FMEA in a service setting, Quality Press, Milwaukee, Vol. 39, Iss. 9; p24.
McNalley, K.M, Page, M.A. and Sunderland, B.V, (1997), Failure mode and effects analysis in improving a drug distribution system, Am. J. Health-Syst Pharm, V. 54, p171-177.
Mahlberg, B, and Obersteiner, M., (2001), Remeasuring the HDI by data envelopment analysis, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Interim Report IR-01-069, Laxemburg, Austria.
Moreno, J. de J., (2006), Efficiency and regulation in Spanish hypermarket retail trade; A cross-section approach, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 36, Iss. 1; p71.
Morris, C., (1982), Software reliability, Systems International, London, Vol. 10, Iss. 7; p. 63
Norman, M. and Stoker, B., (1991), Data Envelopment Analysis: The assessment of performance, John Wiley and Son: New York.
Podinovski, V.V. and Thanassoulis, E., (2007), Improving discrimination in data envelopment analysis: some practical suggestions, Journal of Production Anal, 28, p117-126.
Pollock, S., (2005), Create a simple framework to validate FMEA performance, ASQ Six Sigma Forum Magazine, Aug. 2005, p27.
Puente, J., Pino, R., Priore, P., and Fuente, D. de la, (2002), The International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Bradford, Vol. 19, Iss. 2/3, p137.
Reiling, J.G. and Knutzen, B.L., (2003), FMEA-the cure for medical errors, Quality Progress, Aug, 2003.
Reichert, A.A., (2004), Applying failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) in healthcare: preventing infant abduction, a case study, 2004 Society for Health Systems Presentation, Raleigh, NC.
Reiley, T.T, (2002), FMEA in preventing medical accidents, American Society for Quality, p657.
Sankar, N.IR and Prabhu, B.S. (2001), Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 324-335.
Seiford, L.M., and R.M. Thrall (1990) "Recent Developments in DEA: The Mathematical Programming Approach to Frontier Analysis," Journal of Econometrics vol. 46: pp. 7-38.
Seiford, L.M. and Zhu, J., (1999), Profitability and marketability of the top 55 U.S. commercial banks, Management Science, Vol., 45, Iss., 9, p1270.
Seiford, L.M and J. Zhu (2003), Context-dependent data envelopment analysis: measuring attractiveness and progress, Omega, International Journal of Management Science, Vol., 31, Iss. 5, p397-480.
Seol, H., Lee, H., Kim, S. and Park, Y., (2008), The impact of information technology on organizational efficiency in public services: a DEA-based DT approach, Journal of Operational Research Society, 59, p231-238.
Shahin, A., (2004), Integration of FMEA and the Kano model: An exploratory examination, The International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 21, p731-744.
Signor, M.C., (2000), The failure Analysis Matrix: A usable model for ranking solutions to failures in information systems, Nova Southeastern University.
Tang, S.H. and Ho, S.Y., (1996), Failure mode and effects analysis: an integrated approach for product design and process control, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 13, p8-26.
Teng, S.G., Ho, S.M., Shumar, D. and Liu, P.C, (2006), Implementing FMEA in a collaborative supply chain environment, The International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,. Vol. 23, Iss. 2/3; p179.
Terninko, J., (2003), Reliability/Mistake-proofing using failure mode and effect analysis, Quality Congress, p515.
Thanassoulis, E., (2001), Introduction to the theory and application of data envelopment analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA.
Thompson, R.G., Singleton, F.D. Jr., Thrall, R.M and Smith, B.A, (1996), Comparative site evaluation for locating a high-energy physics lab in Texas, Interfaces, 16, p35-49.
Thompson, R.G., P.S. Dharmapala, E.J. Gatewood, S. Macy and R.M. Thrall, (1996), DEA/assurance region SBDC efficiency and unique projections. Operations Research, 44, p533-542.
Toslas, I., (2008), Derivation of mineral processing environmental sustainability indicators using a DEA weight-restricted algorithm, Mineral & Metallurgical Processing, 25, p4.
Welborn, C., (2007) Using FMEA to assess outsourcing risk, Quality Press, Vol. 40, Iss. 8; p17.
Yang, C, T.C. Wang and W.M. Lu, (2007), Performance measurement in military provisions: The case of retail stores of Taiwan’s General Welfare Service Ministry, Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 24, 3, p313.
Yoon, K.P. and Hwang, C.L., (1995), Multiple attribute decision making : an introduction, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N. and Dublish S., (1998), Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 107, Iss. 3, p507-30.
Zhu, J., (1996a), DEA/AR analysis of the 1988-1989 performance of the Nanjing Textile Corporation, Annals of Operation Research, 66, p311-335.
Zhu, J., (2003), Quantitative models for performance evaluation and benchmarking: DEA with spreadsheets and DEA Excel Solver, Massachusetts, KAP.
 
 
 
 
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：892（臺灣：889，外國：3） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1753550 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67550365
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