A MULTIPLE-OBJECTIVE DECISION-MODEL FOR THE EVALUATION OF ADVANCED MANUFACTURING SYSTEM TECHNOLOGIES

被引:27
作者
DEMMEL, JG
ASKIN, RG
机构
[1] Hughes Aircraft Company, Tucson, AZ
[2] University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
CIM; MANUFACTURING SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION; MULTIPLE OBJECTIVE; STRATEGIC PLANNING;
D O I
10.1016/0278-6125(92)90004-Y
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Ordinary financial measures oversimplify the evaluation of advanced manufacturing system technologies (AMSTs). In this paper, a multiple-objective decision model is developed that avoids the shortcomings of traditional evaluation methods. The model is comprised of three objectives-pecuniary, strategic, and tactical. The pecuniary objective is based upon traditional discounted cash flow (DCF) techniques, with the results normalized to a [-1, + 1] (worst-best) scale. The strategic and tactical objectives are based upon the concept of qualitative flows, and a qualitative discounting method is employed to discount the qualitative costs and benefits to a present value. The three objectives are traded off using the composite programming technique, resulting in a rank ordering of the alternatives under consideration. The three objectives of the model are broken down into attributes that define the objective. These attributes are mapped into the organization of a manufacturing environment. It is shown that the model covers the entire manufacturing organization in accounting for the costs and benefits of the proposed AMST alternatives. In addition to providing a ranking among alternative AMST projects, the influence of the three objectives on the final score can be analyzed using a mixture experiment. The mixture experiment provides insight into the effect of varying the importance of each objective and its effect on the final rankings. This provides the analyst a method to determine which attributes and objectives are critical for the AMST alternative being investigated.
引用
收藏
页码:179 / 194
页数:16
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
Madu, Georgantzas, Strategic Thrust of Manufacturing Automation Decisions A Conceptual Framework, IIE Transactions, 23, 2, pp. 138-148, (1991)
[2]  
Canada, Sullivan, Economic and Multiattribute Evaluation of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, pp. 6-10, (1989)
[3]  
Kaplan, Must CIM be Justified by Faith Alone?, Harvard Business Review, 64, 2, pp. 87-95, (1986)
[4]  
US Department of Labor, Trends in Manufacturing: A Chart Book, pp. 25-27, (1985)
[5]  
Canada, Non-Traditional Method for Evaluating CIM Opportunities Assigns Weights to Intangibles, Industrial Engineering, 18, 3, pp. 66-71, (1986)
[6]  
Sullivan, LeClair, Justification of Flexible Manufacturing Systems Using Expert System Technology, AUTO-FACT '85 Conference Proceedings, pp. 7.1-7.13, (1985)
[7]  
Wymore, Duckstein, Prioritization of Capital Investments for Factory Automation Using Multicriterion Q-Analysis, Proceedings of the International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Applications in Industry & Service, pp. 317-331, (1989)
[8]  
Fine, Freund, Optimal Investment in Product-Flexible Manufacturing Capacity, Management Science, 36, 4, pp. 449-466, (1990)
[9]  
Burstein, Finding the Economical Mix of Rigid and Flexible Automation for Manufacturing Systems, Proceedings of the Second ORSA/TIMS Conference on FMS: Operations Research Models and Applications, pp. 43-54, (1986)
[10]  
Gaimon, The Dynamical Optimal Acquisition of Automation, Annals of Operations Research, 3, 1-4, pp. 59-79, (1985)