Search results

This paper aims to clarify how is a project managed and how are its objectives achieved? In this manner, prioritize the points to be treated, the tasks to be performed and the solutions to be applied in a given space of time. From now onward, each stakeholder has its own requirements and expectations. Yet, in the end, you have no choice but to list the priority points. Moreover, note that each company, each service and each team is unique. As well as each individual is equally important.

Agile approaches, especially the MoSCoW method, were used. This tool is very practical and very simple to implement to set priorities for the actions to be performed. Selecting a tool that is easy to understand and easy to use has the advantage of helping to build consensus around prioritizing requirements, particularly in health and safety at work or even to establish a culture of safety at the workplace. This positive corporate culture is at the heart of sustainable development and the success of occupational health and safety institutions.

Therefore, with 51,500 work accidents recorded in 2016, it seems essential to know how to adapt and give one’s management style to one’s environment. Its the key to success! To reach these objectives, the progress of the manager is to supervise his collaborators. For this, it is necessary to know how to make choices, make decisions, ideally the right ones. It is much less common to list the features that are unwanted to be integrated. Thinking in this manner makes it possible to approach the project from a different perspective; thus, it makes it possible to obtain a much more targeted list of tasks and requirements compared with a more traditional method, i.e., the results of this work.

Capacity to know how to make choices, make decisions, ideally the right ones, especially in health and safety at work. On the other hand, it is not possible to deal with everything in a project. The manager, with a very simple tool easy to implement, manages to supervise his employees and achieving these goals in the company and obtain a list of tasks and requirements much more targeted compared to a more traditional method.

This paper aims to enable the analysts of reliability and safety systems to evaluate the risk and prioritize failure modes ideally to prefer measures for reducing the risk of undesired events.

To address the constraints considered in the conventional failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method for criticality assessment, the authors propose a new hybrid model combining different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used to construct a criticality matrix and calculate the weights of different criteria based on five criticalities: personnel, equipment, time, cost and quality. In addition, a preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) method is used to improve the prioritization of the failure modes. A comparative work in which the robust data envelopment analysis (RDEA)-FMEA approach was used to evaluate the validity and effectiveness of the suggested approach and simplify the comparative analysis.

This work aims to highlight the real case study of the automotive parts industry. Using this analysis enables assessing the risk efficiently and gives an alternative ranking to that acquired by the traditional FMEA method. The obtained findings offer that combining of two multi-criteria decision approaches and integrating their outcomes allow for instilling confidence in decision-makers concerning the risk assessment and the ranking of the different failure modes.

This research gives encouraging outcomes concerning the risk assessment and failure modes ranking in order to reduce the frequency of occurrence and gravity of the undesired events by handling different forms of uncertainty and divergent judgments of experts.