Research Article
Applying a Hybrid MCDM Model for Six Sigma Project Selection
Table 5
The sum of influences given and received on criteria.
| | Criteria | | | | |
| | Meaningful to organization () | 13.69 | 13.46 | 27.16 | 0.23 | | Critical to quality () | 13.37 | 13.87 | 27.25 | −0.50 | | Variable is measurable () | 12.16 | 13.21 | 25.37 | −1.04 | | Technical feasibility () | 13.36 | 13.95 | 27.31 | −0.59 | | Resources are available () | 13.13 | 13.66 | 26.80 | −0.53 | | Time schedule () | 12.51 | 13.24 | 25.75 | −0.73 | | Customer satisfaction () | 13.34 | 13.97 | 27.31 | −0.63 | | Customer complaints () | 12.84 | 13.25 | 26.08 | −0.41 | | New business () | 12.68 | 12.01 | 24.69 | 0.67 | | ROI () | 13.74 | 13.09 | 26.84 | 0.65 | | Cost reduction () | 13.53 | 12.94 | 26.46 | 0.59 | | Profit generation () | 14.08 | 13.56 | 27.64 | 0.53 | | Reduction in cycle time () | 13.36 | 12.98 | 26.34 | 0.37 | | Upgrade operational performance () | 13.83 | 13.70 | 27.53 | 0.13 | | Improved in compliance and controls () | 12.25 | 11.93 | 24.18 | 0.32 | | Retaining rate () | 11.89 | 11.96 | 23.85 | −0.07 | | Improved capability () | 13.38 | 12.37 | 25.75 | 1.01 |
|
|
