Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Research Article

Applying a Hybrid MCDM Model for Six Sigma Project Selection

Table 6

The performance and gap of desired level of all alternative projects.
  Local weight Global weightPerformanceGap of desired level
 
Strategy ( )0.172 ( ) 7.031 6.549 6.794 7.192 6.462 6.648 6.437 6.175 0.219 ( )0.272 ( )0.245 ( )0.201 ( )0.282 ( )0.261 ( )0.285 ( )0.314 ( )
Meaningful to organization ( )0.332 ( )0.057 7.875 5.750 6.875 7.125 6.563 6.688 6.250 5.750 0.125 0.361 0.236 0.208 0.271 0.257 0.306 0.361
Critical to quality ( )0.342 ( )0.059 7.313 7.313 6.875 7.500 6.625 6.750 6.500 6.813 0.188 0.188 0.236 0.167 0.264 0.250 0.278 0.243
Variable is measurable ( )0.325 ( )0.056 5.875 6.563 6.625 6.938 6.188 6.500 6.563 5.938 0.347 0.271 0.264 0.229 0.313 0.278 0.271 0.340
Feasibility ( )0.173 ( ) 6.467 6.382 6.709 6.959 6.473 6.704 6.421 6.212 0.281 ( )0.291 ( )0.255 ( )0.227 ( )0.281 ( )0.255 ( )0.287 ( )0.310 ( )
Technical feasibility ( )0.341 ( )0.059 6.750 6.938 6.813 7.125 6.250 6.500 6.625 6.375 0.250 0.229 0.243 0.208 0.306 0.278 0.264 0.292
Resources are available ( )0.334 ( )0.058 6.813 6.125 6.563 6.750 6.250 6.625 6.438 6.313 0.243 0.319 0.271 0.250 0.306 0.264 0.285 0.299
Time schedule ( )0.324 ( )0.056 5.813 6.063 6.750 7.000 6.938 7.000 6.188 5.938 0.354 0.326 0.250 0.222 0.229 0.222 0.313 0.340
Impact on customers ( )0.166 ( ) 6.271 6.645 6.312 6.701 6.469 6.285 6.665 6.616 0.303 ( )0.262 ( )0.299 ( )0.255 ( )0.281 ( )0.302 ( )0.259 ( )0.265 ( )
Customer satisfaction ( )0.356 ( )0.059 6.563 7.250 6.688 7.188 6.813 6.563 7.000 6.938 0.271 0.194 0.257 0.201 0.243 0.271 0.222 0.229
Customer complaints ( ) 0.337 ( )0.056 6.438 6.875 6.313 6.938 6.250 6.250 6.688 7.063 0.285 0.236 0.299 0.229 0.306 0.306 0.257 0.215
New business ( )0.306 ( )0.051 5.750 5.688 5.875 5.875 6.313 6.000 6.250 5.750 0.361 0.368 0.347 0.347 0.299 0.333 0.306 0.361
Impact on finance ( )0.168 ( ) 6.562 6.021 6.290 6.377 6.605 6.850 5.643 5.794 0.271 ( )0.331 ( )0.301 ( )0.291 ( )0.266 ( )0.239 ( )0.373 ( )0.356 ( )
ROI ( )0.330 ( )0.056 6.500 6.750 6.000 6.188 6.625 6.313 5.625 5.938 0.278 0.250 0.333 0.313 0.264 0.299 0.375 0.340
Cost reduction ( ) 0.326 ( )0.055 6.625 5.438 6.625 6.375 6.563 7.500 5.875 5.563 0.264 0.396 0.264 0.292 0.271 0.167 0.347 0.382
Revenue generation ( ) 0.342 ( )0.058 6.563 5.875 6.250 6.563 6.625 6.750 5.438 5.875 0.271 0.347 0.306 0.271 0.264 0.250 0.396 0.347
Impact on operations ( )0.164 ( ) 6.150 5.885 6.425 6.901 6.225 6.906 6.067 6.159 0.317 ( )0.346 ( )0.286 ( )0.233 ( )0.308 ( )0.233 ( )0.325 ( )0.316 ( )
Reduction in cycle time ( )0.336 ( )0.055 6.125 5.188 6.438 6.063 5.688 6.750 5.563 6.125 0.319 0.424 0.285 0.326 0.368 0.250 0.382 0.319
Upgrade operational performance ( )0.354 ( )0.058 6.250 6.500 7.000 7.500 6.875 7.625 6.875 6.875 0.306 0.278 0.222 0.167 0.236 0.153 0.236 0.236
Improved compliance and controls ( )0.309 ( )0.051 6.063 5.938 5.750 7.125 6.063 6.250 5.688 5.375 0.326 0.340 0.361 0.208 0.326 0.306 0.368 0.403
Impact on employee ( )0.154 ( ) 6.004 5.600 5.568 7.166 5.375 6.258 5.762 5.603 0.333 ( )0.378 ( )0.381 ( )0.204 ( )0.403 ( )0.305 ( )0.359 ( )0.377 ( )
Retaining rate ( )0.491 ( )0.076 5.750 5.250 5.250 6.563 5.375 5.750 5.063 5.063 0.361 0.417 0.417 0.271 0.403 0.361 0.438 0.438
Improved capability ( )0.508 ( )0.079 6.250 5.938 5.875 7.750 5.375 6.750 6.438 6.125 0.306 0.340 0.347 0.139 0.403 0.250 0.285 0.319
Total performance  6.423 ( )6.191 ( )6.363 ( )6.880 ( )6.281 ( )6.613 ( )6.173 ( )6.099 ( )        
Total gap          0.286 ( )0.312 ( )0.292 ( )0.235 ( )0.302 ( )0.265 ( )0.314 ( )0.322 ( )
Note: the numbers in the ( ) denotes the ranks of local weights in dimensions and criteria.