ESTONIAN ACADEMY
PUBLISHERS
eesti teaduste
akadeemia kirjastus
PUBLISHED
SINCE 1952
 
Proceeding cover
proceedings
of the estonian academy of sciences
ISSN 1736-7530 (Electronic)
ISSN 1736-6046 (Print)
Impact Factor (2020): 1.045

Development of a product lifecycle management model based on the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process; pp. 279–286

Full article in PDF format | https://doi.org/10.3176/proc.2017.3.05

Authors
Marko Paavel, Kristo Karjust, Jüri Majak

Abstract

PLM and PDM are important tools in decision-making and management. This article suggests a way how to optimize and simplify the PLM or PDM implementation process with the PLM Maturity Model. It is shown how different benefits are linked with business dimensions and their sub-categories to get a better overview of the current situation. An expert group was involved in the evaluation process of the input and questions. The introduced maturity model is based on the FAHP method. The impact factors of the business dimensions are pointed out.


References

1. Stark, J. Product Lifecycle Management. 21st Century Paradigm for Product Realisation. Springer-Verlag, London, 2011.

2. Snatkin, A., Eiskop, T., Karjust, K., and Majak, J. Production monitoring system development and modification. Proc. Estonian Acad. Sci., 2015, 64, 567−580.
https://doi.org/10.3176/proc.2015.4S.04

3. Snatkin, A., Karjust, K., Majak, J., Aruväli, T., and Eiskop, T. Real time production monitoring system in SME. Estonian J. Eng., 2013, 19, 62−75.
https://doi.org/10.3176/eng.2013.1.06

4. Kuhi, K., Kaare, K. K., and Koppel, O. Using probabilistic models for missing data prediction in network industries performance measurement systems. Procedia Eng., 2015, 100, 1348−1353.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.01.502

5. Lõun, K., Lavin, J., Riives, J., and Otto, T. High performance workplace design model. Estonian J. Eng., 2013, 19, 47−61.
https://doi.org/10.3176/eng.2013.1.05

6. Riives, R., Lavin, J., Karjust, K., and Koov, K. Offer manage­ment in the networking manufacturing. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of DAAAM Baltic Industrial Engineering, Tallinn, Estonia, 2012 (Otto, T., ed.). Tallinn University of Technology, 2012, 561−566.

7. Durkacova, M., Lavin, J., and Karjust, K. KPI optimi­zation for product development process. In Proceedings of the 23rd International DAAAM Symposium "Intelligent Manufacturing & Automation: Focus on Sustainability". Zadar, Croatia, 2012 (Katalinic, B., ed.). DAAAM International, Vienna, 2012, 1079−1084.

8. Qiu, Z. M. and Wong, Y. S. Dynamic workflow changes in PDM systems. Comput. Ind., 2007, 58, 453−463.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2006.09.014

9. Saaksvuori, A. and Immonen, A. Product Lifecycle Management. 3rd Edition. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78172-1

10. Stark, J. Global Product: Strategy, Product Lifecycle Management and the Billion Customer Question. Springer-Verlag, London, 2007.

11. Six tips for a smooth, successful PLM implementation, http://www.arenasolutions.com/resources/articles/plm-implementation/ (accessed 2016-03-29).

12. PLM Maturity Scorecard, http://www.dsasite.com/ capabilitymaturity.html (accessed 2016-03-29).

13. Mettles, T., Rohner, P., and Winter, R. Towards a classifi­cation of maturity models in information systems. In Management of the Interconnected World. The Italian Association for Information Systems (D’Atri, A., De Marco, M., Braccini, A. M., and Cabiddu, F., eds). Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2010, 333−340.

14. de Bruin, T., Freeze, R., Kulkarni, U., and Rosemann, M. Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In 16th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS 2005) (Campbell, B., Underwood, J., and Bunker, D., eds). 2005, Sydney, Australia.

15. Batenburg, R., Helms, R. W., and Versendaal, J. PLM roadmap: stepwise PLM implementation based on the concepts of maturity and alignment. JPLM, 2006, 1, 333−351.
https://doi.org/10.1504/ijplm.2006.011053

16. Batenburg, R., Helms, R., and Versendaal, J. The maturity of Product Lifecycle Management in Dutch organi­zations. A strategic alignment perspective. Technical report UU-CS-2005-00, 2005. Institute of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, 2005.

17. Vezzetti, E., Violante, M. G., and Marcolin, F. A benchmarking framework for product lifecycle management (PLM) maturity models. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2014, 71, 899–918.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-013-5529-1

18. Schuh, G., Rozenfeld, H., Assmus, D., and Zancul, E. Process oriented framework to support PLM implemen­tation. Comput. Ind., 2008, 59, 210–218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2007.06.015

19. Silventoinen, A., Pels, H. J., Kärkkäinen, H., and Lampela, H. Towards future PLM maturity assessment dimensions. In Proceedings PLM11 8th International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management 11th−13th July 2011, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. IFIP, Eindhoven, 2011, 480−492.

20. Kärkkäinen, H., Pels, H. J., and Silventoinen, A. Defining the customer dimension of PLM maturity. In Product Lifecycle Management. Towards Knowledge-rich Enterprises, Vol. 388 (Rivest, L., Bouras, A., and Louhichi, B., eds). Springer, Heidelberg, 2012, 623–634. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-35758-9_56 (accessed 2016-03-29).

21. PLM Analytics Maturity Assessment Program. http: //www.tatatechnologies.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ CIMdata_Tata_PMMA_White_Paper_15Oct2014.pdf (accessed 2016-03-29).

22. Zhang, H., Sekhari, A., Ouzrout, Y., and Bouras, A. A PLM components monitoring framework for SMEs based on a PLM maturity model and FAHP methodo­logy. Journal of Modern Project Management, 2014, 2, 109−119.

23. The essential elements of PLM. http://www.product-lifecycle-management.com/plm-elements.htm (accessed 2016-03-29).

24. Elements of PLM. http://www.product-lifecycle-manage­ment.info/plm-elements/ (accessed 2016-03-29).

25. Cholewa, M. Product Lifecycle Management. Wrocław University of Technology, Wrocław, 2011.

26. PLM models. http://www.product-lifecycle-management.info/ plm-elements/plm-models.html (accessed 2016-06-18).

27. PLM Requirements Specification. http: //plmtechnologyguide.com/site/?page_id=37 (accessed 2016-06-18).

28. PLM Processes. http://plmtechnologyguide.com/site/?page_id =1563 (accessed 2016-06-18).

29. Saaty, T. L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.

30. Franek, J. and Kresta, A. Judgment scales and consistency measure in AHP. Procedia Econ. Finance, 2014, 12, 164−173.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00332-3

31. Chang, D.-Y. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 1996, 95, 649–655.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00300-2

32. Shu, M. S., Cheng, C. H., and Chang, J. R. Using intuitionistic fuzzy set for fault-tree analysis on printed circuit board assembly. Microelectron. Reliab., 2006, 46, 2139–2148.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microrel.2006.01.007

33. Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M. Fuzzy Mathematical Models in Engineering and Management Science. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1988.

34.       Ayhan, M. B. A fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection problem: a case study in a gearmotor company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains, 2013, 4(3), 11−23.
https://doi.org/10.5121/ijmvsc.2013.4302


Back to Issue