Business Finance
MGT 425 SEU Analytic Hierarchy Process in Decision Making Case Study Discussion

mgt 425

Saudi electronic university

MGT

Question Description

I need help with a Management question. All explanations and answers will be used to help me learn.

Read the attached study titled as “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study , and answer the following Questions:

  1. Explain the decision-making approach discussed in this study titled as “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company:A Case Study. (600-700 words)

2. What are your observations about this study and how it is related to the learning in course and beneficial for you? (300-400 words)

WORD format & using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font

No Matching Ratio

Unformatted Attachment Preview

College of Administrative and Financial Sciences Assignment 2 MGT425-Spreadsheet Decision Modeling Deadline: 26/3/2020 @ 23:59 Course Name: Spreadsheet Decision Modeling Student’s Name: Course Code: MGT425 Student’s ID Number: Semester: 2 CRN: Academic Year: 1440/1441 H For Instructor’s Use only Instructor’s Name: Students’ Grade: Marks Obtained/Out of Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY • The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD format only) via allocated folder. • Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted. • Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be reduced for poor presentation. This includes filling your information on the cover page. • Students must mention question number clearly in their answer. • Late submission will NOT be accepted. • Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions. • All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font. No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism). • Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted. Course Learning Outcomes-Covered PLO Course Learning Outcome (CLO) Question 2.2 Demonstrate the tools for deciding when and which decision model to use for specific problems. Question 1 4.1 Employ decision analysis for organizational effectiveness related to decision making, problem solving and general operational performance effectiveness Question 2 Assignment Instructions: • Log in to Saudi Digital Library (SDL) via University’s website • On first page of SDL, choose “English Databases” • From the list find and click on EBSCO database. • In the Search Bar of EBSCO find the following article: Title: “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study” Author: Cheng Jack Kie, Ahmed Khalif Hassan, Norhana Mohd Aripin, Rafiuddin Mohd Yunus. Date: August 18, 2019 Assignment Questions: (Marks 05) Read the above study titled as “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study” by Cheng Jack Kie, Ahmed Khalif Hassan, Norhana Mohd Aripin, Rafiuddin Mohd Yunus, and answer the following Questions: 1. Explain the decision-making approach discussed in this study titled as “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study”. (600-700 words) 2. What are your observations about this study and how it is related to the learning in course and beneficial for you? (300-400 words) Rubric Complete and Clear Answer. Excellent Marks:100 Very Clear, wellexpressed and completed answer, Profound understanding of decision-making approach. Very Good Marks: 75 Clear, wellexpressed and completed answer, Good understanding of decision-making approach Good Marks 50 Partially clear, not well-expressed and completed answer, Incomplete understanding of decision-making approach. Unacceptable Marks: 0 Not clear, not expressed and not completed answer, Little or no understanding of decisionmaking approach. Answers: FGIC2019 FGIC 2nd Conference on Governance and Integrity 2019 Volume 2019 Conference Paper An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study Cheng Jack Kie, Ahmed Khalif Hassan, Norhana Mohd Aripin, and Rafiuddin Mohd Yunus Faculty of Industrial Management, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Lebuhraya Tun Razak, 26300 Gambang, Kuantan, Pahang Abstract Corresponding Author: Cheng Jack Kie jackkie@ump.edu.my Received: 5 August 2019 Accepted: 14 August 2019 Published: 18 August 2019 Publishing services provided by Knowledge E This study is an approach to investigate and to choose the suitable material for the fabrication of tools trolley to ensure the good quality of the product. The project team of an automotive manufacturing company is planning to fabricate 100 sets of tools trolley in the assembly shop. This study was developed to describe an approach based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) that can assist decision-makers and continuous improvement engineers in determining the most suitable material to be employed in fabrication process at the early stage of the product development to reduce the cost. The selected main criteria are Material Strength, Material Cost, Procurement Lead Time and Duration of Fabrication Process while the four materials that will be considered in this study are Aluminium, Steel Tube, and Square Tube. Finally, the results show that Square Tube is recommended as the most suitable material for the in-house tools for trolley fabrication. Keywords: analytic hierarchy process, decision-making, continuous improvement, fabrication process. Cheng Jack Kie et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and 1. Introduction redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited. Selection and Peer-review under Material process selection is a method to determine the most suitable material to fabricate a product. Many researchers have agreed on the importance of material the responsibility of the selection process, especially during the early stage of the product development phase. FGIC2019 Conference Determining the most suitable and appropriate material in the early stage can avoid Committee. additional cost if changes are needed to be carried out after the early stage of the product development process (Ravisankar, Balasubramanian & Muralidharan, 2004). However, it is a difficult task with a complex decision because various factors have to be considered during the process. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a tool that can be used at the conceptual design stage in the product development process (Hambali et al., 2010; Subramanian & How to cite this article: Cheng Jack Kie, Ahmed Khalif Hassan, Norhana Mohd Aripin, and Rafiuddin Mohd Yunus, (2019), “An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach in Decision-Making for Material Selection in an Automotive Company: A Case Study” in FGIC 2nd Conference on Governance and Integrity 2019, KnE Social Sciences, pages 472–484. DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 472 FGIC2019 Ramanathan, 2012). According to Vaidya and Kumar (2006), AHP is widely implemented for selection and evaluation based decision-making, usually in the area of manufacturing, engineering, healthcare, education, and many more. AHP has been used to solve multi-criteria decision-making problems based on experience and skills of the experts by determining the factors that impacted the decision process (Subramanian & Ramanathan, 2012). The tools trolley which acts to transport tools and small parts safety is generally made from few materials such as stainless steel, carbon steel, aluminum, iron, and copper. Each material has different material strength, material lead time, and the price of the material can be very expensive to manipulate the cost. In the fabrication process, there are many processes involved with different amounts of costs of material and equipment, quality of material, and fabricating time (Kalpakjian and Schmid, 2014). In an automotive manufacturing industry, the fabrication process gives the Continuous Improvement (CI) Engineers different types of problems, where the selection of appropriate material is one of the critical issues. By doing this study, the problem faced by the engineers is solved using AHP. This technique will assist in determining the most appropriate material to fabricate the tools trolley, which will meet the product’s specifications and requirements. Thus, the main focus of this study is to explore the potential use of AHP in assisting CI projects to evaluate and determine the most appropriate material for producing tools trolley in an automotive company. Besides that, this paper briefly reviews the concepts and applications of multiple criterion decision analysis. This paper is organized into five sections where after the broad introduction was firstly discussed in Section 1. The literature of past studies related to AHP and Continuous Improvement are presented in Section 2. Next, the chosen methodology, which is AHP, will be elaborated in Section 3 while Section 4 encompassed results and discussion. Then, a conclusion with the point of discussion on limitations and suggestion for future studies are provided in the last section of this paper. 2. Literature Review In order to make a good decision, the decision-maker must be able to first define the problem, the need, and purpose of the decision, then using this information to develop criteria that can be used to evaluate the potential alternative actions to take. The beauty of Analytic hierarchy process and continuous improvement are discussed in the following section, respectively. DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 473 FGIC2019 2.1. Analytic hierarchy process Dweiri and Al-Oqla (2006) mentioned that the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the multi-criteria decision-making tools that incorporated the behavior of its decisionmaker in the decision model. Professor Thomas L. Saaty developed AHP techniques in the 1970s to improve the decision-making process when multiple criteria are involved in the process. Since then, the method is widely used, refined, and studied. AHP technique is one of the most commonly used multi-criteria decision methods in decision making (Subramanian & Ramanathan, 2012). The main flexibility of this method is AHP considered a systematic approach that includes both the tangible and intangible factors and finally provides a structured solution to problems in the industries. The advantages of AHP method is the technique uses both qualitative data collected from judgment values which based on experience and intuition apart from quantitative data of a problem (Subramanian & Ramanathan, 2012; Vaidya & Kumar, 2006). Besides that, the application of AHP allows the investigated problems to be broken down hierarchically where a set of criteria will be arranged in a hierarchy order so that it can be evaluated subjectively based on the importance according to scores or weights. To develop an AHP model, there are three important phases which are problem structuring, judgments comparison, and analyzing priorities. In the structuring phase, a decisionmaking model is developed and then is transposed to a hierarchy form. Then, for each alternative obtained will be evaluated according to the criterion’s weight in the judgment phase. A hierarchy can be used to study the interaction of its components and how these interactions impact the whole system. Therefore a hierarchy is one form of abstraction or representation of a system’s structure (Hambali et al., 2010). Hierarchies work by separating the reality of human thinking into several sets and subsets. The decision making alternatives can be rated once weights are assigned to the developed hierarchy. Weights are assigned through expert comparison using judgment scale. These scales are usually ranged from 1 (equally preferred) to 7 (extremely preferred). These numerical values represent the intensity of the alternatives compared to criteria. Due to the mathematical elements used in AHP, researchers are keen to adopt the technique (Dweiri & Al-Oqla, 2006; Hambali et al., 2008). With the properties of using multi-level objectives, criteria, sub-criteria, and alternatives, AHP is suitable to be used to solve decision problem. Through pairwise comparison, data are obtained using weightage of the importance of the criteria and the alternatives in terms of each decision criteria. DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 474 FGIC2019 AHP is also commonly applied in task selection where the method is used not to find the correct answer but to aid decision-makers finding the best answer. Not only for academic studies, but AHP is also widely used in organizations, especially for an organization to explore their strategies and their competitors (Vaidya & Kumar, 2006). AHP is suitable to be used to groups of decision-makers who shared common objectives, worked in a cooperative environment and of the same status. 2.2. Continuous improvement (CI) Currently, the implementation of sustainable improvement is gaining increase attention (Bhasin, 2008; Hassini, Surti & Searcy, 2012). With that, several guidelines were developed to support continuous improvement implementation (Sundar, Balaji & Kumar, 2014). Strategic Management, Kaizen, Six Sigma, and Total Quality Management are some of the well-known methods used in continuous improvement (Garcia, Rivera & Iniesta, 2013). Each of these methods uses different tools for improvement. One way for the continuous improvement to be successful, there is a need to include staff involvement. With that, Total Quality Management adopts tools and plan of doing, check, act approach (Moeuf et al., 2016) that are capable of integrating learning culture to drive organization change (Amirteimoori, Despotis & Kordrostami, 2014; Moeuf et al., 2016). On the other hand, Six Sigma approach aims at reducing variability in organizational processes through the defining, measuring, analyzing, improving and controlling improvement cycle are used to support this approach (Garcia, Rivera & Iniesta, 2013). As for Kaizen, this tool adopted scenario that allows continuous improvement in personal, family, social, and work-life (Anand & Kodali, 2008) which aimed to change for the better (Bhasin, 2008; Gupta & Jain, 2013). However, there are researchers that mentioned that Kaizen is not only a continuous improvement tool, but it also serves as the means and result of human and non-human resources management in the pursuit of business excellence (Hassini, Surti & Searcy, 2012). As such, a vast literature argues that characteristically the tools that support Kaizen are process-oriented and human-based, as Kaizen is incremental, continuous, and participatory (Anand & Kodali, 2008; Moeuf et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2012). Therefore, Kaizen, as a continuous improvement tool, stressed that efforts of all people involved in the organization are important to achieve the improvements that can contribute to the achievement of superior results (Hassini, Surti & Searcy, 2012; Sundar, Balaji & Kumar, 2014), while understanding management as the maintenance and improvement of working standards (Amirteimoori, Despotis & Kordrostami, 2014). DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 475 FGIC2019 3. Methodology This case study was done in an automotive manufacturing company in Pahang. Moving forward towards the lean manufacturing concept, the company is encouraging continuous improvement projects and activities. In a lean manufacturing concept, reducing waste and increasing value-adding operation time is the main target. To reduce the waste of walking in the production time, fabrication of tools trolley was proposed to increase the efficiency rate. The project team is planning to fabricate 100 sets of tools trolley (shown in Figure 1) in the assembly shop for the used in the assembly line. Figure 1: Tools Trolley in an Assembly Shop (Source: Authors’ own work). As the company, in-house Continuous Improvement (CI) Workshop has the capacity of fabricating the trolley. Therefore CI-engineers need to plan on the design and choose the correct material for the trolley. All fabrication tools and machine such as cutting machine, tightening tools, welding machines, and measuring devices are available in the workshop. The material for the fabrication must be strong to withstand the weight of the tools, equipment, and some fittings parts. Project lead time is short. Therefore the procurement and fabrication lead time must be minimized to ensure the project completion is on schedule. Material cost should also be within the budget allocation. The data collection phase is crucial in any research. Several aspects come into play in the data DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 476 FGIC2019 collection process. The three most crucial aspects are the cost of the selected data collection method, the accuracy of data collected, and the efficiency of data collection. In this study, data were collected via structured, face-to-face interviews. The interview session was conducted with the participation of Project Engineers, Project Leaders, Continuous Improvement Operators, and Assembly Operators. All the participants are involved in the tools trolley project. A pilot test to validate the questionnaires was conducted with two Managers, and some amendments have been made based on the given feedback. Besides that, the researcher also reviewed a few products’ catalogs that describe in details about each material specification to developed comprehensive criteria and alternatives. Information collected from the participants via interview is gathered to determine which criteria are the most important in deciding which material to select for tools trolley fabrication. With the information gathered, the AHP method can be performed. AHP is a decision-making tool that involves structuring criteria into a hierarchy and the relative importance of these criteria is then assessed. Alternatives for each criterion are compared, that relies on the judgment of the interviewed participants. An overall ranking scale of the alternatives is determined. The AHP selection method follows the following steps. Firstly, define the objective of selection, follows by developing a hierarchical framework based on the collected information on criteria and alternatives, construction of pairwise comparison set matrix, calculation of preferences against criteria of pairwise comparison, ranking the criteria, developing an overall priority ranking, performing a consistency check on the result and finally selection of the best alternatives. 4. Results and Discussion The main purpose of this study is selecting the most suitable material for the fabrication process of the tool trolley in order to produce a good quality product. From the interview conducted with the Project Engineers, Project Leaders, Continuous Improvement Operators, and Assembly Operators, information on criteria and alternatives are successfully gathered. The selected main criteria are Material Strength, Material Cost, Procurement Lead Time, and Duration of Fabrication Process. According to the participants, these four criteria are the most important and needed to be considered when considering which material to use in the fabrication process of the tool trolley. As for the alternatives, Aluminium, Steel Tube, and Square Tube are chosen by the participants as the potential materials that can be considered in order to construct the tool trolley. The defined objective, four different criteria, and three possible alternatives are shown in Figure 2. DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i22.5067 Page 477 FGIC2019 Figure 2: Hierarchy Structure of the Criteria (Source: Authors’ work). 4.1. Pairwise comparison The score of each criterion was calculated using pairwise comparison. The decision was done by comparing two alternatives against one criterion, and then the indicated preferences will be recorded. The pairwise comparison scale measurement that was used is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Pairwise Comparison Scale. Preference Level Numeric Value Equally Preferred 1 Moderately Preferred 2 Strongly Preferred 3 Very strongly Preferred 4 Extremely Preferred 5 Source: Taylor (2019) Table 3 depicted the pairwise comparison of alternatives (Aluminium, Steel Tube, and Square Tube) against criteria (Material Strength, Material Cost, Procurement Lead Time and Fabrication Lead Time). ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Final Answer

How is it going Buddy, I got your answer ready 😉

Running head: ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

Analytic Hierarchy Process (Decision-Making Approach)
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

1

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

2

Analytic Hierarchy Process (Decision-Making Approach)
Question One:
The case study highlights the essence of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as a
decision-making approach (Kie et al., 2019). It enables continuous improvement (CI) engineers
in the automotive industry to select the most suitable material for product fabrication. AHP is
instrumental in the initial stages of product development as a means to lower costs and increase
efficiency. Since it determines the most suitable alternative that CI engineers should consider,
the main selection criteria entail the material cost, material strength, fabrication process duration
and the lead time in procurement. The study encompasses materials such as Steel Tube,
Aluminium and Square Tube, which the AHP must help CI engineers to select the most suitable
for fabrication.
AHP is an instrumental tool for the conceptual design stage of product development and
its implementation is based on selection and evaluation (Kie et al., 2019). The automotive
industry relies on AHP to solve decision-making problems that entail multiple criteria and
depends on expertise and skills to ascertain factors tha...

Prowork (4201)
UIUC

Anonymous
I was on a very tight deadline but thanks to Studypool I was able to deliver my assignment on time.

Anonymous
The tutor was pretty knowledgeable, efficient and polite. Great service!

Anonymous
Heard about Studypool for a while and finally tried it. Glad I did caus this was really helpful.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4