ABSTRACT The Failures Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) method is applied to different activities in order to improve production processes. Its operation allows to analyze failure modes, describe their effects, identify causes and design control systems. In addition to assessing these factors, it contributes to the formulation of various improvement actions; however, it has an intrinsic weakness when it comes to prioritizing these actions. Although recent versions acknowledge that it is convenient to regulate the beginning of the proposed actions, the method does not provide indisputable tools to establish priorities and organize action plans due to the fact that the Risk Priority Level traditional indicator has been questioned. In face of this need, this contribution proposes to complement the application of the FMEA with an individual multi-criteria compensatory method that allows actions to be programmed in a participatory manner to improve their management. This proposal provides an example of a real world application. The results and limitations of this work are presented in the conclusion. (FMEA processes modes effects systems factors however questioned need multicriteria multi criteria management conclusion

Abstract Paper aims The FMEA method (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) has difficulty in prioritizing actions, verifying agreements among group participants and assessing uncertainty. This paper overcomes these shortcomings. The proposal applies FMEA in traditional format, establishes priorities for improvement actions, updates them periodically with better criteria than the traditional ones and values group agreement. Originality Other contributions claim to change the method, but this is not accepted by the organizations that apply it. In addition, they propose individual approaches, when the FMEA is essentially group-based. In contrast, this proposal establishes priorities without altering the basic requirements of the FMEA. Research method An action-research approach is used. Main findings Ease of application, improved group learning and commitment to action plans are confirmed. Implications for theory and practice A new group decision-making method is applied and a flexible solution is proposed, adaptable to very diverse problems.

ABSTRACT This paper deals with a problem that Information Technology outsourcing suppliers generally face when selecting a working team technically capable for specific roles in software development projects. A combination of methodologies, interactively integrated, is proposed. They are Soft System Methodology to structure the problem, Repertory Grid for individual interviews and elicitation of the selection criteria, DRV Processes to assess the candidates and to generate knowledge and consensus on the selection process and Linear Programming to assign people to each position. This multimethodology allowed finding a more comprehensive solution than that initially requested by the company, since it helped to establish the necessary transformations for the selection model to operate in the right way, set the competencies to be considered as selection criteria, develop a consensus estimate of the weighted criteria, and award global values to candidates, optimizing the assignment of roles in the group for the project.

This paper describes an application in group decision making, aimed at developing a procedure to help define priorities in preventive maintenance activities. The method applied is called DRV Processes (Decision with Reduction of Variability) and it combines both statistical techniques and multicriteria decision aid procedures. Among its advantages, we may highlight the possibility of reducing the noise affecting information in group decision making and of reaching a consensual decision. This approach generally improves the level of shared knowledge and helps to avoid conflict within the group. The application was carried out in a major pharmaceutical production plant. The experience showed an eighty per cent reduction in the original amount of process noise. Moreover, the paper describes evidence of improvement in interpersonal relationships.

This article presents a method for facilitating group decision-making. The method is founded on a process that allows a systematic analysis of the problem. It also allows sharing exchanging knowledge and experiences. Individual judgements are represented by utility functions. A stability condition leads to inferring if the analysis has been sufficient or if it must be continued. Once stability is reached, the method proposes one mode for aggregating judgements and for ordering the decision alternatives. The analytical framework embedded in the use of the proponed model stimulates the use of independent approaches among the members of the group. The proponed method also facilitates the identification of the participants with the chosen decision.

Se presenta un método orientado a facilitar la toma de decisiones con equipos de trabajo. Plantea un proceso que permite hacer un análisis sistemático del problema, intercambiar conocimientos y experiencia. Los juicios individuales se representan mediante funciones de utilidad. Una condición de estabilidad permite inferir si el análisis ha sido suficiente, o si debe retomarse. Una vez alcanzada la estabilidad, el método propone el modo de agregar los juicios y ordenar las alternativas de decisión. La metodología propuesta estimula la realización de aportes independientes entre los miembros del grupo y hace posible que los integrantes se identifiquen con la decisión adoptada.