A Systematic Decision-Making Approach for Quality Function Deployment Based on Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets
Source abstract
Abstract
As a powerful tool for improving customer satisfaction, quality function deployment (QFD) can convert customer requirements (CRs) into engineering characteristics (ECs) during product development and design. Aiming to address the deficiencies of traditional QFD in expert evaluation, CRs’ weight determination and ECs’ importance ranking, this paper proposes an enhanced QFD model that integrates hesitant fuzzy binary semantic variables, the Best–Worst Method (BWM), and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). The objective is to determine the prioritization of product engineering characteristics. Indeed, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTS) have found extensive application in decision-making problems. Compared to other fuzzy language methods, HFLTS offers greater convenience and flexibility in addressing decision-makers’ hesitations and uncertainties. Initially, the combination of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets with interval binary tuple language variables is employed to articulate the uncertainty in the assessment information provided by QFD team members. Subsequently, the improved BWM and TOPSIS methods based on HFLTS are used to improve the accuracy of the importance ranking of engineering characteristics by determining the weights of CRs and prioritizing ECs in two stages. Finally, the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method are validated through an illustrative example.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Quality Function Deployment in Product Design · Multi-Criteria Decision Making · Optimization and Mathematical Programming
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Economics and Management, China Jiliang University, Hangzhou 310018, China
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Quantification and integration of Kano’s model into QFD for optimising product design10.1080/00207543.2014.939777 ↗
2. Systematical decision-making approach for quality function deployment based on uncertain linguistic term sets10.1080/00207543.2018.1478462 ↗
3. Integrated multiphase sustainable product design with a hybrid quality function deployment—Multi-attribute decision-making (QFD-MADM) framework10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.013 ↗
4. Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD—Types of research, difficulties and benefits10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.03.006 ↗
5. An integrated decision-making approach for designing and selecting product concepts based on QFD and cumulative prospect theory10.1080/00207543.2017.1351632 ↗
6. Approach based on fuzzy goal programing and quality function deployment for new product planning10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.028 ↗
7. Combined quality function deployment and logical framework analysis to improve quality of emergency care in Malta10.1108/IJHCQA-04-2014-0040 ↗
8. Combined analysis of service expectations and perceptions in lodging industry through quality function deployment
9. Implementing QFD in decision making for selecting the optimal structural system for buildings10.1108/CI-12-2019-0149 ↗
10. An application of an integrated ANP–QFD framework for sustainable supplier selection10.1080/13675567.2016.1219702 ↗
11. A systematic approach to quality function deployment with a full illustrative example10.1016/j.omega.2004.03.010 ↗
12. Quantification for the importance degree of engineering characteristics with a multi-level hierarchical structure in QFD10.1080/00207543.2015.1041574 ↗
13. A group multi-granularity linguistic-based methodology for prioritizing engineering characteristics under uncertainties10.1016/j.cie.2015.11.012 ↗
14. Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, R., Zaied, A.E.-N.H., and Smarandache, F. (2019). A Hybrid Plithogenic Decision-Making Approachwith Quality Function Deployment for Selecting Supply Chain Sustainability Metrics. Symmetry, 11.10.3390/sym11070903 ↗
15. Advanced models of quality function deployment: A literature review10.1007/s11135-015-0212-2 ↗
16. Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making10.1109/TFUZZ.2011.2170076 ↗
17. An Overview on Fuzzy Modelling of Complex Linguistic Preferences in Decision Making10.1080/18756891.2016.1180821 ↗
18. A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words10.1109/91.890332 ↗
19. The Extension of Quality Function Deployment Based on 2-Tuple Linguistic Representation Model for Product Design under Multigranularity Linguistic Environment10.1155/2012/989284 ↗
20. Exploiting 2-tuple linguistic representational model for constructing HOQ-based failure modes and effects analysis10.1016/j.cie.2012.11.016 ↗
21. An integrated fuzzy MCDM approach for supplier evaluation and selection10.1016/j.cie.2015.01.019 ↗
22. Computing with Comparative Linguistic Expressions and Symbolic Translation for Decision Making: ELICIT Information10.1109/TFUZZ.2019.2940424 ↗
23. An evidential reasoning based approach for quality function deployment under uncertainty10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.104 ↗
24. A new integrated MCDM approach for improving QFD based on DEMATEL and extended MULTIMOORA under uncertainty environment10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107222 ↗
25. Prioritization of key quality characteristics with the three-dimensional HoQ model-based interval-valued spherical fuzzy-ORESTE method10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104271 ↗
26. Alghazzawi, D., Liaqat, M., Razaq, A., Alolaiyan, H., Shuaib, U., and Liu, J.-B. (2023). Selection of Optimal Approach for Cardiovascular Disease Diagnosis under Complex Intuitionistic Fuzzy Dynamic Environment. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11224616 ↗
27. Selecting firms in University technoparks: A hesitant linguistic fuzzy TOPSIS model for heterogeneous contexts10.3233/JIFS-16727 ↗
28. Novel linear programming models based on distance measure of IFSs and modified TOPSIS method for portfolio selection10.1016/j.eij.2022.06.002 ↗
29. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009 ↗
30. An optimal Best-Worst prioritization method under a 2-tuple linguistic environment in decision making10.1016/j.cie.2021.107141 ↗
31. A weighting model based on best–worst method and its application for environmental performance evaluation10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107168 ↗
32. Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications10.1016/j.knosys.2017.01.010 ↗
33. Hesitant fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications10.1002/int.22131 ↗
34. A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with multigranular hierarchical linguistic contexts in multi-expert decision-making10.1109/3477.915345 ↗
35. Technology selection for sustainable hydrogen production: A multi-criteria assessment framework under uncertainties based on the combined weights and interval best-worst projection method10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.09.030 ↗
36. Multiactor multicriteria decision making for life cycle sustainability assessment under uncertainties10.1002/aic.16149 ↗
37. Wang, Z.-L., You, J.-X., and Liu, H.-C. (2016). Uncertain Quality Function Deployment Using a Hybrid Group Decision Making Model. Symmetry, 8.10.3390/sym8110119 ↗
38. A new integrated fuzzy QFD approach for market segments evaluation and selection10.1016/j.apm.2014.11.051 ↗
39. A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations10.1016/j.ins.2003.10.006 ↗
40. Fuzzy Linguistic Olive Oil Sensory Evaluation Model based on Unbalanced Linguistic Scales
41. On multi-granular fuzzy linguistic modeling in group decision making problems: A systematic review and future trends10.1016/j.knosys.2014.11.001 ↗
42. Multi-granular unbalanced linguistic distribution assessments with interval symbolic proportions10.1016/j.knosys.2015.03.003 ↗
43. Chat with chatgpt on industry 5.0: Learning and decision-making for intelligent industries10.1109/JAS.2023.123552 ↗