Developing innovation, based on knowledge and technology, as a driving force of the economy, is necessary for survival and is required in having strong interactions within the globalized world of business. Innovation and technology development require an intertwined network of organizational interactions between public and private sector. The activities and interactions of these firms are the reasons for innovation development in the framework of innovation systems. Following strategies is of crucial necessity and importance in industries such as aerospace and remotely-piloted helicopters (RPH) with their complex characteristics, costly and time-consuming processes. Understanding the business environment and identifying the success factors is a significant step towards adopting innovative strategies and planning for technology development. The aim of this article is to evaluate the key success factors in technological innovation development of remotely-piloted helicopters (RPH) industry. The methodology used in this article is Best-Worst method which is considered as one of the most prominent and effective MCDM methods. Based on a case study and by reviewing the extant and relevant literature, the key success factors of technological innovation development of remotely-piloted helicopters (RPH) industry in Iran were identified. Then by applying the "Best-Worst" method and the experts' opinions, the key success factors were analyzed and prioritized. Finally, some suggestions are made by considering the results of the study.Growing Science Ltd. All rights reserved. 7
Developing and accepting industry 4.0 influences the industry structure and customer willingness. To a successful transition to industry 4.0, implementation strategies should be selected with a systematic and comprehensive view to responding to the changes flexibly. This research aims to identify and prioritise the strategies for implementing industry 4.0. For this purpose, at first, evaluation attributes of strategies and also strategies to put industry 4.0 in practice are recognised. Then, the attributes are weighted to the experts' opinion by using the Best Worst Method (BWM). Subsequently, the strategies for implementing industry 4.0 in Fara-Sanat Company, as a case study, have been ranked based on the Interval Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy (IVIF) of the TODIM method. The results indicated that the attributes of 'Technology', 'Quality', and 'Operation' have respectively the highest importance. Furthermore, the strategies for "new business models development', 'Improving information systems' and 'Human resource management' received a higher rank. Eventually, some research and executive recommendations are provided. Having strategies for implementing industry 4.0 is a very important solution. Accordingly, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are a useful tool for adopting and selecting appropriate strategies. In this research, a novel and hybrid combination of BWM-TODIM is presented under IVIF information.
This study seeks to investigate and understand why and how Iranian higher education students choose to study overseas. After critically analyzing the international student mobility literature, the important factors are distilled. Then, by using Fuzzy-Delphi Method (FDM), 15 factors are selected from the 21 factors initially selected by reviewing the literature. This study utilizes a novel Multicriteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach, based on Best-Worst Method (BWM), to prioritize the factors influencing the choice of Iranian students regarding international higher education. Therefore, by using BWM, the most and the least important factors and subfactors were identified and prioritized based on the experts' opinions. The findings of this quantitative research reveal that Iranian students identify "Aids and Scholarships," "Cost Issues," and "Environment of the Home Country" as the most important factors, respectively. Finally, a discussion is generated regarding the results and their implications.
One of the most important steps in formulating and solving a multiattribute decision‐making (MADM) problem is weighting the attributes. Most existing weighting methods are based on judgments by experts/decision‐makers, which are prone to several cognitive biases, making it necessary to examine these biases in MADM weighting methods and develop debiasing strategies. This study uses experimental analysis to look at equalizing bias—one of the main cognitive biases, where decision‐makers tend to assign the same weight to different attributes—in MADM methods. More specifically, we look at AHP (analytic hierarchy process), BWM (best‐worst method), PA (point allocation), SMART (simple multiattribute rating technique), and Swing methods under two structuring formats, hierarchical and non‐hierarchical. To empirically examine the existence of equalizing bias in these methods, we formulate several hypotheses, which are tested using a public transportation mode selection problem among 146 university students. The results indicate that AHP and BWM have less equalizing bias than SMART, Swing, and PA, and that the hierarchical problem structuring leads to a reduction in the equalizing bias in all five methods and that such a reduction significantly varies among the methods. Our findings prove some debiasing strategies suggested in existing literature, which could be used by real decision‐makers (when selecting a method) as well as researchers (when developing new methods).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.