An FMEA model for risk assessment of university sustainability: using a combined ITARA with TOPSIS-AL approach based neutrosophic sets

Abstract

It is necessary to emphasize both the process and results of performance management to find the balance between quality and quantity needed to ensure the sustainable development of universities to make the best use of limited educational resources and meet the diverse needs of students. This study applies failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to analyze obstacles to university sustainability by constructing complete risk assessment modes and reference indicators. The neutrosophic set theory was incorporated into the FMEA to account for information uncertainty and asymmetry. A specialist team then evaluated the importance of the risk factors using neutrosophic indifference threshold-based attribute ratio analysis to determine objective weights for the risk factors. Furthermore, the neutrosophic technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution based on aspiration level (N-TOPSIS-AL) is employed to aggregate the total risk scores of the failure modes. Using neutrosophic sets to measure truth, falsity, and indeterminacy in the assessment significantly improve the adaptability of the fuzzy theory to real-world problems. The study results indicate that when assessing university affairs management and analyzing possible risks, priority must be given to the occurrence of risks and that the lack of educational facilities is the riskiest item in the specialist assessment. The proposed assessment model can be applied as a basis for university sustainability assessments to accelerate the development of other forward-looking approaches.

Risk Assessment in Sustainable Production: Utilizing a Hybrid Evaluation Model to Identify the Waste Factors in Steel Plate Manufacturing

“…It investigates existing or potential failure modes and eliminates potential risk factors associated with products, designs, processes, services, and systems, thereby enhancing their reliability [28]. The primary objective of FMEA is to prevent potential failure modes, reduce the likelihood of faults, and avert the occurrence of hazardous events or minimize their probability, rather than seeking remedial measures [29]. Chang et al [30] also underscored the ethos of FMEA as "prevention is better than cure", providing proactive protection against possible future faults, effectively reducing maintenance costs and time.…”

“…It assesses the level of influence that a failure mode exerts on the entire system, product, equipment, or process when it occurs. [27,29,33] Occurrence (O)…”

“…Typically, the frequency of a failure mode over a specific period determines the level. [28,29,33] Detectability (D)…”

Risk assessment of crane operation hazards using modified FMEA approach with Z-number and set pair analysis

“…(7) Conventional FMEA, along with many other risk management approaches, tends to evaluate system risk in a static manner and often disregards the temporal dimension within the system profile, overlooking dynamic aspects [ 16 ]. (8) The RPN calculation is highly sensitive to risk variations [ 17 ].…”

Assessing Supplier Disruption Risks Using a Modified Pythagorean Fuzzy SWARA–TOPSIS Approach

“…The objective of MCDM is to formulate the most appropriate strategies for decision-makers and provide effective management information under a complex and interdependent factor environment. Generally, the MCDM process includes determining evaluation criteria, measuring the weights of these criteria, and calculating the performance scores of the evaluated items [38][39][40].…”