Impact of the Multi-criteria Methods in Supporting

Innovation “Application of the AHP Method Within an Automotive Firm, Morocco”
  • Jihane Abdessadak
  • Houda Youssouf
  • Akram El Hachimi
  • Kamal Reklaoui
  • Abdelatif Benabdellah
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 37)


The international automotive market has for a long time been dominated by a few classical industries, which today increasingly fear the arrival of competition from Asian countries, notably China and India, which promise to “break prices”.

To cope with this competition, accentuated by globalization, companies must always think about adapting their products while maintaining good quality and preserving their brand images. To this end, they always use innovative methods to create new ideas to differentiate themselves from competitors.

This paper comes to emphasize the importance of the multi-criteria methods and more precisely the AHP method to support innovation.


AHP method Decrease of diversity Multi-criteria methods Innovation Monozukuri 



We would like to thank the company that allowed us to do this study and provided us with all the resources and information we needed.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Saito, K.: Development of the University of Kentucky – Toyota Research Partnership: Monozukuri: PART II, vol. 17, no. 5 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ranky, P.G.: Eighteen ‘monozukuri-focused’ assembly line design and visual factory management principles with DENSO industrial examples. Assem. Autom. 27(1), 12–16 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rse, L., Ong, L., Daiichi, F.: La responsabilité sociale des entreprises au Japon, de l‘époque d’Edo à la norme ISO 26 000 et à l’accident nucléaire de Fukushima, pp. 33–37 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shiro, F., Kaoru, Y.: Is Japanese manufacturing style (so-called Monozukuri) really robust? - Causal loop diagram and modeling analysis. In: Shiro, F. (ed.) Proceedings 27th International Conference System Dynamics Society, no. 5, pp. 1–26 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fujimoto, T.: The Japanese Manufacturing Industries - Its Capabilities and Challenges - Evolutionary Analysis of Capability and Architecture (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aoki, K., Staeblein, T., Tomino, T.: Monozukuri capability to address product variety: a comparison between Japanese and German automotive makers. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 147(PART B), 373–384 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsu, Y.L., Lee, C.H., Kreng, V.B.: The application of Fuzzy Delphi Method and Fuzzy AHP in lubricant regenerative technology selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 37(1), 419–425 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sivilevičius, H., Maskeliūnaite, L.: The criteria for identifying the quality of passengers’ transportation by railway and their ranking using AHP method. Transport 25(4), 368–381 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saaty, T.L.: Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 1(1), 83 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Danner, M., et al.: Integrating patients’ views into health technology assessment: Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a method to elicit patient preferences. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 27(4), 369–375 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vučijak, B., Kurtagić, S.M., Silajdžić, I.: Multicriteria decision making in selecting best solid waste management scenario: a municipal case study from Bosnia and Herzegovina. J. Clean. Prod. 130, 166–174 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang, T., Hsieh, C.H.: Six-Sigma project selection using national quality award criteria and Delphi fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making method. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(4), 7594–7603 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stefanović, G., Milutinović, B., Vučićević, B., Denčić-Mihajlov, K., Turanjanin, V.: A comparison of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Analysis and Synthesis of Parameters under Information Deficiency method for assessing the sustainability of waste management scenarios. J. Clean. Prod. 130, 155–165 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dong, Y., Zhang, G., Hong, G., Xu, Y.: Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method. Decis. Support Syst. 49(3), 281–289 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Benaïm, C., Perennou, D.-A., Pelissier, J.Y., Daures, J.-P.: Using an analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for weighting items of a measurement scale: a pilot study. Rev. Epidemiol. Sante Publique 58, 59–63 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jihane Abdessadak
    • 1
  • Houda Youssouf
    • 1
  • Akram El Hachimi
    • 1
  • Kamal Reklaoui
    • 1
  • Abdelatif Benabdellah
    • 1
  1. 1.Lab: Engineering, Innovation and Management of Industrial SystemsFSTTTangierMorocco

Personalised recommendations