Management and Production Engineering Review

Content

Management and Production Engineering Review | 2018 | vol. 9 | No 1

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Performance measurement system in supply chain management (SCM) has been receiving increasing

attention by business organizations as a way to evaluate efficiency in supply chain

activities. Assessing the performance of supply chain uncovers the gap between planning

and actual performance as to trace the potential problems thus ascertain necessary areas

for improvement. This research aims to investigate the application of performance measurement

system in SCM as well as exploring its relationship with organization’s performance

among Malaysian manufacturing firms. By utilizing the questionnaire method, respondents

involved were requested to indicate the extent to which they use a number of 24 selected

performance measures that are related to SCM. The results show that the majority of the

observed manufacturing firms utilize specific performance measurement tools in evaluating

the supply chain performance. The current performance measurement techniques, the Balanced

Score Card is adopted by around a quarter of the total responding firms followed

by Supply Chain Operations References Model – SCOR, which attracts total users of only

a fifth of the total respondents. In particular, performance measures under customer service

category recorded the highest number of usage followed by cost-based performance measures

and operations management. The results of this investigation also unveil few major points

that are important to be highlighted. Firstly, the obtained outcomes of this study bring to

light the significant relationships between the utilization of supply chain performance measures

under customer service, operations management and organizational performance. In

addition, this study discovered a significant correlation between the size of the organization

and the extent of use of supply chain performance measures and how these two variables

positively correlated. Lastly, the findings also suggested that the performance measures for

SCM has been playing a crucial role in enhancing the performance of the organizations and

is increasingly operated as the firms grow in size. Based on the brief highlighted points listed

above, it is not an exaggeration to say that this research contributes new information to the

body of knowledge in performance measurement system in SCM and its associations with

organizational performance.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Kamilah Ahmad
Shafie Mohamed Zabri
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The difficulty of innovation risk assessment makes it necessary to use a multi-criteria analysis.

Innovative projects are related to unstructured problems and the uncertainty, therefore,

the use of fuzzy logic in the innovation risk assessment is analyzed. This paper proposes

a method of determining the weights of criteria in order to innovation risk assessment. The

weights are determined by 5 general criteria and 14 detailed criteria of innovation risk assessment.

The proposed method is an extension of the fuzzy AHP method. The extension

consists in taking into consideration the group decision-making approach with experts’ psychological

conditions. The groups of experts have been chosen based on an elaborated form.

The form makes it possible to characterize the persons within the scope of different psychological

conditions. The proposed method provides objective and rational decision-making.

The paper presents also a comparison of results with the fuzzy AHP method without the

group decision making. The weights obtained by the proposed method are more diversified

and bring out the most important criteria.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Anna Małgorzata Deptuła
Katarzyna Rudnik
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the article problems related to human labor and factors affecting the increasing use of

industrial robots are discussed. Since human factors affect the production processes stability,

robots are preferred to apply. The application of robots is characterized by higher performance

and reliability comparing to human labor. The problem is how to determine the real

difference in work efficiency between human operator and robot. The aim of the study is to

develop a method that allows clearly definition of productivity growth associated with the

replacement of human labor by industrial robots. Another aim of the paper is how to model

robotized and manual operated workstation in a computer simulation software. Analysis of

the productivity and reliability of the hydraulic press workstation operated by the human

operator or an industrial robot, are presented. Simulation models have been developed taking

into account the availability and reliability of the machine, operator and robot. We apply

OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) indicator to present how availability and reliability

parameters influence over performance of the workstation, in the longer time. Simplified

financial analysis is presented considering different labor costs in EU countries.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Grzegorz Gołda
Adrian Kampa
Iwona Paprocka
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to present the author’s reflections on the origin and popularity

of various approaches to maintenance and improvement of production processes, their

terminological consistency, understanding, and practical application of their principles. The

author’s reflections are based on his observations made over his many years of activity as

a lecturer and consultant in the area of production engineering and management. It was

shown that there is a need to make scientists and practitioners aware of the relatively large

degree of freedom in defining the scope and way of application of strategies of continuous

improvement. The author’s proposal is to refer to all approaches to maintenance and improvement

of production processes with the title “Strategies of Efficient Action” and all

supporting methods as “Practices of Efficient Action”.

Considerations presented in the paper can be useful in more and more efficiently applying

the power of TQM, Six Sigma, Lean Manufacturing and other strategies of processes

maintenance and improvement in the daily activities of companies.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Adam Hamrol
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the article problems related to human labor and factors affecting the increasing use of

industrial robots are discussed. Since human factors affect the production processes stability,

robots are preferred to apply. The application of robots is characterized by higher performance

and reliability comparing to human labor. The problem is how to determine the real

difference in work efficiency between human operator and robot. The aim of the study is to

develop a method that allows clearly definition of productivity growth associated with the

replacement of human labor by industrial robots. Another aim of the paper is how to model

robotized and manual operated workstation in a computer simulation software. Analysis of

the productivity and reliability of the hydraulic press workstation operated by the human

operator or an industrial robot, are presented. Simulation models have been developed taking

into account the availability and reliability of the machine, operator and robot. We apply

OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) indicator to present how availability and reliability

parameters influence over performance of the workstation, in the longer time. Simplified

financial analysis is presented considering different labor costs in EU countries.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Sylwia Łęgowik-Świącik
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This study provides a systematic review of the existing academic literature describing the

key components of eMaintenance. The current literature is reviewed by utilizing a number of

academic databases including Scopus, SpringerLink and ScienceDirect, and Google Search is

used to find relevant academic and peer-reviewed journal articles concerning eMaintenance.

The literature describes eMaintenance as an advanced maintenance strategy that takes advantage

of the Internet, information and communication technologies, wireless technologies

and cloud computing. eMaintenance systems are used to provide real time analyses based

on real time data to offer a number of solutions and to define maintenance tasks. The collection

and analysis of appropriate maintenance and process data are critical to create robust

‘maintenance intelligence’ and finally improvements in manufacturing costs, safety, environmental

impact, and equipment reliability. This paper describes how the scientific discussion

on eMaintenance has expanded significantly during the last decade, creating a need for an

up-to-date review. As a conclusion, three research gaps in the area of eMaintenance are

identified, including evaluating the benefits of eMaintenance, agreeing on a

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Lasse Metso
David Baglee
Salla Marttonen-Arola
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In this article, we review the research state of the bullwhip effect in supply chains with

stochastic lead times. We analyze problems arising in a supply chain when lead times are

not deterministic. Using real data from a supply chain, we confirm that lead times are

stochastic and can be modeled by a sequence of independent identically distributed random

variables. This underlines the need to further study supply chains with stochastic lead times

and model the behavior of such chains.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Peter Nielsen
Zbigniew Michna
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Spare parts are one of the important pillars in the after-sales service of automotive business.

Customers will satisfied and comfortable if the availability of spare parts is guaranteed.

Spare Part Center is one of function to support unit sales and as well as profit-oriented,

so the accuracy and speed of spare part acceptance by the customer is an important key

to winning the competition. Order Picking is one of the supply chain processes that play

a role in warehouse operations to meet customer needs. Order Picking is the most expensive

activity in warehousing and can reach 55% of the total cost of warehousing operations, so it

is considered a top priority in increasing productivity, even reaching 65% of total warehouse

operating costs. The purpose of this research is to increase productivity in the process

of picking order through reduction of processing time. Increased productivity is done by

improving the working method of the picking process. From the result the comparing, the

method by zone requires less total picking time (193.712 seconds) than by routing (249.559

seconds) decreased 55.85 second time, in other words, an increase of 22.38%. With the Visual

Stream Mapping (VSM) in this research can reduce to travel time, it means that the total

distance traveled is small than the current method. The impact from VSM approach will

eliminate time for preparation of 1.960 seconds, and take empty trolley of 200 seconds. In

this case some of traveling non-value

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Humiras Hardi Purba
Mukhlisin
Siti Aisyah
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Technological development offers a wide range of new possibilities for implementation of

production processes. Continual production development is the main key to success and

competitiveness improvement, labour productivity and image-building for all manufacturing

companies. The article deals with designing of new workplace with implementation and

utilization of automated robot for faster and safer handling of cast stock. The new layout

of workplace is created in software Process Simulate.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Peter Trebuna
Miriam Pekarcıkova
Jana Kronova
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The problem of sequencing jobs on a single machine to minimize total cost (earliness and

tardiness) is nowadays not just important due to traditional concerns but also due to its

importance in the context of Collaborative Networked Organizations and Virtual Enterprises,

where precision about promptly responses to customers’ requests, along with other

important requirements, assume a crucial role. In order to provide a contribution in this

direction, in this paper the authors contribute with an applied constructive heuristics that

tries to find appropriate solutions for single machine scheduling problems under different

processing times and due dates, and without preemption allowed. In this paper, two different

approaches for single-machine scheduling problems, based on external and internal

performance measures are applied to the problem and a comparative analysis is performed.

Computational results are presented for the problem under Just-in-Time and agile conditions

on which each job has a due date, and the objective is to minimize the sum of holding costs

for jobs completed before their due date and tardiness costs for jobs completed after their

due date. Additional computational tests were developed based on different customer and

enterprise oriented performance criteria, although preference is given to customer-oriented

measures, namely the total number of tardy jobs and the maximum tardiness.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maria L.R. Varela
Justyna Trojanowska
Ana M. Madureira
Joana D. Dantas
André S. Santos
Goran D. Putnik
José Machado

Instructions for authors

REVIEW PROCESS

Received manuscripts are first examined by the Management and Production Engineering Review Editors.
Manuscripts clearly not suitable for publication, incomplete or not prepared in the required style will be sent back to the authors without scientific review, but may be resubmitted as soon as they have been corrected.
The corresponding author will be notified by e-mail when the manuscript is registered at the Editorial Office (https://www.editorialsystem.com/mper/). The responsible editor will make the decision either to send the manuscript to another reviewer to resolve the difference of opinion or return it to the authors for revision. The ultimate decision to accept, accept subject to correction, or reject a manuscript lies within the prerogative of the Editor-in-Chief and is not subject to appeal. The editors are not obligated to justify their decision.
All manuscripts submitted to MPER editorial system ( https://www.editorialsystem.com/mper/) will be sent to at least two and in some cases three reviewers for passing the double-blind review process.
The material formatted in the MPER format must be unpublished and not under submission elsewhere.

REVIEWERS
Once a year a list of co-operating reviewers is publish in electronic version of MPER. All articles published in MPER are published in open access.


APC
In order to provide free access to readers, and to cover the costs of copyediting, typesetting, long-term archiving, and journal management, an article processing charge (APC) of 800 PLN (about 180 Euro, VAT included) for 10-page article applies to papers accepted after peer review. Each additional page of the article (over 10 pages) costs 80 PLN (about 18 Euro, VAT included).
Maximum length of the article is 18 pages (using MPER template).
There is no submission charge.

Guidelines for Authors

Template for Authors





Additional info

The non-commercial use of the article will be governed by the Creative Commons Attribution license as currently displayed on https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Publication Ethics Policy

The ethics statements for the journal Management and Production Engineering Review are based on the guidelines of Committee on publication ethics (COPE) and the ELSEVIER publishing ethics resource kit.
For Authors: All articles, published in the journal Management and Production Engineering Review have to comprise a list of references which correspond with the journal’s Instructions to authors for paper preparation. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. All articles are tested using antyplagiarism programme. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Authors are accountable for the originality, validity and integrity of the content of their submissions. In choosing to use AI tools, authors are expected to do so responsibly and in accordance with our editorial policies on authorship and principles of publishing ethics. Authorship requires taking accountability for content, consenting to publication via an author publishing agreement, giving contractual assurances about the integrity of the work, among other principles. These are uniquely human responsibilities that cannot be undertaken by AI tools. Therefore, AI tools must not be listed as an author. Authors must, however, acknowledge all sources and contributors included in their work. Where AI tools are used, such use must be acknowledged and documented appropriately.
For Editor-in-Chief: The editor is responsible for decision which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor and editorial board and office must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
For Reviewers: Peer review helps the editor in making editorial decisions and also assist the author in improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Other sources: http://apem-journal.org/


Peer-review Procedure

Received manuscripts are first examined by the Management and Production Engineering Review Editors. Manuscripts clearly not suitable for publication, incomplete or not prepared in the required style will be sent back to the authors without scientific review, but may be resubmitted as soon as they have been corrected. The corresponding author will be notified by e-mail when the manuscript is registered at the Editorial Office (marta.grabowska@put.poznan.pl; mper@put.poznan.pl). The ultimate decision to accept, accept subject to correction, or reject a manuscript lies within the prerogative of the Editor-in-Chief and is not subject to appeal. The editors are not obligated to justify their decision. All manuscripts submitted to MPER editorial office (https://www.editorialsystem.com/mper/) will be sent to at least two and in some cases three reviewers for passing the double-blind review process. The responsible editor will make the decision either to send the manuscript to another reviewer to resolve the difference of opinion or return it to the authors for revision.

The average time during which the preliminary assessment of manuscripts is conducted - 14 days
The average time during which the reviews of manuscripts are conducted - 6 months
The average time in which the article is published - 8.4 months

Reviewers

2024
No Name Surname Affiliation
1 Abd El-Rahman Abd El-Raouf Ahmed Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural Engineering Research Institute, Giza , Egypr
2 Wiktor Adamus Jagiellonian University, Poland
3 Shoaib Akhtar Fatima Jinnah Women University, Pakistan
4 Mohammad Al-Adaileh "COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Engineering, Technology, and Management Assistant Professor of Instruction, United States"
5 Hind Ali University of Technology, Iraq
6 Katarzyna Antosz Rzeszow University of Technology, Poland
7 Muhammad Asrol Binus University, Indonesia
8 Lucia Bednarova Technical University of Kosice, Slovak Republic
9 Haniyah Bilal Haverford university, United States
10 Berihun Bizuneh "Bahir Dar University Bahir Dar Univ, Ethiopian Inst Text & Fash Technol, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, Ethiopia"
11 Łukasz Brzeziński Katedra Organizacji i Zarządzania, Wyższa Szkoła Logistyki w Poznaniu, Poland
12 Waldemar Budner Katedra Logistyki, Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu, Poland
13 Anna Burduk Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
14 Vishnu C R Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Tirupati, India
15 Fatih Çetin Başkent Üniversitesi, Turkey
16 Danylo Cherevatskyi Institute of Industrial Economics of NAS of Ukraine: Kiev, UA, Ukraine
17 Claudiu Cicea Bucharest University of Economic Studies Romania, Romania
18 Hasan Huseyin Coban Department of Electrical Engineering, Bartin University, Turkey
19 Juan Cogollo-Florez Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia
20 David Coopler Universitat Politècnica de València, Romania
21 Ömer Cora Karadeniz Technical University, Turkey
22 Margareta Coteata Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iasi, Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Romania
23 Szymon Cyfert Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland
24 Valentina Di Pasquale Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Italy
25 Milan Edl University of West Bohemia, Czech Republic
26 Luis Edwards Cornell University, United States
27 Joanna Ejdys Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
28 Abdellah El barkany Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University Faculty of Science and Technology of Fez, Morocco
29 Chiara Franciosi CRAN UMR 7039, Université de Lorraine, France
30 Mose Gallo Materials and Industrial Production Engineering, University of Napoli Federico, Italy
31 Tetiana Galushkina State Ecological Academy of Postgraduate Education and Management, Ukraine
32 Józef Gawlik Cracow University of Technology, Institut of Production Engineering, Poland
33 Rohollah Ghasemi, College of Management, University of Tehran, Iran
34 Arkadiusz Gola, Lublin University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poland
35 Alireza Goli Department of industrial engineering, Yazd university, Yazd, Iran
36 Magdalena Graczyk-Kucharska, Politechnika Poznańska, Poland
37 Adriana Grenčíková Industry 4.0, Human factor, Ergonomic, Slovak Republic
38 Patrik Grznár, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Žilina Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Slovak Republic
39 Anouar Hallioui INTI International University, Malaysia
40 Adam Hamrol Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
41 ni luh putu hariastuti itats, Indonesia
42 Paula Heliodoro, Polytechnic Institute of Setubal, Portugal
43 Vitalii Ivanov Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Machines and Tools, Sumy State University, Ukraine
44 Ali Jaboob Dhofar University, Oman
45 Zamberi Jamaludin Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Malaysia
46 Izabela Jonek-Kowalska, Wydział Organizacji i Zarządzania Politechnika Śląska, Poland
47 Satishbabu ACE India
48 Prasad Kanaka Institute of Industrial Relations and Human Resource Development, India
49 Anna Karwasz Poznan University of Technology, Poland
50 Waldemar Karwowski University of Central Florida, United States
51 Osmo Kauppila University of Oulu, Finland
52 Tauno Kekale Merinova Technology Centre, Finland
53 Mahmoud Khedr Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Cairo, Egypt, Egypt
54 Peter Kostal Department of Production Systems, Metrology and Asembly, Slovenská Technická Univerzita V Bratislave, Faculty of Material Science and Technology, Slovak Republic
55 Boris Kostow University of Angela Kyncheva in Ruse, Bulgaria
56 Martin Krajčovič, University of Žilina, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Slovak Republic
57 Caroline  Kristian Uppsala University, Sweden
58 Robert Kucęba Wydział Zarządzania, Politechnika Częstochowska, Poland
59 Agnieszka Kujawińska Poznan University of Technology
60 Edyta Kulej-Dudek Politechnika Częstochowska, Poland
61 Bhakaporn Kuljirundhorn Foxford University, Canada
62 Rajeev Kumar Doon University, India
63 Sławomir Kłos Institute of Mechanical Engineering, University of Zielona Góra, Poland
64 Yu Lee National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan
65 Anna Lewandowska-Ciszek Department of Logistics, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland
66 Wojciech Lewicki West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, Poland
67 Tetiana Likhouzova National Technical University of Ukraine, “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”, Ukraine
68 Damjan Maletič University of Maribor, Faculty of Organizational Sciences, Slovenia
69 Marcela Malindzakova Technical University, Slovak Republic
70 Ildiko Mankova Technical University of Košice, Slovakia
71 Arnaud  Marcelline University of Nantes, France
72 Józef Matuszek University of Bielsko-Biała, Poland
73 Marcin Matuszny Department of Production Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Bielsko-Biala, ul. Willowa 2, 43-300 Bielsko-Biała
74 Giovanni Mazzuto Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Italy
75 Tomasz Małkus Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie, Katedra Procesu Zarządzania, Poland, Poland
76 Rafał Michalski Katedra Systemów Zarządzania i Rozwoju Organizacji, Politechnika Wrocławska, Poland
77 Jerzy Mikulik AGH University of Krakow, Poland
78 Rami Mokao MIS - Management Information Systems, HIAST, Syria
79 Norsyahida Mokhtar International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia
80 Ig. Jaka Mulyana Industrial Engineering, Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University, Indonesia
81 Nor Hasrul Akhmal Ngadiman School of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia
82 Duc Duy Nguyen Department of Industrial Systems Engineering, Ho Chi Minh Technology University (HCMUT), Viet Nam
83 fernando Nino Polytechnic University of San Luis Potos, Mexico
84 Filscha Nurprihatin Sampoerna University, Indonesia
85 Rebecca Oliver Stockton University, United States
86 Anita Pavlenko Kryvyi Rih State University of Economics and Technology, Ukraine
87 Aleksandar Pesic, MB University, Faculty of Business and Law, Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia
88 Huy Phan Education Technology University, Vietnam, Viet Nam
89 Anna Piekarczyk Poznan School of Logistics (WSL), Poland
90 Alin Pop University of Oradea, Romania
91 Humiras Purba Industrial Engineering, Associate Professor, Universitas Mercu Buana, Jakarta, Indonesia, Indonesia
92 Tengku nur Azila Raja Mamat Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Malaysia
93 Silvijo  Renato University of Rijeka, Croatia
94 Piotr Rogala Department of Quality and Environmental Management, Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, Poland
95 Michał Rogalewicz, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
96 Izabela Rojek Institute of Computer Science, Kazimierz Wielki University, Poland
97 Adam Sadowski Katedra Strategii i Zarządzania Wartością Przedsiębiorstwa, Uniwersytet Łódzki, Poland
98 Mansia Sadyrova Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Kazakhstan
99 Nadia Saeed University of the Punjab, Pakistan
100 Sebastian Saniuk Uniwersytet Zielonogórski, Poland
101 Krzysztof Santarek Faculty of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
102 shankar sehgal Panjab University Chandigarh, India
103 Piotr Senkus University of Warsaw, Poland
104 Jarosław Sęp Politechnika Rzeszowska, Wydział Budowy Maszyn i Lotnictwa, Poland
105 Robert Sika Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Management, Institute of Materials Technology, Poland
106 Dariusz Sobotkiewicz Instytut Nauk o Zarządzaniu i Jakości, Uniwersytet Zielonogórski, Poland
107 Beata Starzyńska Poznan University of Technology
108 Klaudia Tomaszewska Faculty of Management Engineering, Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
109 Stefan Trzcielinski Poznan University of Technology, Poland
110 Cang Vo Binh Duong University, Viet Nam
111 Somporn Vongpeang Faculty of Technical Education, Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi, Thailand
112 Jaroslav Vrchota University of South Bohemia České Budějovice, Faculty of Economics, Czech Republic
113 Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber Poznań University of Technology, Poland
114 Ewa Więcek-Janka Wydział Inżynierii Zarządzania, Politechnika Poznańska, Poland
115 Linda Winters Czech University of Life Sciences, Czech Republic
116 Zbigniew Wisniewski Lodz University of Technology, Poland
117 Piotr Wróblewski Faculty of Engineering, University of Technology and Economics H. Chodkowska in Warsaw, Poland
118 Iseul  Young Hanyang University, Korea (South)
119 Chong Zhan Hubei University, China
120 Sylwia Łęgowik-Świącik Czestochowa University of Technology Poland, Poland


2025
No. Name Surname Affiliation
1 akshat gaurav akshat Asia University, Taiwan
2 luma Al-kindi University of Technology, Iraq
3 Hind Ali University of Technology, Iraq
4 Katarzyna Antosz Rzeszow University of Technology, Poland
5 Gilmar Batalha Universidade de Sao PauloUniv Sao Paulo, Mech Engn Dept, Escola Politecn, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil, Brazil
6 Lucia Bednarova Technical University of Kosice, Slovak Republic
7 Anna Burduk Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
8 Danylo Cherevatskyi Institute of Industrial Economics of NAS of Ukraine: Kiev, UA, Ukraine
9 Dorota Czarnecka-Komorowska Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
10 SUGANYA Devi National Institute of Technology,Silchar, India
11 Jacek Diakun Poznan University of Technology, Poland
12 Milan Edl University of West Bohemia, Czech Republic
13 João Furtado Santa Cruz do Sul University, Brazil
14 Bożena Gajdzik "Politechnika Śląska Wydział Inżynierii Materiałowej Katedra Informatyki Przemysłowej, Poland"
15 Mose Gallo Materials and Industrial Production Engineering, University of Napoli Federico, Italy
16 Remigiusz Gawlik Department of Public Management, Krakow University of Economics (KUE), Poland
17 Raja Reddy GNV University of Saskatchewan, Canada
18 Arkadiusz Gola Department of Production Informatisation and Robotisation, Lublin University of Technology,Poland
19 Alireza Goli Department of industrial engineering, Yazd university, Yazd, Iran Iran, Iran
20 Cristian Gómez Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia
21 José-Armando HIDALGO CRESPO ENSAM, Spain
22 Magdalena HRYB Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
23 Katarzyna Hys Opole University of Technology, Poland
24 Izabela Jonek-Kowalska "Wydział Organizacji i Zarządzania Politechnika Śląska, Poland"
25 Amirhossein Karamoozian, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
26 Anna Karwasz Poznan University of Technology, Poland
27 khaoula khlie Liwa college, Morocco
28 Jerzy Kisilowski
29 Peter Kostal, Slovenská Technická Univerzita V Bratislave, Faculty of Material Science and Technology, Slovak Republic
30 Herbert Kotzab Institute for Logistics and Supply Chain Management, University of Bremen, Germany
31 Martin Krajčovič University of Žilina, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Slovak Republic
32 Krzysztof Krystosiak Toronto Metropolitan University, Graphic Communications Management, Canada
33 Wiesław Kuczko Poznan University of Technology, Poland
34 Agnieszka Kujawińska Poznan University of Technology, Poland
35 Edyta Kulej-Dudek Politechnika Częstochowska, Poland
36 Anup Kumar Inst Management Technol NagpurInst Management Technol Nagpur, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India, India
37 Sławomir Kłos Institute of Mechanical Engineering, University of Zielona Góra, Poland
38 Quynh Le Song Thanh Ho Chi Minh Technology University, Viet Nam
39 Yu Lee National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan
40 Stanisław Legutko Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poznan, Poland, Poland
41 Anna Lewandowska-Ciszek Department of Logistics, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland
42 José Machado University of Minho · School of Engineering, Portugal
43 Damjan Maletič University of Maribor, Faculty of Organizational Sciences, Slovenia
44 Marcela Malindzakova Technical University, Slovak Republic
45 Tomasz Malkus Department of Management Process, Cracow University of Economics, Poland
46 Mengistu Manaye, Kombolcha Institute of Technology, Wollo University, Ethiopia, Ethiopia
47 Marcin Matuszny, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Bielsko-Biala, Poland
48 Tomasz Małkus, Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie, Katedra Procesu Zarządzania, Poland, Poland
49 Rami Mokao MIS - Management Information Systems, HIAST, Syria
50 Beata Mrugalska Poznan University of Technology, Poland
51 Ig. Jaka Mulyana Industrial Engineering, Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University, Indonesia
52 fernando Nino Polytechnic University of San Luis Potos, Mexico
53 Shimon Nof Purdue University, United States
54 Hana Pacaiová KLI, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Aeronautics, Technical University of Košice, Slovak Republic
55 Arun Kiran Pal Printing Engineering Department, Jadavpur University, India
56 Michal Patak University of Pardubice, Czech Republic
57 Ivan Pavlenko Department of General Mechanics and Machine Dynamics, Sumy State University, Ukraine
58 Miriam Pekarcikova Department of industrial and digital engineering, Technical University of Košice, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Slovak Republic
59 Alin Pop University of Oradea, Romania
60 Praveen Prabhu School of Engineering and Technology, Shivaji University, Kolhapur., India
61 Humiras Purba Industrial Engineering, Associate Professor, Universitas Mercu Buana, Jakarta, Indonesia, Indonesia
62 Paulina Rewers Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznań University of Technology, Poland
63 Michał Rogalewicz Division of Production Engineering, Institute of Materials Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
64 Izabela Rojek Institute of Computer Science, Kazimierz Wielki University, Poland
65 David Romero Tecnológico de Monterrey, Mexico
66 Adam Sadowski Katedra Strategii i Zarządzania Wartością Przedsiębiorstwa, Uniwersytet Łódzki, Poland
67 Abdu Salam Abdul Wali Khan Univ MardanAbdul Wali Khan Univ Mardan, Dept Comp Sci, Mardan 23200, Pakistan, Pakistan
68 fernando sampaio KMITL, Brazil
69 Sebastian Saniuk Uniwersytet Zielonogórski, Poland
70 Iman Sharaf "Higher Technological Institute - Egypt Higher Technol Inst, Dept Basic Sci, Cairo, Egypt, Egypt"
71 Robert Sika Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Management, Institute of Materials Technology, Poland
72 Beata Starzyńska Poznan University of Technology
73 Robert Ulewicz Politechnika Częstochowska, Poland
74 Wiesław Urban Politechnika Białostocka, Poland
75 Cang Vo Binh Duong University, Viet Nam
76 Jaroslav Vrchota University of South Bohemia České Budějovice, Czech Republic
77 Ewa Więcek-Janka Wydział Inżynierii Zarządzania, Politechnika Poznańska, Poland
78 Sylwia Łęgowik-Świącik Czestochowa University of Technology Poland, Poland

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more