Risk Assessment of Employing Digital Robots in Process Automation

• Published in: Systems (Basel) Vol. 12; no. 10; p. 428
• Main Authors: Dogan, Onur, Arslan, Ozlem, Cengiz Tirpan, Esra, Cebi, Selcuk
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 12.10.2024
• Subjects: Automation; Decision making; decomposed fuzzy sets; Failure modes; FMEA; Fuzzy set theory; Fuzzy sets; Global marketing; Productivity; risk assessment; robotic process automation; Robots; Software
• ISSN: 2079-8954; 2079-8954
• DOI: 10.3390/systems12100428

Using digital technologies is essential to gain a competitive advantage in the global market by adapting to new business models. While digital technologies make business processes efficient, they enable companies to make faster and more accurate decisions by automating daily and routine process tasks. Robotic process automation (RPA) automates routine and repetitive business processes, allowing many jobs performed by humans to be performed faster. This way, advantages such as reduced error rates, reduced costs, increased production speed, and labor productivity are provided. For the successful implementation of RPA, potential risks need to be considered. In this study, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) based on decomposed fuzzy sets (DFSs), a new extension of intuitionistic fuzzy sets, has been used to evaluate subjectiveness in expert judgments. Differing from the other extensions of fuzzy set theory, the advantage of DFSs is to simultaneously consider decision-makers’ optimistic and pessimistic answers. Thus, the answer given by the decision-maker to the positive and negative questions on the same subject defines the indeterminacy of the decision-maker, and the method takes this indeterminacy into account in the evaluation. This study assesses and evaluates the potential risks of six digital robots in process automation. Thirteen risks were individually assessed for each automated process. This study found “Sustainability challenge” critical in three processes, “Absence of governance management” in two, and “Security“ in one. Variability in risk importance arose from process vulnerabilities.