In the current competitive environment, managers have been making attempts to convert organizations under their supervision into competitive and responsive through creating capability of timely delivery of quality products and services. In line with this, maintenance as a system plays an important role in achieving these goals. The maintenance strategy selection is a kind of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem, which requires considering a large number of complex factors as multiple evaluation criteria. A robust MCDM method should consider the interactions among criteria. The analytic network process (ANP) is a relatively new MCDM method, which can deal with all kinds of interactions systematically. Moreover, the Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) not only can convert the relations between cause and effect of criteria into a visual structural model, but also can be used as a way to handle the inner dependences within a set of criteria. Hence, this paper proposes an effective solution based on a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach to help vehicle companies that need to evaluate and select maintenance strategies.

Aghaee, M & Fazli, S. (2012). An improved MCDM method for maintenance approach selection: A case study of auto industry.Management Science Letters, 2(1), 137-146.

Al-Najjar, B., & Alsyouf. I. (2003). Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making. International Journal of Production Economics, 84, 85–100.

Agarwal. A., & Shankar, R. (2002). Analyzing alternatives for improvement in supply chain performance. Work Study, 51(1), 32–38.

Bashiri. M., Badri. H., Hejazi. T.H. (2011). Selecting optimum maintenance strategy by FUZZY interactive linear assignment method. Applied mathematical modeling, 35, 152-164.

Bengtsson, M. (2004). Condition based maintenance system technology-where is development heading?, Proceedings of the 17th European Maintenance Congress, Barcelona, Spain, May, 11–13.

Bevilacqua. M, & Braglia, M. (2000). The analytic hierarchy process applied to maintenance strategy selection. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 70, 71–83.

Blanchard, S.B (1997). An enhanced approach for implementation and total productive maintenance in manufacturing environment. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 3(2), 69-80.

Byington. C., Roemer. M.J., & Galie, T. (2002). Prognostic enhancements to diagnostic systems for improved condition- based maintenance, Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference, 6, Big Sky, USA, March 9–16, 2815–2824.

Chand. G., & Shirvani, B. (2000). Implementation of TPM in cellular manufacturing. Journal of Material Processing Technology, 103, 149-54.Chung. S. H., Lee. A. H. I., & Pearn, W. L. (2005). Analytic network process (ANP) approach for product mix planning in semiconductor fabricator. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(1), 15–36.

Coulter. K, & Sarkis. J. (2005). Development of a media selection model using the analytic network process. International Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 193–216.

Djurdjanovic, D., Lee, J., & Ni, J. (2003). Watchdog agenda infotronics based prognostics approach for product performance assessment and prediction. International Journal of Advanced Engineering Informatics, 17, 109–125.

Fontela. E., & Gabus. A. (1976). The DEMATEL observer, DEMATEL 1976 Report, Switzerland Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Center.

Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems and invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL, Switzerland Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Centre.

Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1973). Perceptions of the World problematic: Communication procedure, communicating with those bearing collective responsibility (DEMATEL Report No. 1). Switzerland Geneva: Battelle Geneva Research Centre.

Hori. S., & Shimizu, Y. (1999). Designing methods of human interface for supervisory control systems, Control Engineering Practice, 7(11), 1413–1419.

Kahraman. C., Ertay, T., & Buyukozkan, G. (2006). A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 171(2), 390–411.

Karsak, E.E., & Tolga, E. (2001). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making procedure for evaluating advanced manufacturing system investments. International Journal of Production Economics, 69, 49–64.

Karsak. E. E., Sozer, S., & Alptekin, S. E. (2003). Product planning in quality function deployment using a combined analytic network process and goal programming approach. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 44(1), 171–190.

Kinosita. E. (2003). From AHP to ANP. Operations Research of Japan, 48(9), 677–683.

Kumar, D., & Kumar, P. (2005). FLM to select suitable maintenance strategy in process industries using MISO model. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 11(4), 359-374.

Lee. J. W., & Kim, S. H. (2001). An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection. International Journal of Project Management, 19(2), 111–118.

Leung. L. C., Hui, Y. V., & Zheng, M. (2003). Analysis of compatibility between interdependent matrices in ANP. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54(7), 758–768.

Li, J.R., Khoo, L.P., & Tor, S.B. (2006). Generation of possible multiple components disassembly sequence for maintenance using a disassembly constraint graph. International Journal of Production Economics, 102, 51–65.

Mann. L., Saxena, A., & Knapp, G.M. (1995). Statistical-based or condition-based preventive maintenance. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 1(1), 46–59.

Mardani. N. (2010). Selecting suitable maintenance strategy by using FUZZY method (case study: Isfahan Siman Sepahan), MA thesis, Alammeh Tabatabaie university, Tehran.

McKone. K., Schroeder, R., & Kristy, C. (1999). Total productive maintenance: a contextual view. Journal of Operations Management, 17, 123-44.

Meade. L. M., & Presley, A. (2002). R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(1), 59–66.

Mechefske, C.K., & Wang, Z. (2001).Using fuzzy linguistics to select optimum maintenance and condition monitoring strategies. Mechanical System and Signal Processing, 15(6), 1129-1140.

Mechefske. C.K., & Wang, Z. (2003). Using fuzzy linguistics to select optimum maintenance and condition monitoring strategies. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 17(2), 305–316.

Mobley, R.K. (2002). An Introduction to Predictive Maintenance. 2nd ed., Elsevier Science, New York.Martorell, S., Sanchez, A., & Serradell, V. (1999). Age-dependent reliability model considering effects of maintenance and working conditions. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 64, 19–31.

Nakajima. S (1988). Introduction to Total Productive Maintenance (TPM). Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA.

Niemira, M. P., & Saaty, T. L. (2004). An analytic network process model for financial-crisis forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting, 20(4), 573–587.

Partovi, F. Y. (2001). An analytic model to quantify strategic service vision. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(5), 476–500.

Partovi, F. Y., & Corredoira, R. A. (2002). Quality function deployment for the good of soccer. European Journal of Operational Research, 137(3), 642–656.

Partovi, F. Y. (2006). An analytic model for locating facilities strategically. Omega, 34(1), 41–55.

Saaty, T. L. (1996). The analytic network process-decision making with dependence and feedback. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications.

Saaty, T. L. (1999). Fundamentals of the analytic network process. The International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Kobe, Japan.Saaty, R. W. (2003). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for decision making and the analytic network process (ANP) for decision making with dependence and feedback. Creative Decisions Foundation.Saaty, T. L. (2004). The analytic network process: Dependence and feedback in decision making (Part 1): Theory and validation examples, SESSION 4B: Theory and development of the analytic hierarchy process/analytic network process, In The 17th International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making, August 6-11, 2004 at The Whistler Conference Centre, Whistler, British Columbia, Canada.

Sarkis, J. (1999). A methodological framework for evaluating environmentally conscious manufacturing programs. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 36(4), 793–810.

Sekitani, K., & Takahashi, I. (2001). A unified model and analysis for AHP and ANP. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 44(1), 67–89.

Shang, J. S., Tjader, Y., & Ding, Y. (2004). A unified framework for multi-criteria evaluation of transportation projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51(3), 300–313.

Sharma, R.K., Kumar, D., & Kumar, P. (2005). FLM to select suitable maintenance strategy in process industries using MISO model. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 11(4), 359–374.

Shygith, K., Ilangkumaran, M., & Kumanan, S. (2008). Multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 14(4), 375-386.

Swanson, L. (2001). Linking maintenance strategies to performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 70, 237–244.Tesfamariam, D., & Lindberg, B. (2005). Aggregate analysis of manufacturing systems using system dynamics and ANP. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 49(1), 98–117.

Waeyenbergh, G., Pintelon, L. (2002). A framework for maintenance concept development, International Journal of Production Economics, 77, 299–313.Wang, Y., & Hayfield, M. (1999). Rolling contact fatigue failure modes of lubricated silicon nitride in relation to ring crack defects. Wear, 225–229 (2), 1284–1292.

Wang, Y.J., & Lee, H.S. (2007). Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 53, 1762–1772.

Yang, Y., Kurfess, T., Liang, S., & Danyluk, S. (1999). Application of a specialized capacitance probe in bearing diagnosis, Wear, 225 (2), 1215–1221.Yurdakul, M. (2004). AHP as a strategic decision-making tool to justify machine tool selection. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 146(3), 365–376.