## 2 State of the Art
[PERSON] et al. [10; 26] conducted a remarkable literature review on multicriteria decision making (MCDM) methods that evaluate risks using FMEA. They selected 169 papers from 16 international journals and concluded that many researchers have improved the FMEA approach to overcome the limitations of FMEA by using FMEA together with other MCDM approaches. The literature review divides the 169 papers into 10 research branches and concludes that it continues to point to the need to include additional risk variables in the traditional FMEA approach. In the original FMEA, only three risk variables are used in the RPN function, namely, severity (S), occurrence (O), and detectability (D). Severity aims to assess the impact of a particular failure mode, occurrence aims to quantify its probability, and detectability aims to quantify the ability to detect a failure mode before it occurs. However, in many practical cases, additional risk variables are needed to fully characterize risk scenarios. In practice, these additional variables have been conceptually included along with the traditional FMEA risk variables. For example, assessing the severity of a particular failure mode may involve the impact of several sub-variables, such as: Cost, Profitability, Human, Social, Environmental, etc. If all these sub-variables have the same weight in the risk assessment, their breakdown is not necessary. However, if they contribute with different weight to the risk, which is usually the case, then their breakdown becomes important. In this sense, the original RPN function cannot be used because it considers only three risk variables. This has led to alternative approaches to create new disaggregated severity variables, which in some cases are assessed separately along with their respective occurrence and detectability scores. In this approach, the disaggregated severity variables are scored independently and do not take into account the aggregate interdependence of these variables, which may be a shortcoming in some situations. Recent studies suggest that the performance of risk assessment and management teams, as well as the resources available for risk management, have a particular influence on the degree of impact of the risk assessment scenario. Despite these findings, there is no systematic methodology in FMEA that takes this aspect into account. This fact mainly results from the limitation to the three variables found in the traditional FMEA. In many cases, a fourth variable, such as risk mitigation performance, is needed. For example, [PERSON] et al. [27] developed a risk mitigation model based on FMEA with the aim of improving risk metrics in a hospital's quality management system. The authors used the traditional RPN together with a detailed description of hospital processes and concluded that it was necessary to integrate risk management programs into quality management programs. In addition to this aspect, the authors also concluded that the performance of process owners had a strong influence on the assessment and management of risks. Despite these conclusions, the proposed risk model did not consider the performance level of process owners to implement mitigation strategies, which was a limitation of the proposed model. [PERSON] et al. [28] proposed a new group decision model based on the FMEA concept combined with ELECTRE TRI and Double Hierarchy Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets (DHHFLTS). The main objective was to evaluate the overall risk of important risk factors that are usually evaluated independently. The authors concluded, among other things, that the complexity of risk mitigation had a strong influence on the classification of failure modes. This conclusion underscores the need for a simple and structured approach to assessing risk mitigation capabilities, which in turn is closely related to the risk owner's performance in mitigating risk. [PERSON] et al.