# Sustainable Transformation: A Case Study of an Engineering-to-Order Additive Manufacturing Firm
## 5 Case Study Company
### Process Analysis through Sus-VSM
#### 5.1.3 Selection of KPIs  
Figure 5 depicts the decomposition of the decision problem using the AHP method [101] for the case study company. The model incorporates three primary criteria: environmental, economic, and societal aspects, based on the TBL theory. The selection of the AHP method for this study was driven by its widespread use in decision-making within the area of sustainable development and the field of AM [38; 102; 103]. Additionally, authors employed the AHP method to identify performance measures for integration into BSC for strategic management [104; 105]. Figure 5: Hierarchical diagram for ranking of key performance indicators (KPIs) for sustainable development in additive manufacturing (AM) company according to the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method. The decision-makers employed AHP Online System (AHP-OS), a freely accessible tool [106] that has been also used by other authors in AHP-related studies [104]. The voting through the software engaged two experts. One expert had 25 years of manufacturing expertise, including a decade in the AM sector, while the other had over 10 years of operational and management experience. The identified KPIs are sourced from Table 3. It is essential to note that, as per the guidelines outlined by [107] and [88], each KPI should adhere to the SMART criteria, signifying that they should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. In order to facilitate the comparative analysis of PIs, voters utilised [PERSON]'s scale [101], ranging from 1 to 9. This scale allowed for the assessment of the relative importance of each PI, with a rating of 1 indicating equal importance and a rating of 9 denoting extreme significance. By employing this scale, voters were able to discern nuanced differences in the importance of various PIs within the context of the study. This systematic approach ensured a comprehensive assessment, enabling the prioritisation of KPIs based on their relevance and significance within the context of the study. In this study, a pairwise comparison method was employed to distinguish the most relevant sustainability KPIs for AM companies. The constructed hierarchy was accurately analysed through a series of pairwise comparisons utilising the software. Throughout the pairwise comparison process, consistency ratios were calculated using the software [106], ensuring that the consistency ratio remained below or equal to 0.1, indicating a reliable comparison. The pairwise comparison matrix, showing the assessment of the relative importance of criteria, is presented in Tables A1-A4 in Appendix A. Following the pairwise comparisons, global priorities were computed for each alternative, as outlined in Appendix A, Table A5. Subsequently, consolidated global priorities were determined by the software based on the analysis of the acquired data, as detailed in Appendix A, Table A6. This phase of the study was designed to present a systematic and organised approach for evaluating which KPI offers the most effective solution to the decision problem. Based on the calculated global weights of all the alternatives, the KPIs with the highest weights were selected for prioritisation. These include print quality (24.7%), material cost (12.3%), build time (12.3%), regulatory compliance (13.1%), material waste (11.2%), and transport waste (10%). The six KPIs are categorised into three distinct criteria groups: the environmental KPI group (material waste and transport waste), societal KPI group (regulatory compliance), and economic KPI group (build time, material cost, and print quality). These KPIs play a pivotal role by offering valuable benchmarks for evaluating the AM company's current sustainability, operational efficiency, and financial performance. This comprehensive set of KPIs provides management with a well-rounded and balanced view, enabling the company to measure its progress towards established strategic objectives effectively. Understanding these KPIs is instrumental in crafting an SSM that seamlessly aligns with the identified indicators.