IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p776-d202965.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Hybrid MCDM Model with Grey Numbers for the Construction Delay Change Response Problem

Author

Listed:
  • Alireza Chalekaee

    (Construction Engineering and Management, School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Narmak, Tehran 16846, Iran
    Laboratory of Operational Research, Institute of Sustainable Construction, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, 10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Zenonas Turskis

    (Laboratory of Operational Research, Institute of Sustainable Construction, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, 10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Mostafa Khanzadi

    (Construction Engineering and Management, School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Narmak, Tehran 16846, Iran)

  • Gholamreza Ghodrati Amiri

    (Center of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Narmak, Tehran 16846, Iran)

  • Violeta Keršulienė

    (Department of Law, Faculty of Business Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

Stakeholders carry out construction projects under fast-changing conditions. The conditions can undermine the concept of a stable and prosperous construction plan without an appropriate permit and an active and targeted plan for environmental management. Therefore, the decision maker often faces many challenges of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) when it comes to solving the construction management proper response selection problem for planning delay changes when sustainable environment requirements are essential. Any addition, reduction, or modification of the original project plan is a change to the project and impacts the environment. Change occurrence is a probable issue while projects are implemented. One of the most complex tasks for the project manager is to work correctly and to find the most suitable decisions for the not precisely predetermined future expectations of a change. Therefore, the relevant criteria of values must reflect the uncertain properties of the problem model. Similar problems require fuzzy or grey MCDM methods. The paper introduces a new MCDM approach, which combines four different MCDM methods with grey numbers: the SWARA, TOPSIS-GM, Additive Ratio ASsessment with Grey Numbers (ARAS-G) techniques and Geometric Mean to cover uncertainty and improve the problem-solving model. An analysis of a case study has examined and highlighted four possible alternatives described by eight performance criteria (cost, duration, and some linguistic criteria). Stakeholders determined the best alternative, calculated the efficiency of choice, and practically implemented the best option.

Suggested Citation

  • Alireza Chalekaee & Zenonas Turskis & Mostafa Khanzadi & Gholamreza Ghodrati Amiri & Violeta Keršulienė, 2019. "A New Hybrid MCDM Model with Grey Numbers for the Construction Delay Change Response Problem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:776-:d:202965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/776/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/776/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dvir, Dov & Lechler, Thomas, 2004. "Plans are nothing, changing plans is everything: the impact of changes on project success," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hamidreza Khalesi & Amirhossein Balali & Alireza Valipour & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Darius Migilinskas & Viaceslav Zigmund, 2020. "Application of Hybrid SWARA–BIM in Reducing Reworks of Building Construction Projects from the Perspective of Time," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Mehdi Keshavarz-Ghorabaee & Maghsoud Amiri & Mohammad Hashemi-Tabatabaei & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2020. "A New Decision-Making Approach Based on Fermatean Fuzzy Sets and WASPAS for Green Construction Supplier Evaluation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-24, December.
    3. Ioannis E. Tsolas, 2020. "Financial Performance Assessment of Construction Firms by Means of RAM-Based Composite Indicators," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Osman Kazancı & Sarka Hoskova-Mayerova & Bijan Davvaz, 2022. "Multipolar Fuzzy Hyperideals in Ordered Semihypergroups," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-11, September.
    5. Seyed Morteza Hatefi & Hamideh Asadi & Gholamreza Shams & Jolanta Tamošaitienė & Zenonas Turskis, 2021. "Model for the Sustainable Material Selection by Applying Integrated Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory and Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Shoaib Shafique & Iram Naz, 2023. "A Mediating and Moderating Analysis of the Relationship Between Team Emotional Intelligence and Team Performance," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    2. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    3. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    4. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    6. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    7. Denys Yemshanov & Frank H. Koch & Yakov Ben‐Haim & Marla Downing & Frank Sapio & Marty Siltanen, 2013. "A New Multicriteria Risk Mapping Approach Based on a Multiattribute Frontier Concept," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1694-1709, September.
    8. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    9. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    10. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    11. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.
    12. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    13. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    14. Jha, Madan K. & Chowdary, V.M. & Kulkarni, Y. & Mal, B.C., 2014. "Rainwater harvesting planning using geospatial techniques and multicriteria decision analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 96-111.
    15. Om Prakash Mishra & Mahesh Chand & Krishan Kumar & Prashant Mishra, 2023. "Investigating applicability of green supply chain management in manufacturing sectors," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(4), pages 1183-1196, August.
    16. David Han-Min Wang & Quang Linh Huynh, 2013. "Mediating Role of Knowledge Management in Effect of Management Accounting Practices on Firm Performance," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(3), pages 1-10, June.
    17. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    18. Neha Arora & Naresh Kumar, 2021. "Does Financial Inclusion Promote Human Development? Evidence from India," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 10(2), pages 163-184, December.
    19. Hossain, Mohammad Khalid & Meng, Qingmin, 2020. "A fine-scale spatial analytics of the assessment and mapping of buildings and population at different risk levels of urban flood," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:776-:d:202965. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.