IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v29y2009i5p752-763.html

An Integrated Methodology for Assessment and Selection of the Project Risk Response Actions

Author

Listed:
  • Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseini
  • Siamak Noori
  • Mohammad Ali Hatefi

Abstract

In a systematic process of project risk management, after risk assessment is implemented, the risk analysts encounter the phase of assessment and selection of the project risk response actions (RA). As indicated by many researchers, there are less systematic and well‐developed solutions in the area of risk response assessment and selection. The present article introduces a methodology including a modeling approach with the objective of selecting a set of RA that minimizes the undesirable deviation from achieving the project scope. The developed objective function comprises the three key success criteria of a project, namely, time, quality, and cost. Our model integrates overall project management into the project risk response planning (P2RP). Furthermore, the proposed model stresses on an equivalent importance for both “risk” and “response.” We believe that applying the proposed model helps the project risk analyst in most effective and efficient manner dealing with his or her complicated RA selection problems. The application of the proposed model was implemented in projects in the construction industry in which it showed tremendous time, cost, and quality improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseini & Siamak Noori & Mohammad Ali Hatefi, 2009. "An Integrated Methodology for Assessment and Selection of the Project Risk Response Actions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 752-763, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:29:y:2009:i:5:p:752-763
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01187.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01187.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01187.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Estimating the weights for multiple attributes in a composite criterion using pairwise judgments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(4), pages 473-493, December.
    2. I Ben-David & T Raz, 2001. "An integrated approach for risk response development in project planning," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 52(1), pages 14-25, January.
    3. Yacov Y. Haimes & Stan Kaplan & James H. Lambert, 2002. "Risk Filtering, Ranking, and Management Framework Using Hierarchical Holographic Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 383-397, April.
    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. Xiaoyan Jiang & Sai Wang & Jie Wang & Sainan Lyu & Martin Skitmore, 2020. "A Decision Method for Construction Safety Risk Management Based on Ontology and Improved CBR: Example of a Subway Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Dengsheng Wu & Xiaoqian Zhu & Jie Wan & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li, 2019. "A Multiobjective Optimization Approach for Selecting Risk Response Strategies of Software Project: From the Perspective of Risk Correlations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 339-364, January.
    3. Mahsa Parsaei Motamed & Shahrooz Bamdad, 2022. "A multi-objective optimization approach for selecting risk response actions: considering environmental and secondary risks," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 59(1), pages 266-303, March.
    4. Zuo, Fei & Zio, Enrico & Xu, Yue, 2023. "Bi-objective optimization of the scheduling of risk-related resources for risk response," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    5. Zhe Xu & Jing Yu & Hongbo Li, 2014. "Analyzing Integrated Cost‐Schedule Risk for Complex Product Systems R&D Projects," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2014(1).
    6. Xin Guan & Tom Servranckx & Mario Vanhoucke, 2024. "Risk response budget allocation based on fault tree analysis and optimization," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 337(2), pages 523-564, June.
    7. Curto, D. & Acebes, F. & González-Varona, J.M. & Poza, D., 2022. "Impact of aleatoric, stochastic and epistemic uncertainties on project cost contingency reserves," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    8. David Curto & Fernando Acebes & Jose M Gonzalez-Varona & David Poza, 2024. "Impact of aleatoric, stochastic and epistemic uncertainties on project cost contingency reserves," Papers 2406.03500, arXiv.org.
    9. John Malu Nzioki & Dr. Mary Nyawira Mwenda, 2021. "Enhancing Performance of the Building Construction Industry through Quantitative Risk Analysis and Risk Response: A Case of Exchequer Funded Building Construction Projects in Machakos County, Kenya," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(3), pages 31-39, March.
    10. Ofer Zwikael & Mark Ahn, 2011. "The Effectiveness of Risk Management: An Analysis of Project Risk Planning Across Industries and Countries," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 25-37, January.
    11. Guiliang Su & Rana Khallaf, 2022. "Research on the Influence of Risk on Construction Project Performance: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, May.

    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. Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2006. "Measuring and optimizing systems' quality costs and project duration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 259-280, September.
    2. Dengsheng Wu & Xiaoqian Zhu & Jie Wan & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li, 2019. "A Multiobjective Optimization Approach for Selecting Risk Response Strategies of Software Project: From the Perspective of Risk Correlations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 339-364, January.
    3. Rogerson, Ellen C. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Prioritizing risks via several expert perspectives with application to runway safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 22-34.
    4. Sell, Sandra & Lopatta, Kerstin & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen, 2010. "Der Einfluss der Besteuerung auf die Rechtsformwahl: Eine Conjoint-Analyse," Discussion Papers 2010/10, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    5. Jason R. W. Merrick & Laura A. McLay, 2010. "Is Screening Cargo Containers for Smuggled Nuclear Threats Worthwhile?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 155-171, June.
    6. Madelynn R. D. Stackhouse & Robert Stewart, 2017. "Failing to Fix What is Found: Risk Accommodation in the Oil and Gas Industry," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 130-146, January.
    7. Ioanna Ioannou & Jaime E. Cadena & Willy Aspinall & David Lange & Daniel Honfi & Tiziana Rossetto, 2022. "Prioritization of hazards for risk and resilience management through elicitation of expert judgement," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 112(3), pages 2773-2795, July.
    8. Olivier Toubia & Eric Johnson & Theodoros Evgeniou & Philippe Delquié, 2013. "Dynamic Experiments for Estimating Preferences: An Adaptive Method of Eliciting Time and Risk Parameters," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 613-640, June.
    9. Greco, Salvatore & Mousseau, Vincent & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 416-436, December.
    10. Andrew G. Huff & James S. Hodges & Shaun P. Kennedy & Amy Kircher, 2015. "Evaluation of the Food and Agriculture Sector Criticality Assessment Tool (FASCAT) and the Collected Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(8), pages 1448-1467, August.
    11. Barry Charles Ezell, 2007. "Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment Model (I‐VAM)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 571-583, June.
    12. Heckmann, Iris & Comes, Tina & Nickel, Stefan, 2015. "A critical review on supply chain risk – Definition, measure and modeling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 119-132.
    13. Aven, Terje, 2017. "Improving risk characterisations in practical situations by highlighting knowledge aspects, with applications to risk matrices," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 42-48.
    14. James H. Lambert & Jeffrey M. Keisler & William E. Wheeler & Zachary A. Collier & Igor Linkov, 2013. "Multiscale approach to the security of hardware supply chains for energy systems," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 326-334, September.
    15. Halme, Merja & Kallio, Markku, 2011. "Estimation methods for choice-based conjoint analysis of consumer preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(1), pages 160-167, October.
    16. Seyed Hossein Razavi Hajiagha & Jalil Heidary-Dahooie & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė & Kannan Govindan, 2022. "A new dynamic multi-attribute decision making method based on Markov chain and linear assignment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 159-191, August.
    17. Abhinav B. Agrawal & Kash Barker & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2011. "Adaptive multiplayer approach for risk‐based decision‐making: 2006 Virginia Gubernatorial Inauguration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 455-470, December.
    18. Amar Oukil & Srikrishna Madhumohan Govindaluri, 2020. "A hybrid multi‐attribute decision‐making procedure for ranking project proposals: A historical data perspective," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 461-472, April.
    19. Gregory A. Lamm & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2002. "Assessing and managing risks to information assurance: A methodological approach," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 286-314.
    20. Sahin, Ismail, 1999. "Railway traffic control and train scheduling based oninter-train conflict management," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 511-534, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:29:y:2009:i:5:p:752-763. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.