IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pdn/dispap/21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is it Worth the Effort? - A Decision Model to Evaluate Resource Interactions in IS Project Portfolios

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Meier

    (University of Paderborn)

  • Dennis Kundisch

    (University of Paderborn)

  • Jochen Willeke

    (University of Paderborn)

Abstract

The adequate consideration of resource interactions among IS projects is a challenging but important requirement within IS project portfolio selection. However, the literature is silent on potential techniques for the identification and assessment of resource interactions. Moreover, the literature has so far neglected the question of the trade-off between time and effort invested in identifying and evaluating resource interactions caused by resource sharing among projects, compared to the benefits derived from this exercise, and the extent to which it is worth doing so thoroughly. Hence, our contribution is twofold. First, we suggest a technique to support the identification and evaluation of potentially economically relevant resource interactions. Second, we propose a decision model that allows to calculate a theoretical upper bound for the amount of effort that should be invested in improving estimates for identified interactions as part of the portfolio planning process.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Meier & Dennis Kundisch & Jochen Willeke, 2015. "Is it Worth the Effort? - A Decision Model to Evaluate Resource Interactions in IS Project Portfolios," Working Papers Dissertations 21, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:pdn:dispap:21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://groups.uni-paderborn.de/wp-wiwi/RePEc/pdf/dispap/DP21.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. F Ghasemzadeh & N Archer & P Iyogun, 1999. "A zero-one model for project portfolio selection and scheduling," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(7), pages 745-755, July.
    2. Nelson, Craig A., 1986. "A scoring model for flexible manufacturing systems project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 346-359, March.
    3. H. Martin Weingartner, 1966. "Capital Budgeting of Interrelated Projects: Survey and Synthesis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(7), pages 485-516, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christian Meier & Dennis Kundisch & Jochen Willeke, 2017. "Is it Worth the Effort?," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 59(2), pages 81-95, April.
    2. Pérez, Fátima & Gómez, Trinidad & Caballero, Rafael & Liern, Vicente, 2018. "Project portfolio selection and planning with fuzzy constraints," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 117-129.
    3. Gupta, Renu & Bandopadhyaya, Lakshmisree & Puri, M. C., 1996. "Ranking in quadratic integer programming problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 231-236, November.
    4. Jian Xiong & Rui Wang & Jiang Jiang, 2019. "Weapon Selection and Planning Problems Using MOEA/D with Distance-Based Divided Neighborhoods," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-18, November.
    5. Bagloee, Saeed Asadi & Asadi, Mohsen, 2015. "Prioritizing road extension projects with interdependent benefits under time constraint," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 196-216.
    6. McCarl, Bruce A. & Rister, M. Edward & Ward, Ruby & Long, Charles R. & McCorkle, Dean & Ziari, Houshmand & Conner, J. Richard & Sturdivant, Allen W. & Thompson, Troy N., 2000. "Strategie Agribusiness Operation Realignment in the Texas Prison System," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 145-158, April.
    7. Enrique Garza-Escalante & Arturo de la Torre, 2015. "Nacional Monte de Piedad Uses a Novel Social-Value Measure for Allocating Grants Among Charities," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 45(6), pages 514-528, December.
    8. Debarun Bhattacharjya & Jo Eidsvik & Tapan Mukerji, 2013. "The Value of Information in Portfolio Problems with Dependent Projects," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 341-351, December.
    9. S. D. Deshmukh & S.D.Chikte, 1974. "On the R & D Process and Decisions," Discussion Papers 102, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    10. Ye Tian & Miao Sun & Zuoliang Ye & Wei Yang, 2016. "Expanded models of the project portfolio selection problem with loss in divisibility," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(8), pages 1097-1107, August.
    11. Wilbaut, Christophe & Salhi, Saïd & Hanafi, Saïd, 2009. "An iterative variable-based fixation heuristic for the 0-1 multidimensional knapsack problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 339-348, December.
    12. Crama, Yves, 1997. "Combinatorial optimization models for production scheduling in automated manufacturing systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 136-153, May.
    13. Patrizia Beraldi & Maria Bruni & Antonio Violi, 2012. "Capital rationing problems under uncertainty and risk," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 1375-1396, April.
    14. Fernández Carazo, Ana & Gómez Núñez, Trinidad & Guerrero Casas, Flor M. & Caballero Fernández, Rafael, 2008. "Evaluación y clasificación de las técnicas utilizadas por las organizaciones, en las últimas décadas, para seleccionar proyectos = Evaluation and classification of the techniques used by organizations," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 5(1), pages 67-115, June.
    15. Nicholas G. Hall & Daniel Zhuoyu Long & Jin Qi & Melvyn Sim, 2015. "Managing Underperformance Risk in Project Portfolio Selection," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 660-675, June.
    16. Kunikazu Yoda & András Prékopa, 2016. "Convexity and Solutions of Stochastic Multidimensional 0-1 Knapsack Problems with Probabilistic Constraints," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 715-731, May.
    17. Karsu, Özlem & Morton, Alec, 2014. "Incorporating balance concerns in resource allocation decisions: A bi-criteria modelling approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 70-82.
    18. Kwanyoung Im & Kihwan Nam & Hyunbo Cho, 2020. "Towards successful business model management with analytic network process-based feasibility evaluation and portfolio management," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 509-523, September.
    19. R?zvan C?t?lin DOBREA & Felicia Alina DINU, 2014. "A Build-Up Algorithm For Sustainable Discount Rates Projections," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 8(1), pages 1181-1191, November.
    20. Richard J. Forrester & Lucas A. Waddell, 2022. "Strengthening a linear reformulation of the 0-1 cubic knapsack problem via variable reordering," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 498-517, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    IS project portfolio selection; resource interactions; sensitivity analysis; identification; assessment; decision model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pdn:dispap:21. 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: WP-WiWi-Info (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwpadde.html .

    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.