Next Article in Journal
Data Hiding Based on a Two-Layer Turtle Shell Matrix
Next Article in Special Issue
Pre-Rationalized Parametric Designing of Roof Shells Formed by Repetitive Modules of Catalan Surfaces
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
A Novel Approach for Evaluation of Projects Using an Interval–Valued Fuzzy Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method: A Case Study of Oil and Gas Well Drilling Projects
Article Menu
Issue 2 (February) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Symmetry 2018, 10(2), 46; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10020046

A Hybrid MCDM Technique for Risk Management in Construction Projects

1
Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur 713209, India
2
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, LT-1022 Vilnius, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 24 November 2017 / Revised: 30 January 2018 / Accepted: 9 February 2018 / Published: 13 February 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Civil Engineering and Symmetry)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [1717 KB, uploaded 23 February 2018]   |  

Abstract

Multi-stakeholder based construction projects are subject to potential risk factors due to dynamic business environment and stakeholders’ lack of knowledge. When solving project management tasks, it is necessary to quantify the main risk indicators of the projects. Managing these requires suitable risk mitigation strategies to evaluate and analyse their severity. The existence of information asymmetry also causes difficulties with achieving Pareto efficiency. Hence, to ensure balanced satisfaction of all participants, risk evaluation of these projects can be considered as an important part of the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) process. In real-life problems, evaluation of project risks is often uncertain and even incomplete, and the prevailing methodologies fail to handle such situations. To address the problem, this paper extends the analytical network process (ANP) methodology in the D numbers domain to handle three types of ambiguous information’s, viz. complete, uncertain, and incomplete, and assesses the weight of risk criteria. The D numbers based approach overcomes the deficiencies of the exclusiveness hypothesis and completeness constraint of Dempster–Shafer (D–S) theory. Here, preference ratings of the decision matrix for each decision-maker are determined using a D numbers extended consistent fuzzy preference relation (D-CFPR). An extended multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) method in D numbers is then developed to rank and select the best alternative risk response strategy. Finally, an illustrative example from construction sector is presented to check the feasibility of the proposed approach. For checking the reliability of alternative ranking, a comparative analysis is performed with different MCDM approaches in D numbers domain. Based on different criteria weights, a sensitivity analysis of obtained ranking of the hybrid D-ANP-MABAC model is performed to verify the robustness of the proposed method. View Full-Text
Keywords: D number; analytical network process (ANP); multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC); multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM); consistent fuzzy preference relation (CFPR); construction project risk; risk management D number; analytical network process (ANP); multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC); multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM); consistent fuzzy preference relation (CFPR); construction project risk; risk management
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Chatterjee, K.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Tamošaitienė, J.; Adhikary, K.; Kar, S. A Hybrid MCDM Technique for Risk Management in Construction Projects. Symmetry 2018, 10, 46.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Symmetry EISSN 2073-8994 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top