A hybrid risk management and value management model | A hybrid risk management and value management modelbased on MCDM in contractor selection

Mehrnaz Aghajanzadeh Hooshyar

ISBN 10: 6203462063 / ISBN 13: 9786203462067

Published by LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2021

About this Item

A hybrid risk management and value management model | A hybrid risk management and value management modelbased on MCDM in contractor selection | Mehrnaz Aghajanzadeh Hooshyar | Taschenbuch | Englisch | 2021 | LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing | EAN 9786203462067 | Verantwortliche Person für die EU: preigu GmbH & Co. KG, Lengericher Landstr. 19, 49078 Osnabrück, mail[at]preigu[dot]de | Anbieter: preigu.

Seller Inventory # 119734220

Bibliographic Details

• Title: A hybrid risk management and value management model | A hybrid risk management and value management modelbased on MCDM in contractor selection
• Publisher: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing
• Publication Date: 2021
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 6203462063
• ISBN 13: 9786203462067
• Binding: Taschenbuch
• Condition: Neu
• Dimensions: 220W x 150H x 8D millimeters 220 millimeters width by 150 millimeters height by 8 millimeters depth
• Weight: 191 grams
• Seller catalogs:
  • Bücher

About this title

Synopsis

In this research, an hybrid approach based on risk management and value engineering has been developed to select contractors in construction projects. This model is designed based on some criteria and sub-criteria derived from the literature whose importance is evaluated by the best worst method. The contractors were then prioritized using VIKOR methods and GrayRelationship Analysis. According to the computational results, it can be observed that the local risk strategic (0.348) has the highest score among the criteria and the other risk weighted local scale (0.080) has the lowest score among the criteria. In terms of operational risk, the technical error sub-criterion had the highest local weight (0.477) and the cheaper sub-criterion the lowestlocal weight (0.165). In the strategic risk dimension, the social dissatisfaction sub-criterion reported the highest local weight (0.380) and the environmental dissatisfaction sub-criterion the lowest local weight (0.136).