An optimization framework for risk response actions selection using hybrid ACO and FTOPSIS

Document Type : Article


1 Department of Project & Construction Management, Mehralborz Institute of Higher Education, No. 109, Shokrollah Street, Jajal-e Al-e Ahmad Crossroad, North Kargar Avenue, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Construction, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Design, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.


This paper presents a framework for solving risk response action selection problem by considering: (1) the impact of risk events on the project objectives, (2) the interactions between risk events and (3) management criteria and preferences. For these purposes, a framework is developed by combining an optimization-based model and a Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach. First, in the optimization-based model, Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) is used to find the best combination of response actions which have more effects on time, cost and quality. Also, in this model, to overcome the imprecision situation resulting from lack of knowledge or insufficient data, risk parameters are determined using the fuzzy set theory.  Moreover, the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) is used to capture the effect of interactions between risk events. Second, theFuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS) method is used to analyze the obtained solutions by ACO, based on the other management criteria. Finally, the efficiency of the proposed framework is examined by its implementation in a real building construction project. Discussions through the case study show that using the proposed framework decision makers can evaluate more aspects of response actions.


Main Subjects

1. Loosemore, M., Raftery, J., Reilly, C., and Higgon, D., Risk Management in Projects, London: Taylor & Francis (2006). 2. PMI (Project Management Institute), A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 5th Ed., PMI (2012). 3. Flanagan, R. and Norman, G., Risk Management and Construction, Victoria, Australia.: Blackwell Science Pty Ltd (1993). 4. Amehl, O., Soyingbe, A., and Odusami, K. Signi_cant factors causing cost overruns in telecommunication projects in Nigeria", Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 15(2), pp. 49-67 (2010). 5. Olateru-Olagbegi, M., Investigating Key Risk Factors and Risk Management Methods in the Information and Communications Technology Industry in Nigeria, Lille, France: SKEMA Business School (2016). 6. Zou, P.X.W., Zhang, G., andWang, J. Understanding the key risks in construction projects in China", International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), pp. 601-614 (2007). 7. Seyedhoseini, S.M., Noori, S., and Hate_, M.A. An integrated methodology for assessment and selection of the project risk response actions", Risk Analysis, 29(5), pp. 752-763 (2009). 8. Miller, R. and Lessard, D. Understanding and managing risks in large engineering projects", International Journal of Project Management, 19(8), pp. 437-443 (2001). 9. Piney, C. Risk response planning: select the right strategy", In Fifth Project Management Conference, France (2002). 10. Kujawski, E. Selection of technical risk responses for e_cient contingencies", Systems Engineering, 5(3), pp. 194-212 (2002). 11. Pipattanapiwong, J. and Watanabe, T. Multi-party risk management process (MRMP) for a construction project _nanced by an international lender", In Proceedings of the 16th ARCOM conference, pp. 219-228 (2000). 12. Klein, J.H., Powell, P.L., and Chapman, C.B. Project risk analysis based on prototype activities.", Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45(7), pp.749-757 (1994). 13. Fan, M., Lin, N.-P., and Sheu, C. Choosing a project risk-handling strategy: an analytical model", International Journal of Production Economics, 112(2), pp. 700-713 (2008). 14. Fan, Z.P., Li, Y.H., and Zhang, Y. Generating project risk response strategies based on CBR: A case study", Expert Systems with Applications, 42(6), pp. 2870- 2883 (2015). 15. Zhang, Y. and Fan, Z.P. An optimization method for selecting project risk response strategies", International Journal of Project Management, 32(3), pp. 412-422 (2014). 16. Kayis, B., Arndt, G., Zhou, M., and Amornsawadwatana, S. A risk mitigation methodology for new product and process design in concurrent engineering projects", Annals of the CIRP, 56(1), pp. 167-170 (2007). 17. Ben-David, I. and Raz, T. An integrated approach for risk response development in project planning", Journal of the Operational Research Society, 52(1), pp. 14-25 (2001). 18. Nik, E.R., Zegordi, S.H., and Nazari, A. A multiobjective optimization and fuzzy prioritization approach for project risk responses selection", In Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM). 2011 IEEE International Conference on IEEE, Singapore (2011). 19. Fang, C., Marle, F., Xie, M., and Zio, E. An integrated framework for risk response planning under resource constraints in large engineering projects", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 60(3), pp. 627-639 (2013). 20. Soo_fard, R. and Khakzar Bafruei, M. An optimal model for Project Risk Response Portfolio Selection (P2RPS) (Case study: Research institute of petroleum industry)", Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 9(4), pp. 741-765 (2016). 21. Soo_fard, R. and Gharib, M. A new approach to project risk responses selection with inter-dependent risks", International Journal of Engineering Transactions B: Applications, 30(5), pp. 720-728 (2017). 22. Zhang, Y. Selecting risk response strategies considering project risk interdependence", International Journal of Project Management, 34(5), pp. 819-830 (2016). 23. Tiwana, A. and Keil, M. Functionality risk in information systems development: An empirical investigation", IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management, 53(3), pp. 412-425 (2006). 24. Parchami Jalal, M. and Shoar, S. A hybrid SDDEMATEL approach to develop a delay model for construction projects", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24(4), pp. 629-651 (2017). 25. Duan, Q. and Warren, L.T. Improved ant colony optimization algorithms for determining project critical paths", Automation in Construction, 19(6), pp. 676- 693 (2010). 26. Mueller, C. Multi-objective optimization of software architectures using ant colony optimization", Lecture Notes on Software Engineering, 2(4), pp. 371-374 (2014). 27. Dorigo, M. and Gambardella, L.M., Ant Colonies for the Traveling Salesman Problem, Belgium: TR/IRIDIA/1996-3, Universit_e Libre de Bruxelles (1996). 28. Lopez-Ibanez, M., Multi-objective Ant Colony Optimization, Universidad de Granada (2004). 29. Dorigo, M. Optimization, learning and natural algorithms", Italy, Ph.D. Thesis, Politecnico di Milano (1992). 30. Abbasianjahromi, H., Rajaie, H., Shakeri, E., and Chokan, F. A new decision making model for subcontractor selection and its order allocation", Project Management Journal, 45(1), pp. 55-66 (2014). 31. Dorigo, M. and Stutzle, T. The ant colony optimization metaheuristic: Algorithms, applications and advances", In Handbook of Metaheuristics, volume 57 of International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, F. Glover and G. Kochenberger, Eds., Norwell: MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 251-285 (2003). 32. Hatami-Marbini, A. and Kangi, F. An extension of fuzzy TOPSIS for a group decision making with an application to Tehran stock exchange", Applied Soft Computing, 52, pp. 1084-1097 (2017). 33. Jafarian, A., Sha_ei, M., and Amiri, M. Framework for prioritizing and allocating six sigma projects using fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy expert system", Scientia Iranica, 21(6), pp. 2281-2294 (2014). 34. Wang, T.C. and Chang, T.H. Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment", Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), pp. 870-880 (2007). 35. Gupta, R., Sachdeva, A., and Bhardwaj, A. Selection of 3pl service provider using integrated fuzzy delphi and fuzzy TOPSIS", In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science, San Francisco, USA (2010). 36. Behzadian, M., Khanmohammadi Otaghsara, S., Yazdani, M., and Ignatius, J. A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications", Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), pp. 13051-13069 (2012). 37. Steward, D.V. The design structure system: a method for managing the design of complex systems", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 28(3), pp. 71-74 (1981). 38. Fu, Y., Li, M., and Chen, F. Impact propagation and risk assessment of requirement changes for software development projects based on design structure matrix", International Journal of Project Management, 30(3), pp. 363-373 (2012). 39. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Project Risk Management Handbook, 4th Ed., Sacramento: CA: Caltrans, O_ce of Project Management Process Improvement (2007). 40. Klir, G. and Yuan, B., Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications, Chapter. 10, Englewood Cli_s, N.J.: Prentice-Hall PTR, pp. 280-301 (1995). 41. Dalkey, N. and Helmer, O. An experimental application of the delphi method to the use of experts", Management Science, 9(3) , pp. 458-467 (1963). 42. Saaty, T.L., Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytical Hierarchy Process for Decision in a Complex World, Chapter 5, Belmont, California: Lifetime Learning, pp. 75-92 (1982). 43. Podg_orski, D. Measuring operational performance of OSH management system - A demonstration of AHPbased selection of leading key performance indicators", Safety Science, 73, pp. 146-166 (2015). 44. Guyonnet, D., C^ome, B., Perrochet, P., and Parriaux, A. Comparing two methods for addressing uncertainty in risk assessments", Journal of Environmental Engineering, 125(7), pp. 660-666 (1999).