Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

A Hybrid MCDM Technique for Risk Management in Construction Projects

Version 1 : Received: 24 November 2017 / Approved: 24 November 2017 / Online: 24 November 2017 (16:46:59 CET)

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

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. 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.

Journal reference: Symmetry 2018, 10, 46
DOI: 10.3390/sym10020046


Multi-stakeholder based construction projects are subject to various risk factors due to dynamic business environments. These risks affect project activities which indirectly impact construction costs, resulting in delays and poor building quality. So, managing these project risks requires suitable risk mitigation strategies to evaluate and analyse their severity. Hence, risk evaluation and assessment of construction projects is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem. In present 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 number domain to handle three types of ambiguous evaluations, viz. complete, uncertain, and incomplete, and assesses the weight of risk criteria. The D number 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 number extended consistent fuzzy preference relation (D-CFPR). An extended multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) method in D number 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 (D-COPRAS, D-ARAS, D-MABAC, and D-TOPSIS). Based on different criteria weights, a sensitivity analysis of obtained ranking of the hybrid D-ANP-MABAC model is performed for verify the robustness of the proposed method.

Subject Areas

D number, Analytical Network Process (ANP), MABAC, Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM), Consistent fuzzy preference relation (CFPR), Construction project risk, Risk Management

Comments (1)

Importance: How significant is the paper to the field?
Outstanding/highlight paper
Significant contribution
Incremental contribution
No contribution
Soundness of evidence/arguments presented:
Conclusions well supported
Most conclusions supported (minor revision needed)
Incomplete evidence (major revision needed)
Hypothesis, unsupported conclusions, or proof-of-principle
Comment 1
Received: 8 December 2017
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Very interesting paper, well done!
+ Respond to this comment

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our diversity statement.

Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 1
Metrics 0

Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here.