Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 56, Issue 4, pp 365–381 | Cite as

Disruption management for resource-constrained project scheduling

Theoretical Paper

Abstract

In this paper, we study the problem of how to react when an ongoing project is disrupted. The focus is on the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with finish–start precedence constraints. We begin by proposing a classification scheme for the different types of disruptions and then define the constraints and objectives that comprise what we call the recovery problem. The goal is to get back on track as soon as possible at minimum cost, where cost is now a function of the deviation from the original schedule. The problem is formulated as an integer linear program and solved with a hybrid mixed-inter programming/constraint programming procedure that exploits a number of special features in the constraints. The new model is significantly different from the original one due to the fact that a different set of feasibility conditions and performance requirements must be considered during the recovery process. The complexity of several special cases is analysed. To test the hybrid procedure, 554 20-activity instances were solved and the results compared with those obtained with CPLEX. Computational experiments were also conducted to determine the effects of different factors related to the recovery process.

Keywords

project management disruption management scheduling integer programming constraint propagation resource 

References

  1. Clausen J, Hansen J, Larsen J and Larsen A (2001). Disruption management. ORMS Today 28: 40–43.Google Scholar
  2. Yu G and Qi X (2004). Disruption Management: Framework, Models, Solutions and Applications. World Scientific Publishers: Singapore.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eden C, Williams T, Ackerman F and Howick S (2000). The role of feedback dynamics in disruption and delay on the nature of disruption and delay (D&D) in major projects. J Opl Res Soc 51: 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Herroelen W, De Reyck B and Demeulemeester E (1998). Resource-constrained project scheduling: a survey of recent developments. Comput Opns Res 25: 279–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bottcher J, Drexl A, Kolisch R and Salewski F (1999). Project scheduling under partially renewable resource constraints. Mngt Sci 45: 543–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kolisch R and Padman R (2001). An integrated survey of deterministic project scheduling. OMEGA 29: 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Miller R and Lessard D (2001). Understanding and managing risks in large engineering projects. Int J Project Mngt 19: 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Pich MT, Loch CH and De Meyer A (2002). On uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity in project management. Mngt Sci 48: 1008–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Pickavance K (2000). Delay and Disruption in Construction Contracts. LLP Professional Publishing: London.Google Scholar
  10. Williams T and Eden C (1995). The effects of design changes and delays on project costs. J Opl Res Soc 46: 809–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Williams T (2003). Assessing extension of time delays on major projects. Int J Project Mngt 21: 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman C (1997). Project risk analysis and management—PARM the generic process. Int J Project Mngt 15: 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Yu G, Argüello M, Song G, McCowan SM and White A (2003). A new era for crew recovery at continental airlines. Interfaces 33: 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Argüello M, Bard JF and Yu G (1997). A GRASP for aircraft routing in response to groundings and delays. J Combin Optim 5: 211–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Thengvall BG, Bard JF and Yu G (2001). Multiple fleet aircraft schedule recovery following hub closures. Transp Res Part A 35: 289–308.Google Scholar
  16. Möhring RH, Schulz AS, Stork F and Uetz M (2001). On project scheduling with irregular starting time costs. Opns Res Lett 28: 149–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Möhring RH, Schulz AS, Stork F and Uetz M (2003). Solving project scheduling problems by minimum cut computations. Mngt Sci 49: 330–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garey MR and Johnson DS (1979). Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. WH Freeman: New York.Google Scholar
  19. Baptiste P, Le Pape C and Nuijten W (2001). Constraint-based Scheduling: Applying Constraint Programming to Scheduling Problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rodosĕk R, Wallace MG and Hajian MT (1999). A new approach to integrating mixed integer programming and constraint logic programming. Ann Opns Res 86: 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bockmayr A and Kasper T (1998). Branch and infer: a unifying framework for integer and finite domain constraint programming. INFORMS J Comput 10: 287–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jain V and Grossmann IE (2001). Algorithms for hybrid MILP/CP models for a class of optimization problems. INFORMS J Comput 13: 258–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ILOG (2002). ILOG CPLEX 7.5, Reference Manual. ILOG, Inc.: Mountain View, CA.Google Scholar
  24. Bard JF, Kontoravdis G and Yu G (2002). A branch-and-cut procedure for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. Transp Sci 36: 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gu Z, Nemhauser GL and Savelsbergh MW (1998). Lifted cover inequalities for 0–1 integer programs: computation. INFORMS J Comput 10: 427–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhu G, Bard JF and Yu G (2003). A branch-and-cut procedure for multi-mode resource constraint project scheduling problem Working paper, Department of Management Science and Information Systems, The University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  27. Bartusch M, Möhring RH and Radermacher EJ (1988). Scheduling project networks with resource constraints and time windows. Ann Opns Res 16: 201–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kolisch R, Sprecher A and Drexl A (1995). Characterization and generation of a general class of resource-constrained project scheduling problems. Mngt Sci 41: 1693–1703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hartman S (1999). Project scheduling under limited resources. In: Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Vol 478. Springer: Berlin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations