Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Risk assessment with multi-attribute utility theory for building projects

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Building Pathology and Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Construction has a complex environment, surrounded by ambiguous or incomplete information, with multiple goals and various stakeholders. In this environment, risk management is a challenging task, and it is usually treated superficially or ignored. In small and medium construction projects, risk management practice presents a higher challenge because of their limited resources. To achieve success, every construction project, regardless of size and importance, depends on risk identification and analysis. The aim of this paper is to apply a multiple criteria decision-aid to achieve a risk hierarchy in residential building projects. The method comprised applying the Multi-attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) to estimate the major risks factors in three types of projects. In terms of quality, time, and cost, the results indicate the major risks. This research presents a decision-aid method that covers the manager’s experience; hence, the framework is useful for reaching a risk ranking that may affect the planning phase of residential buildings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table 2
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chan APC, Scott D, Chan APL (2004) Factors Affecting the Success of a Construction Project. J Constr Eng Manag 130:153–155. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130. :1(153)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kerzner HR (2013) A System Approach to Planning Scheduling and Controlling, vol 11. edn. Wiley, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  3. Al-Bahar JF, Crandall KC (1990) Systematic Risk Management Approach of Construction Projects. J Constr Eng Manag 116:533–546. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1990)116:3(533)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hwang B, Zhao X, Toh LP (2014) Risk management in small construction projects in Singapore: status, barriers and impact. Int J Project Manage 32:116–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nieto-Morote A, Ruz-Vila F (2011) A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment. Int J Project Manage 29:220–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.02.002

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Zeng J, An M, Smith NJ (2007) Application of a fuzzy based decision-making methodology. Int J Project Manage 25:589–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Doloi HK (2011) Understanding stakeholders’ perspective of cost estimation in project management. Int J Project Manage 29:622–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wideman MR (1992) Project and program risk management integration. PMI, Pennsylvania

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dikmen I, Birgonul MT, Han S (2007) Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects. Int J Project Manage 25:494–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Abderisak A, Lindahl G (2015) Take a chance on me? Construction client’s perspectives on risk management. Procedia Econ Finance 21:548–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00211-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Taroun A (2014) Towards a better modelling and assessment of construction risk: insights from a literature review. Int J Project Manage 32:101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. KarimiAzari A, Mousavi N, Mousavi SF, Hosseini S (2011) Risk assessment model selection in construction industry. Expert Syst Appl 38:9105–9111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jato-Espino D, Castillo-Lopez E, Rodriguez-Hernandez J, Canteras-Jordana JC (2014) A review of application of multi-criteria decision-making methods. Autom Constr 45:151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mardani A, Jusoh A, Zavadskas EK (2015) Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications - two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst Appl 42:4126–4148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rostami A, Sommerville J, Wong IL, Lee C (2015) Risk management implementation in small and medium enterprises in the UK construction industry. Eng Constr Architectural Manage 22:91–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2014-0057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Huang Y-S, Chang WC, Li WH, Lin ZL (2013) Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making. Eur J Oper Res 229:462–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.02.043

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Isaac I (1995) Training in risk management. Int J Project Manage 13:225–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-7863[94]00023-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Akintoye AS, Macleod MJ (1997) Risk analysis and management in construction. Int J Project Manage 15:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(96)00035-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith NJ, Merna T, Jobling P (2006) Managing risk in construction projects 2edn. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  20. PMI (2017) A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge [PMBOK® Guide] 6edn. Project Management Institute, Newton Square

    Google Scholar 

  21. Liu J, Li B, Lin B, Nguyen V (2007) Key issues and challenges of risk management and insurance in China’s construction industry. Industrial Manage Data Syst 107:382–396. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570710734280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hosseini MR, Chileshe N, Jepson J, Arashpour M (2016) Critical success factors for implementing risk management systems in developing countries. Constr Econ Building 16:18–32. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v16i1.4651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shevchenko G, Ustinovichius L, Andruškevičius A (2008) Multi-attribute analysis of investments risk alternatives in construction. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 14:428–443. https://doi.org/10.3846/1392-8619.2008.14.428-443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Salimi R, Yarmohammadi Y, Masomi A, Farasani HH (2015) Risks Evaluation of Sahand New Town 1226 Housing Project and Exploring Their Effects on Time and Cost of the Project. J Service Sci Manage 8:754–765. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2015.85076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kuo Y-C, Lu S-T (2013) Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making approach to enhance risk. Int J Project Manage 31:602–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2012.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ahmadi M, Behzadian K, Ardeshir A, Kapelan Z (2017) Comprehensive risk management using fuzzy FMEA and MCDA techniques in highway construction projects. J Civil Eng Manage 23:300–310. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2015.1068847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jimoh RA, Sani MA, Adoza AI, Yahaya I (2016) Managing Pre-Construction and Construction Risks on Project Sites in Abuja-Nigeria. Civil Eng Dimension 18:1–7. https://doi.org/10.9744/ced.18.1.1-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bakht MN, El-Diraby TE (2015) Synthesis of Decision-Making Research in Construction. J Constr Eng Manag 141:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dall ’OG, Norese MF, Galante A, Novello C (2013) A multi-criteria methodology to support public administration decision making concerning sustainable energy action plans. Energies 6:4308–4330. https://doi.org/10.3390/en6084308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decision with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. John Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Canbolat YB, Chelst K, Garg N (2007) Combining decision tree and MAUT for selecting a country for a global manufacturing. Omega 35:312–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Doumpos M, Zopounidis C (2002) Multicriteria decision aid classification methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Rogers M, Bruen M, Maystre L-Y (1999) ELECTRE and decision support. Methods and applications in engineering and infrastructure investment. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell

    Google Scholar 

  34. Løken E, Botterud A, Holen AT (2009) Use of the equivalent attribute technique in multi-criteria planning of local. Eur J Oper Res 197:1075–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.12.050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Belton V, Stewart TJ (2001) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a grant from CNPq [Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade Federal do Ceará, Campus do Pici s/n, Bloco 733, Fortaleza, Brazil

    Vanessa Ribeiro Campos

  2. Instituto Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil

    Delcia Janine Sequeira Moreira

Authors
  1. Vanessa Ribeiro Campos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Delcia Janine Sequeira Moreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa Ribeiro Campos.

Ethics declarations

There is no conflict of interest to declare in this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Campos, V.R., Moreira, D.J.S. Risk assessment with multi-attribute utility theory for building projects. J Build Rehabil 7, 98 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-022-00241-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-022-00241-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation