Wednesday , June 20 2018

Selecting a Contractor by Using a Novel Method for Multiple Attribute Analysis:
Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment with Grey Values (WASPAS-G)

Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS, Zenonas TURSKIS,
Jurgita ANTUCHEVICIENE

Vilnius Gediminas Technical University,
Sauletekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania
edmundas.zavadskas@vgtu.lt; zenonas.turskis@vgtu.lt; jurgita.antucheviciene@vgtu.lt

Abstract: Selecting the right contractor in construction industry is an important problem for an organization while thecompetition in global markets increases. Evaluating contractors’ performance is a multiple attribute decision makingprocess consisting of vagueness and imprecision. It is based on a set of hardly exact measurable attributes: capability andskills, occupational health and safety, technical capacity, managerial capability, bid amount, past performance andexperience, financial soundness. The goals and interests of the stakeholders should be taken into consideration whenselecting the attributes and their importance for the evaluation of contractors. In this context, the paper presents a novelmethod based on multiple attribute Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment with the grey attributes scores –WASPAS-G method. The proposed method was applied in a case study of evaluation and selection of a right constructioncontractor, which has to be the most appropriate to stakeholders. The proposed technique, due to its capabilities ofhandling imprecise information because of applied grey relations and capabilities of providing decisions of enhancedaccuracy when aggregating two methods, could also be used to sustain the ranking of development strategies, selecting themost effective investment or management decisions.

Keywords: Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM), contractor selection, Weighted Aggregated Sum ProductAssessment (WASPAS), grey relations, WASPAS-G.

>Full text
CITE THIS PAPER AS:
Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS, Zenonas TURSKIS, Jurgita ANTUCHEVICIENE, Selecting a Contractor by Using a Novel Method for Multiple Attribute Analysis: Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment with Grey Values (WASPAS-G), Studies in Informatics and Control, ISSN 1220-1766, vol. 24 (2), pp. 141-150, 2015.

  1. Introduction

Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) reported that contractors waste up to 10% of the project costs when acting in a wrong way and correcting these wrong actions later. Most of construction projects involve risks that are difficult to control and analyse [1].

Contractor selection has attributes both qualitative and quantitative in nature. Construction cost and time overrun is a common problem in construction industries [2]. This is because of the sixteen following main factors: a) no clearly defined scope of project in the contract, b) no proper cost control, c) contract dispute (unclear drawings and / or guideless regulations), d) high fluctuation in commodity prices, e) the gap between construction plan and reality is too great, f) material shortage or supply delay, g) time management, h) practical experience, I) modifications of the scope of construction, j) the level of demand quality, k) project team, l) project valuation does not match the collected payment, m) procurement contract, n) geology and topography, o) climate factor, p) natural disasters.

Abbasianjahromi et al. [3] argued that present condition of the construction industry imposes onerous responsibilities on contractors so they are very eager to subcontract some of their works. Therefore, subcontracting also should to be taken into account when selecting proper construction contractor [4].

Comprehensive evaluation and proper selection of the right contractor is an important decision that has a huge impact on the overall success of a construction project. Accordingly, there is a necessity for decision support methods to assist stakeholders in making optimal decisions when selecting a contractor [5].

The standard optimisation techniques could be applied when: a) the rules of the game are well laid out; b) the environment is predictable; c) actors behaviour is deterministic; d) costs vary within a small, narrow band, and e) relationships between variables are linear.

However, deciding whether to bid on a project is commonly referred to as the bid/no-bid decision. It is a critical activity associated with complexity as well as uncertainty. Various multi-attribute decision-making methods are now available to help stakeholders in choosing the best decisive course of actions, including those for evaluation of contractors [6 – 8], supporting products and services acquisition [9], technology [10] or software selection [11]. Some of the models that involve both monetary and non-monetary criteria can be partly considered as multi-attribute decision-making models [12 – 14], but they do not provide a mathematical formulation and an optimization model as their basis for decision-making [15]. The benefits of the above-mentioned actions in construction industry are unpredictable, relationships between attributes may be actually unknown [16]. Furthermore, modelling real-world problems with crisp values of attributes under many conditions is inadequate because human judgement and his preferences are often vague and implicit and hardly can be estimated with exact numerical values [17].

To overcome the listed shortcomings, the paper presents a novel multiple attribute Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment method with the grey attributes scores – WASPAS-G method. The advantages of the proposed technique are based on its capabilities of handling imprecise information due to applied grey relations and capabilities of providing decisions of enhanced accuracy when optimizing weighted aggregated assessment. The proposed novel method is applied in a case study of evaluation and selection of a right contractor from a set of potential construction contractors.

The paper is organized as follows. Chapter 2 presents preliminaries of grey theory. The main recent applications of grey extensions of MADM (Multiple Attribute Decision Making) methods in construction engineering and management are shortly reviewed in Chapter 3. Introduction to WASPAS method and development of WASPAS-G method is presented in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 contains case study of construction contractor selection by applying the novel multiple attribute decision making method.

REFERENCES

  1. HWANG, B.G., X. ZHAO, M .J. S. GAY, Public Private Partnership Projects in Singapore: Factors, Critical Risks and Preferred Risk Allocation from the Perspective of Contractors, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 31, no. 3, 2013, pp. 424-
  2. CHENG, Y. M., An Exploration into Cost-influencing Factors on Construction Projects, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 32, no. 5, 2014, pp. 850-860.
  3. ABBASIANJAHROMI, H., H. RAJAIE, E. SHAKERI, A Framework for Subcontractor Selection in the Construction Industry, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, Vol. 19, no. 2, 2013, pp. 158-168.
  4. MANU, P., N. ANKRAH, D. PROVERBS, S. SURESH, Mitigating the Health and Safety Influence of Subcontracting in Construction: the Approach of Main Contractors, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 31, no. 7, 2013, pp. 1017-1026.
  5. ALHUMAIDI, H., Construction Contractors Ranking Method Using Multiple Decision-Makers and Multiattribute Fuzzy Weighted Average, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2014.
  1. WANG, W. CH., W. D. YU , I. T. YANG, Ch. Ch. LIN, M. T. LEE, Y. Y. CHENG, Applying the AHP to Support the Best-value Contractor Selection – Lessons Learned from Two Case Studies in Taiwan, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 19(1), 2013, pp. 24-36.
  2. OLCER, M. G., D. E. AKYOL, A MADM Based Decision Support System for International Contractor Rating, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, vol. 27, no. 5, 2014, pp. 2163-2175.
  3. El-ABBASY, M. S., T. ZAYED, M. AHMED, H. ALZRAIEE, M. ABOUHAMAD, Contractor Selection Model for Highway Projects Using Integrated Simulation and Analytic Network Process, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 139, no. 7, 2013, pp. 755-767.
  4. BANCIU, D. D. M., M. RESTEANU, MADM Models for Decision Making in Acquisitions, Studies in Informatics and Control, ICI Publishing House, vol. 20, no. 3, 2011, pp. 313-324.
  5. ZAVADSKAS, E. K., Z. TURSKIS, R. VOLVACIOVAS, S. KILDIENE, Multi-criteria Assessment Model of Technologies, Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 22(4), 2013, pp. 249-258.
  6. ANDREICA, M., C. RESTEANU, R. TRANDAFIR, Parallel and Distributed Software Assessment in Multi-Attribute Decision Making Paradigm, Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 23(2), 2014, pp. 133-142.
  7. ULUBEYLI, S, E. MANISALI, A. KAZAZ, Subcontractor Selection Practices in International Construction Projects, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 16(1), 2010, pp. 47-56.
  8. ARSLAN, G., Web-based Contractor Evaluation System for Mass-housing Projects in Turkey, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 18, no. 3, 2012, pp. 323-334.
  9. TSERNG, H. P., P. Ch. CHEN, W. H. HUANG, M. Ch. LEI, Q. H. TRAN, Prediction of Default Probability for Construction Firms Using the Logit Model, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 20(2), 2014, pp. 247-255.
  10. JASKOWSKI, P., S. BIRUK, R. BUCON, Assessing Contractor Selection Criteria Weights with Fuzzy AHP Method Application in Group Decision Environment, Automation in Construction, vol. 19, 2010, pp. 120-126.
  11. CHEN, C. T., C. T. LIN, S. F. HUANG, A Fuzzy Approach for Supplier Evaluation and Selection in Supply Chain Management, International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 102, 2006, pp. 289-301.
  12. MEHRJERDI, Y. Z., Strategic System Selection with Linguistic Preferences and Grey Information Using MCDM, Applied Soft Computing, vol. 18, 2014, pp. 323-337.
  13. DENG J., Control Problems and Grey Systems, Systems and Control Letters, vol. 5, no. 2, 1982, pp. 288-294.
  14. CHEN, M. F., G. H. TZENG, Combining Grey Relation and TOPSIS Concepts for Selecting an Expatriate Host Country, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 40(13), 2004, pp. 1473-1490.
  15. LIU, S., Y. LIN, Grey Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer-Verlagh, 2010, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  16. TURSKIS, Z., E. K. ZAVADSKAS, V. KUTUT, A Model Based on ARAS-G and AHP Methods for Multiple Criteria Prioritizing of Heritage Value, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, vol. 12, no. 1, 2013, pp. 45-73.
  17. SIOZINYTE, E., J. ANTUCHEVIČIENĖ, V. KUTUT, Upgrading the Old Vernacular Building to Contemporary Norms: Multiple Criteria Approach, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 20(2), 2014, pp. 291-298.
  18. OZTAYSI, B., A Decision Model for Information Technology Selection Using AHP Integrated TOPSIS-Grey: The Case of Content Management Systems, Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 70, 2014, pp. 44-54.
  19. ZHANG, Z., Y. Y. WANG, Z. X. WANG, A Grey TOPSIS Method Based on Weighted Relational Coefficient, Journal of Grey System, vol. 26(2), 2014, pp. 112-123.
  20. KIM, G., Y. JONG, S. F. LIU, Generalized Hybrid Grey Relation Method for Multiple Attribute Mixed Type Decision Making, Journal of Grey System, vol. 26, no. 2, 2014, pp. 142-153.
  21. TAVANA, M., E. MOMENI, N. REZAEINIYA, S. M. MIRHEDAYATIAN, H. REZAEINIYA, A Novel Hybrid Social Media Platform Selection Model Using Fuzzy ANP and COPRAS-G, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, no. 14, 2013, pp. 5694-5702.
  22. NGUYEN, H. T., S. Z. M. DAWAL, Y. NUKMAN, H. AOYAMA, Hybrid Approach for Fuzzy Multi-attribute Decision Making in Machine Tool Selection with Consideration of the Interactions of Attributes, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 6, 2014, pp. 3078-3090.
  23. KUANG, H., D. M. KILGOUR, K. W HIPEL, Grey-based PROMETHEE II with Application to Evaluation of Source Water Protection Strategies, Information Sciences, vol. 294, 2015,     pp. 376-389.
  24. STANUJKIC, D., N. MAGDALINOVIC, D. MILANOVIC, S. MAGDALINOVIC, G. POPOVIC, An Efficient and Simple Multiple Criteria Model for a Grinding Circuit Selection based on the MOORA method, Informatica, 25, no. 1, 2014, pp. 73-93.
  25. STANUJKIC, D., An Extension of the MOORA Method for Solving Fuzzy Decision Making Problems, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, vol. 19, s 1, 2013, pp. 228-255.
  26. HASHEMI, S. S, S. H. RAZAVI HAJIAGHA, M. AMIRI, Decision Making with Unknown Data: Development of ELECTRE Method Based on Black Numbers, Informatica, vol. 25, no. 1, 2014, pp. 21-36.
  27. SENTHIL, S., B. SRIRANGACHARYULU, A. RAMESH, A Robust Hybrid Multi-criteria Decision Making Methodology for Contractor Evaluation and Selection in Third-party Reverse Logistics, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 1, 2014, pp. 50-58.
  28. YOU, X. Y., J. X. YOU, H. C. LIU, L. ZHEN, Group Multi-criteria Supplier Selection Using an Extended VIKOR Method with Interval 2-tuple Linguistic Information, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 4, 2015, pp. 1906-1916.
  29. ZAVADSKAS, E. K., Z. TURSKIS, J. ANTUCHEVICIENE, A. ZAKAREVICIUS, Optimization of Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment, Electronics and Electrical Engineering = Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, vol. 122(6), 2012, pp. 3-6.
  30. HASHEMKHANI ZOLFANI, S., M. H. AGHDAIE, A. DERAKHTI, E. K. ZAVADSKAS, M. H. M. VARZANDEH, Decision Making on Business Issues with Foresight Perspective; an Application of New Hybrid MADM Model in Shopping Mall Locating, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, no. 17, 2013, pp. 7111-7121.
  31. Dejus, T., J. Antucheviciene, Assessment of Health and Safety Solutions at a Construction Site, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 19, no. 5, 2013, pp. 728-737.
  32. Zavadskas, E. K, J. AntucheviCienE, J. Saparauskas, Z. Turskis, MCDM Methods WASPAS and MULTIMOORA: Verification of Robustness of Methods when Assessing Alternative Solutions, Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, vol. 47, no. 2, 2013, pp. 5-20.
  33. Siozinyte, E., J. AntucheviCienE, Solving the Problems of Daylighting and Tradition Continuity in a Reconstructed Vernacular Building, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 19, no. 6, 2013, pp. 873-882.
  34. Bagocius, V., E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, Multi-person Selection of the Best Wind Turbine Based on the Multi-criteria Integrated Additive-multiplicative Utility Function, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, vol. 20, no. 4, 2014, pp. 590-599.

https://doi.org/10.24846/v24i2y201502