Etemadinia, H and Tavakolan, M (2021) Using a hybrid system dynamics and interpretive structural modeling for risk analysis of design phase of the construction projects. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(1), pp. 93-112. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Risks in construction projects are dynamic in nature and hence should be considered as a complex interrelated system rather than a set of separate individual factors. In this paper, a hybrid SD-ISM method is proposed in order to extend the structural systematic approach of Interpretive Structural Modeling with dynamic capabilities of System Dynamics to analyse the uncertainties in design phase of the construction projects. A mathematical model is developed, validated, and then applied to a case project. Using the sensitivity analysis, project risks are prioritized to identify the major risks which have relatively large influence on project behaviour. Then, quantitative analysis of individual risk factors and overall project risk are performed for the case project. It was shown that how considering the interrelated structures and dynamics of the overall project risk can help the managers for the accurate estimation of the project objectives such as its cost and completion time.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; interpretive structural modelling; mathematical model; risk analysis; system dynamics |
| Index terms: | quantitative analysis, construction project, risk factor, risk analysis, estimation, interpretive structural modelling, design phase, dynamics, manager, completion time, system dynamics, mathematical model, dynamic capability, sensitivity analysis, hybrid system |
| Subjects: | computing systems, production management, financial and cost management, mathematical modelling, systems and processes, project controls, management, practitioner, systems engineering, professional practice, environmental hazards, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here