Kishk, M; Laing, R and Pollock, R (2004) A novel approach for selecting finishes: System algorithm and methodology. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Motivated by the lack of effective tools that would facilitate the effective choice of building finishes taking into considerations various values to the client, an integrated approach for the selection of building finishes is proposed. First, critical requirements and processes for effective identification of decision criteria, generation of alternatives, and the decision-making process are identified. Then, the decision-making process is broken down into a logical series of activities. Then, various identified techniques/metrics are employed to model each activity and link it with other activities. The most unique feature of the approach is that critical stages of the decision-making process are automated and various scenarios of the decision making process are logically handled by a carefully designed algorithm.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | finishes; MCDM; value assessment; whole-life costing |
| Index terms: | finishes, decision criteria, methodology, whole-life costing, integrated approach, decision-making process |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, occupational health, research methods, building materials, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Risk Management, Procurement, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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