Gaur, S; Dosapati, S and Tawalare, A (2023) Stakeholder assessment in construction projects using a critic-TOPSIS approach. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 13(2), pp. 217-237. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: Stakeholder assessment is based on attributes possessed by stakeholders, making the process heavily reliant on evaluating attribute weights. The present assessment methods are based on Analytical Hierarchy Process, Analytical Network Process, and pairwise comparisons that heavily rely on decision-makers' skills and knowledge. An objective evaluation of attribute weight needs to be done to overcome this challenge. Design/methodology/approach: A Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) based approach, through the combined use of Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods has been incorporated to objectively evaluate the weights of the stakeholder attributes and their ranking with a specific focus on construction megaprojects. Five stakeholder attributes and twelve commonly associated stakeholders with megaprojects were considered to achieve this. Findings: The new model presented power, durability and legitimacy as three important stakeholder attributes, further used to determine stakeholder importance. The client, contractor and project manager were identified as the top three internal stakeholders, and customers, local community and utility service providers as three crucial external stakeholders. Research limitations/implications: The findings from the proposed method provide the practitioners with updated information about the attributes they need to look into when planning stakeholder involvement and management. Further, it also leads them to the established framework for the provided stakeholder ranking when planning their management strategies. Originality/value: The use of CRITIC method allowed to address the possibility of any correlation between the attributes in their weight determination. This was one of the advantages as co-relation between the attributes during their weight determination has not been addressed in previous methods.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction management; critic; mcdm; megaprojects; stakeholder attribute; stakeholder identification; topsis |
| Index terms: | external stakeholder, analytical hierarchy process, stakeholder identification, stakeholder involvement, preference, megaproject, legitimacy, construction project, methodology, practitioner, topsis, durability, management strategy, multi-criteria decision-making, project manager |
| Subjects: | production management, decision-making and reasoning, research methods, management, decision-making and optimization, sociology, decision analysis, practitioner, profession, material degradation and durability, strategic project management, participation process |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Construction Materials, Project Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Risk Management |
| 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