Tam, C M; Tong, T K L and Lau, C T (2003) ELECTRE III in evaluating performance of construction plants: Case study on concrete vibrators. Construction Innovation, 3(1), pp. 45-61. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
In this paper, we discuss how a multi-criteria decision-making technique (ELECTRE III) facilitates construction practitioners in decision making for selecting an appropriate construction plant. We first introduce the theoretical background of the technique. Then a case study on how to apply the technique to select concrete vibrators is presented. The findings demonstrate the effectiveness of the model in outranking various options in the process of concrete vibrator selection. The use of ELECTRE III can systematically analyse expert judgments on the decision factors and alternatives that can rationalize the selection process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction plant; multi-criteria decision making; outranking |
| Index terms: | option, effectiveness, judgment, case study, multi-criteria decision-making, construction plant, decision-making, construction practitioner |
| Subjects: | performance management, data collection methods, decision analysis, construction equipment, professional development, dispute resolution |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Quality Management, Plant and Equipment, Legal Issues, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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