Shen, Q; Lo, K K and Wang, Q (1998) Priority setting in maintenance management: A modified multi-attribute approach using analytic hierarchy process. Construction Management and Economics, 16(6), pp. 693-702. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
In the current economic climate, budgets for the maintenance of public buildings are unlikely to meet the ever-increasing maintenance needs. Although it is unlikely that this problem can be overcome completely without an injection of further resources, it is possible for government maintenance authorities to improve the situation by ensuring that the best solution in terms of 'value for money' is achieved in the planned maintenance programme. A maintenance plan which is based on a rational assessment of priorities and up-to-date knowledge of the condition of the property stock will help to ensure the best use of available resources. Based on the multi-attribute maintenance prioritization model developed by Alan Spedding, Roy Holmes and Qiping Shen at the University of West of England, which is simple in practice and flexible from a management point of view, this paper presents the results of some further research into this area by modifying the original model using an analytical hierarchy process in deciding the weightings of the criteria set out in the prioritization model. This modified model is more quantitative and objective than the original model. The validation of the framework is also discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytic hierarchy process; multi-attribute prioritization; planned maintenance; priority setting; public buildings |
| Index terms: | England, public building, injection, analytical hierarchy process, maintenance management, programme, validation, value-for-money |
| Subjects: | construction type, evaluation, maintenance engineering, manufacturing engineering, project controls, Geography, professional development, decision-making and optimization |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Time Control, Business Strategy, Value Management, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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