Comparing optimization modeling approaches for the multi-mode resource-constrained multi-project scheduling problem

Kannimuthu, M; Raphael, B; Ekambaram, P and Kuppuswamy, A (2020) Comparing optimization modeling approaches for the multi-mode resource-constrained multi-project scheduling problem. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(4), pp. 893-916. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: Construction firms keep minimal resources to maintain productive working capital. Hence, resources are constrained and have to be shared among multiple projects in an organization. Optimal allocation of resources is a key challenge in such situations. Several approaches and heuristics have been proposed for this task. The purpose of this paper is to compare two approaches for multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling in a multi-project environment. These are the single-project approach (portfolio optimization) and the multi-project approach (each project is optimized individually, and then heuristic rules are used to satisfy the portfolio constraint). Design/methodology/approach: A direct search algorithm called Probabilistic Global Search Lausanne is used for schedule optimization. Multiple solutions are generated that achieve different trade-offs among the three criteria, namely, time, cost and quality. Good compromise solutions among these are identified using a multi-criteria decision making method, Relaxed Restricted Pareto Version 4. The solutions obtained using the single-project and multi-project approaches are compared in order to evaluate their advantages and disadvantages. Data from two sources are used for the evaluation: modified multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem data sets from the project scheduling problem library (PSPLIB) and three real case study projects in India. Findings: Computational results prove the superiority of the single-project approach over heuristic priority rules (multi-project approach). The single-project approach identifies better solutions compared to the multi-project approach. However, the multi-project approach involves fewer optimization variables and is faster in execution. Research limitations/implications: It is feasible to adopt the single-project approach in practice; realistic resource constraints can be incorporated in a multi-objective optimization formulation; and good compromise solutions that achieve acceptable trade-offs among the conflicting objectives can be identified. Originality/value: An integer programming model was developed in this research to optimize the multiple objectives in a multi-project environment considering explicit resource constraints and maximum daily costs constraints. This model was used to compare the performance of the two multi-project environment approaches. Unlike existing work in this area, the model used to predict the quality of activity execution modes is based on data collected from real construction projects.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction planning; decision support systems; optimization; project management; scheduling
Index terms: case study, heuristic, multi-objective optimization, integer programming, project management, construction planning, India, modelling, decision support, project scheduling, scheduling, construction firm, resource constraint, construction project, decision-making, methodology
Subjects: decision analysis, project controls, algorithms, research methods, project management theory and practice, production management, Geography, operations management, operations research, analytical methods, construction planning, organization, data collection methods, risk assessment
Topics: Digital Applications, Site Management, Time Control, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Risk Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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