Optimizing time-cost in generalized construction projects using multiple-objective social group optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods

Tran, D H (2020) Optimizing time-cost in generalized construction projects using multiple-objective social group optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(9), pp. 2287-2313. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: Project managers work to ensure successful project completion within the shortest period and at the lowest cost. One of the main tasks of a project manager in the planning phase is to generate the project time–cost curve, and furthermore, to determine the most appropriate schedule for the construction process. Numerous existing time–cost tradeoff analysis models have focused on solving a simple project representation without regarding for typical activity and project characteristics. This study aims to present a novel approach called “multiple-objective social group optimization” (MOSGO) for optimizing time–cost decisions in generalized construction projects. Design/methodology/approach: In this paper, a novel MOGSO to mimic the time–cost tradeoff problem in generalized construction projects is proposed. The MOSGO has slightly modified the mechanism operation from the original algorithm to be a free-parameter algorithm and to enhance the exploring and exploiting balance in an optimization algorithm. The evidential reasoning technique is used to rank the global optimal obtained non-dominated solutions to help decision makers reach a single compromise solution. Findings: Two case studies of real construction projects were investigated and the performance of MOSGO was compared to those of widely considered multiple-objective evolutionary algorithms. The comparison results indicated that the MOSGO approach is a powerful, efficient and effective tool in finding the time–cost curve. In addition, the multi-criteria decision-making approaches were applied to identify the best schedule for project implementation. Research limitations/implications: Accordingly, the first major practical contribution of the present research is that it provides a tool for handling real-world construction projects by considering all types of construction project. The second important implication of this study derives from research finding on the hybridization multiple-objective and multi-criteria techniques to help project managers in facilitating the time–cost tradeoff (TCT) problems easily. The third implication stems from the wide-range application of the proposed model TCT. Practical implications: The model can be used in early stages of the construction process to help project managers in selecting an appropriate plan for whole project lifecycle. Social implications: The proposal model can be applied to multi-objective contexts in diversified fields. Moreover, the model is also a useful reference for future research. Originality/value: This paper makes contributions to extant literature by: introducing a method for making TCT models applicable to actual projects by considering general activity precedence relations; developing a novel MOSGO algorithm to solving TCT problems in multi-objective context by a single simulation; and facilitating the TCT problems to project managers by using multi-criteria decision-making approaches.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: multi-criteria decision; multi-objective analysis; scheduling; social group optimization; time-cost tradeoffs
Index terms: tradeoff, proposal, reasoning, scheduling, multi-criteria decision-making, optimization algorithm, construction project, construction process, methodology, evolutionary algorithm, lowest cost, project lifecycle, project manager, case study, implementation
Subjects: cognitive psychology, building construction, decision analysis, production management, algorithms, research methods, bidding, project planning, contractual arrangements, operations research, data collection methods, profession, project completion
Topics: Time Control, Site Management, Digital Applications, Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project 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