•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This research deals with a technique to expedite group decision making during the selection of technical solutions for value management process. Selection of a solution from a set of alternatives is facilitated by evaluating using multicriteria decision making techniques. During the process, every possible solution is rated on criteria of function and cost. Function deals more with quality than with quantity, and cost can be calculated based on the theoretical time value of money. Decision-making techniques based on satisfying games are applied to determine the relative function and cost of solutions and hence their relative value. The functions were determined by function analysis system technique. Analytical hierarchy process was applied to decision making and life-cycle cost analysis were used to calculate cost. Cooperative decision making was shown to consist of identifying agreement options, analyzing, and forming coalitions. The objective was attained using the satisfying game model as a basis for two main preferences. The model will improve the value of decision regarding design. It further emphasizes the importance of performance evaluation in the design process and value analysis. The result of the implementation, when applied to the selection of a building wall system, demonstrates a process of selecting the most valuable technical solution as the best-fit option for all decision makers. This work is relevant to group decision making and negotiation, as it aims to provide a framework to support negotiation in design activity.

Bahasa Abstract

Keputusan Kelompok dan Koalisi pada Manajemen Nilai. Penelitian ini berkaitan dengan penyusunan model untuk mempercepat pengambilan keputusan kelompok selama pemilihan solusi teknis dan membangun sistem alternatif untuk proses manajemen nilai. Pemilihan solusi dari serangkaian alternatif dilakukan menggunakan teknik pengambilan keputusan multikriteria dengan kriteria fungsi dan biaya. Proses hirarki analitis diterapkan untuk pengambilan keputusan, dan analisis fungsi serta analisis biaya siklus hidup digunakan untuk menentukan nilai bagi solusi terbaik. Pengambilan keputusan kelompok disusun secara kooperatif melalui identifikasi pilihan, analisis, dan pembentukan koalisi. Model ini akan meningkatkan nilai keputusan pada proses desain. Hasil pelaksanaan, yang diterapkan pada pemilihan sistem dinding bangunan, menunjukkan proses pemilihan solusi teknis sebagai pilihan terbaik untuk semua pengambil keputusan. Riset ini relevan dengan pengambilan keputusan kelompok dan negosiasi, karena bertujuan menyediakan kerangka kerja untuk mendukung negosiasi dalam kegiatan desain.

References

  1. R. Woodhead, C. Downs, Value Management: Improving Capabilities, Thomas Telford, London, 2001, p.20.
  2. J. Kelly, S. Male, D. Graham, Value Management of Construction Projects, Blackwell, Oxford, 2004, p.81.
  3. A. Ashworth, K.I. Hogg, Added Value in Design and Construction, Pearson Education, New York, 2000, p.75.
  4. S.J. Kirk, R.G. Turk, R.W. Hobbs, Value-Based Design Decision Making, SAVE International Conference, Denver, 2002.
  5. C.W. Bytheway, FAST Creativity and Innovation: Rapidly Improving Processes, Product Development and Solving Complex Problems, J.Ross Publishing, Florida, 2007.
  6. G. Thomas, M. Thomas, Constructing, Partnering, Integrated Teamworking, Blackwell, Oxford, 2005.
  7. S.D. Green, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Reading, UK, 1994.
  8. Q. Shen, J.K.H. Chung, Informatics Digital Library, CIB-W78, 2003.
  9. Q. Shen, J.K.H. Chung, L. Heng, L. Shen, Autom. Constr. 13 (2004) 209.
  10. S. Fan, Q. Shen, J. Kelly, J. Comput. Civil. Eng. 22/2 (2008) 100-113.
  11. N. Naderpajouh, A. Afshar, Const. Manag. and Econo. 26/4 (2008) 363.
  12. S.D. Green, S.J. Simister, in: D.A. Langford, A. Retik (Eds.), The Organization and Management of Construction: Shaping Theory and Practice (vol. 2), E&FN Spon, London (1996) 529.
  13. W.C. Stirling, Satisfying Games and Decision Making with Applications to Engineering and Computer Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
  14. A. Warszawski, Industrialized and Automated Building System: A Managerial Approach, 2nd ed., Taylor and Francis, London, 1999, p.78.
  15. A. Idrus, J.B. Newman, Constr. Manag. Econo. 20 (2002) 13.
  16. C. Utomo, Majalah Iptek, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember 22/1 (2011) 7.
  17. R.N. Astrand, Ph.D. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, 2002.
  18. P.Y. Hong, Ph.D. Thesis, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, 2007.
  19. J. Wong, H. Li, Build. Environ. 41/8 (2006) 1106.
  20. A. Kelly, Decision Making Using Game Theory: An Introduction for Managers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
  21. T. Wanyama, In: V. Torra, Y. Narukawa, Y. Oshida (Eds.), MDAI 2007, LNAI 4617, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2007, p.45.
  22. C. Utomo, A. Idrus, M. Napiah, Inter. Conf. on Adv. Comp. Cont., Singapore (2009) 365.
  23. C. Utomo, A. Idrus, in: F. Biondini, D. Frangopol (Eds.), Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, Taylor and Francis, London, 2008, p.889.
  24. T.L. Saaty, K. Peniwati, Group Decision Making: Drawing Out and Reconciling Difference. RWS, Pittsburgh, 2007.
  25. J. Wang, S. Zionts, Europ. J. Op. Res. 188 (2008) 191.
  26. N. Bhushan, K. Rai, Strategic Decision Making: Applying the Analytical Hierarchy Process. Springer Verlag, London, 2004.
  27. C.M. Tam, T.K.L. Tong, H. Zhang, Decision Making and Operations Research Techniques for Construction Management. City Univ. Hong Kong Pr., Hong Kong, 2007.
  28. C-C. Lin, W-C. Wang, W-D. Yu, Aut. in Const. 17 (2008) 180.
  29. E. Triantaphyllou, Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2000.
  30. C. Utomo, A. Idrus, M. Napiah, M.F. Khamidi, Proceedings of the Symp. on Comp. Intell. in MCDM, IEEE, Nashville, 2009, p.118.
  31. Y. Kitamura and R. Mizoguchi, Engineering Design 15/4 (2004) 327.
  32. J.J. Kaufman, Value Management: Creating Competitive Advantage, Financial World Publishing, Canterbury, 2001.
  33. R. Woodhead, Paired Comparison: Why Tools and Techniques Fit within the Value Methodology. Conf. of SAVE Intl., 2005.
  34. M.A. Berawi, Ph.D. Thesis, Oxford Brookes University, UK, 2006.
  35. Y.T. Wan, Ph.D. Thesis, Hong Kong Poly. Univ., Hong Kong, 2006.
  36. P. Barringer, A Life Cycle Cost Summary. Inter. Conf. of Maint. Socs. Perth, 2003.
  37. K.K. Seo, J.H. Park, D.S. Jang, D. Wallace, Inter. Jnl. Adv. Manufac. Tech. 19 (2002) 461.
  38. W.C. Stirling, in: J. Andrysek, J. Kracik, M. Karny (Eds.), Multiple Participant Decision-Making, Adv. Knowl. Intl., Maggil, Adelaide, 2004, p.3.
  39. W.F. Bialas, Cooperative n-Person Stackelberg Games, IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, 1989, p. 2439.
  40. R.J. Aumann, M. Maschler, The Bargaining Set for Cooperative Games, in H.W. Kuhn (Ed.), Classics in Game Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1997, p.140.
  41. E.A. Thompson, in: G. Tullock (Ed.), Papers on Non-Market Decision Making, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1966, p.133.
  42. E.N. Barron, Game Theory: An Introduction. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ, 2008.
  43. T. Wanyama, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Calgary, Alberta, 2006.
  44. K. Westwood, V. Allan, Who Works Together in Agent Coalition Formation? in M. Klusch, K.V. Hindriks, M.P. Papazoglou (Eds.), CIA 2007, LNAI 4676, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2007, p.241.

Download

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.