Abstract
This paper considers a decision making problem encountered by a natural gas pipeline construction company having a set of ongoing projects and facing unpredictable risks that can result in large deviations from planned schedules. This situation forces the company to consider the decision of halting one or more projects to avoid future losses and to allow for possible reallocation of some of their resources to other ongoing projects. This decision making problem involves different factors and criteria that need to be combined in an organized structure that exploits assessments of experts managing such projects. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is found to be suitable for guiding decisions in this problem. A case study for a major natural gas pipeline construction company in Egypt is presented, where three ongoing projects are considered. The proposed AHP structure, along with collected pairwise comparison scores and calculated priorities, suggests halting one project. Sensitivity analysis is conducted to investigate the effect of changes in the pairwise comparison scores assigned to the main criteria on the final decision. The results and analysis provide some insights regarding the application of the AHP and the relative importance of the factors affecting decisions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdelgawad M, Fayek A (2010) Risk management in the construction industry using combined fuzzy FMEA and fuzzy AHP. J Constr Eng Manag 136(9):1028–1036
Al-Bahar JF, Crandall KC (1990) Systematic risk management approach for construction projects. J Constr Eng Manag 116(3):533–546
Ashan SN, Sakale R (2014) Risk management in construction projects. Int J Adv Appl Sci Eng 1(3):162–166. doi:10.1177/097324701100700310
Buertey JIT (2014) Project cost risk and uncertainties: towards a conceptual cost contingency estimation model. Int J Constr Eng Manag 3(5):144–155. doi:10.5923/j.ijcem.20140305.02
Dey PK (2002) Project risk management: a combined analytic hierarchy process and decision tree approach. Cost Eng 44(3):13–26
Dey PK (2004) Decision support system for inspection and maintenance: a case study of oil pipelines. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 51(1):47–56. doi:10.1109/TEM.2003.822464
Dey PK (2006) Integrated project evaluation and selection using multiple-attribute decision-making technique. Int J Prod Econ 103(1):90–103. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.11.018
Dey PK (2010) Managing project risk using combined analytic hierarchy process and risk map. Appl Soft Comput 10(4):990–1000. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2010.03.010
Dey PK (2012) Project risk management using multiple criteria decision-making technique and decision tree analysis: a case study of Indian oil refinery. Prod Plan Control 23(12):903–921. doi:10.1080/09537287.2011.586379
Dione S, Ruwanpura JY, Hettiaratchi JP (2005) Assessing and managing the potential environmental risks of construction projects. Pract Period Struct Des Constr 10(4):260–266. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(2005)10:4(260)
El-Razek MEA, Bassioni HA, Mobarak AM (2008) Causes of delay in building construction projects in Egypt. J Constr Eng Manag. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(1995)11:2(45)
Eraky (2011) Risk management of ministry of interior construction project in egypt. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University
Ezeldin AS, Abdel-Ghany M (2013) Causes of construction delays for engineering projects: an Egyptian perspective. AEI 2013:54–63. doi:10.1061/9780784412909.006
Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, New York
Forman E, Peniwati K (1998) Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 108(1):165–169. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0
Hossen MM, Kang S, Kim J (2015) Construction schedule delay risk assessment by using combined AHP-RII methodology for an international NPP project. Nucl Eng Technol 47(3):362–379. doi:10.1016/j.net.2014.12.019
Hsiao HH (1996) Risk management in BOT project. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Kendrick JD, Saaty D (2007) Use analytic hierarchy process for project selection. ASQ Six Sigma Forum Mag 6(4):22–29
Kerzner H (2009) Project management: systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling, 10th edn. The International Institute for Learning, New York
Odimabo OO, Oduoza CF (2013) Risk assessment framework for building construction projects in developing countries. Int J Constr Eng Manag 2(5):143–154. doi:10.5923/j.ijcem.20130205.02
Palcic I, Lalic B (2009) Analytical hierarchy process as a tool for selecting and evaluating projects. Int J Simul Model 8(1):16–26. doi:10.2507/IJSIMM08(1)2.112
Pressman RS (2005) Software engineering—a practitioner’s approach, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
Ruqaishi M, Bashir HA (2014) Causes of delay in construction projects in the oil and gas industry in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: a case study. J Manag Eng. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000248
Ryor MM (2013) Utilization of risk management practices by construction project managers in the United States. Ph.D. thesis, Capella University, UMI 3567627
Saaty T (2005) Theory and applications of the analytic network process: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh
Saaty T (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98
Saaty T, Ozdemir M (2003) Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Math Comput Model 38(3–4):233–244. doi:10.1016/S0895-7177(03)90083-5
Saaty T, Vargas L (2012) The seven pillars of the analytic hierarchy process. In: Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process, pp 23–40. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3597-6_2
Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting. Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill International, New York
Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48(1):9–26. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
Thaheem MJ, Marco AD, Barlish K (2012) A review of quantitative analysis techniques for construction project risk management. Creative construction conference. Budapest, Hungary, pp 656–666
Tummala VMR, Ling H (1998) A note on the computation of the mean random consistency index of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Theor Decis 44(3):221–230
Wang W, Wang Z, Wang S, Qu G (2012) Application of AHP evaluation method in project management of residential construction in China. In: 2012 international conference on ecology, waste recycling, and environment, vol 7, pp 190–195
Zabaal (2007) Risk management of pipeline infrastructure projects in Egypt. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Engineering Cairo University
Zand E (2009) Risk analysis in oil and gas projects: a case study in the Middle East. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to anonymous reviewers for very useful remarks that helped to improve an earlier version of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Abdelmaguid, T.F., Elrashidy, W. Halting decisions for gas pipeline construction projects using AHP: a case study. Oper Res Int J 19, 179–199 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-016-0277-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-016-0277-2