Computerized Multiple Criteria Decision Making Model for Projects Planning and Implementation By Ali Reda Al-Jaroudi Presented by: Jihad Farhat

Introduction & Objective Decision Making for Projects Computerized multi-criteria decision making model based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Model applied on a telecommunications project Factors that influence the decision making

Previous Studies Literature addressing methods of selecting project alternatives. Weighted evaluation Paired Comparison Criteria Weighting Process Paired Comparison Criteria Weighting Process Evaluation Matrix Evaluation Matrix Select alternative with the highest score. Select alternative with the highest score. Other methods (Fuzzi, Multi-attribute function)

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Alleviates the shortcomings of the other processes. Steps: Constructing a decision hierarchy by breaking down the decision problem Constructing a decision hierarchy by breaking down the decision problem Performing pairwise comparisons of the decision elements. Performing pairwise comparisons of the decision elements. Estimating the weights of the decision elements. Estimating the weights of the decision elements. Aggregating the relative weights of the decision elements to provide a set of ratings for the decision alternatives. Aggregating the relative weights of the decision elements to provide a set of ratings for the decision alternatives.

How to Construct a Decision Hierarchy Main criteria Sub-criteria or decision alternatives Weighing of criteria of same level Distribution of influence downwards Measuring influence on a nine-point scale Assignment of weights to the alternatives

Nine-Point Scale For Evaluating Alternatives One (1) for equal importance Three (3) for moderate importance Five (5) for strong importance Seven (7) for very strong importance Nine (9) for extreme importance 2, 4, 6, 8 for compromise.

Decision Criteria for the Selection of Projects Alternatives criteria were obtained from: Literature review Literature review Documentation of previously implemented telecommunications projects Documentation of previously implemented telecommunications projects A survey and informal interviews with people who are responsible for conducting telecommunications projects A survey and informal interviews with people who are responsible for conducting telecommunications projects System specific criteria (may be added) System specific criteria (may be added)

Decision Hierarchy

Survey and Data Analysis (1)

Survey and Data Analysis (2)

Survey and Data Analysis (3) Range of the mean is between 3 & 7 None of the criteria is at 8, 9, 2, or 1 Tendency of most participants to use a five-point scale Cost did not receive a high rating First six (6) factors carry hidden costs

Computerized Decision Making Model (1) Created in visual basic. Input and output data are saved automatically in a Microsoft Access file. Program limitation: Hierarchies of five (5) levels or less Hierarchies of five (5) levels or less Criteria groups with ten (10) sub-criteria or less Criteria groups with ten (10) sub-criteria or less Alternatives should not exceed more than ten (10) (Recommendation) Alternatives should not exceed more than ten (10) (Recommendation)

Computerized Decision Making Model (2) Program consists of six modules: Start Module (2) Start Module (2) Initial Data Module (17) Initial Data Module (17) Criteria Pairwise Comparison Module (8) Criteria Pairwise Comparison Module (8) Initial Alternatives Data Module (3) Initial Alternatives Data Module (3) Alternative Pairwise Comparison Module (8) Alternative Pairwise Comparison Module (8) Synthesis Module (1) Synthesis Module (1)

Computerized Decision Making Model (3)

Project Alternatives Evaluation Problem (Case Study) Scope replace current mobile radio communications system, infrastructure and end user equipment with a new state of the art mobile radio system replace current mobile radio communications system, infrastructure and end user equipment with a new state of the art mobile radio systemAlternatives An analog system (tried, field proven, & used by other entities) An analog system (tried, field proven, & used by other entities) Open system architecture (potential cost & schedule risks) Open system architecture (potential cost & schedule risks) Proprietary system architecture (discontinued vendor future support, non-standard equipment) Proprietary system architecture (discontinued vendor future support, non-standard equipment) Methodology Applications and Discussion Criteria Pairwise Comparison (15) Alternatives with Respect to Criteria Pairwise Comparisons (49) Result > Alternative 3

Conclusion Structured and systematic decision making approach for evaluating and selecting project alternatives Model applicable throughout all the phases of the project Straightforward application and use Difficulty in construction of the decision hierarchy (depends on the decision maker's experience) Difficulty in construction of the decision hierarchy (depends on the decision maker's experience)

Recommendation Conduct additional research on the developed Computerized Multiple Criteria Decision- making Model Develop further this computerized model to be part of an expert system that includes all the criteria that influence the various decisions for all aspects of the project Incorporate uncertainties in future research (this is one is based on a deterministic approach to decision making)

THANK YOU