The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in project portfolio selection: a literature review and future research directions

被引:19
|
作者
Kandakoglu, M. [1 ,2 ]
Walther, G. [1 ]
Ben Amor, S. [2 ]
机构
[1] Rhein Westfal TH Aachen, Chair Operat Management, Aachen, Germany
[2] Univ Ottawa, Telfer Sch Management, Ottawa, ON, Canada
关键词
Multi-criteria decision analysis; Integer programming; Project portfolio selection; Preference modeling; Alternative solutions; MULTIPLE-CRITERIA; METAHEURISTIC APPROACH; MANAGEMENT; OPTIMIZATION; UNCERTAINTY; FRAMEWORK; STRATEGY; SUPPORT; POLICY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1007/s10479-023-05564-3
中图分类号
C93 [管理学]; O22 [运筹学];
学科分类号
070105 ; 12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In most project portfolio selection (PPS) situations, the presence of multiple attributes and decision-maker preference is inevitable. As Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methods provide a framework well-suited to deal with these challenges in PPS problems, the use of MCDA methods in real-life PPS problems has increased in recent years. This paper provides a comprehensive literature review of the use of different MCDA methods and their individual or combined utilization with other modeling techniques to support PPS problems. First, we summarize how MCDA methods are used in different modeling approaches. Second, we examine the mathematical models that are generally used to combine MCDA with mathematical programming techniques to solve PPS problems with resource constraints. Third, we present the drawbacks of combined utilization and discuss recent advances. Finally, we visualize the summary of the reviewed papers as a decision tree to assist researchers and practitioners in the use of MCDA methods in a specific PPS context and propose some future research directions.
引用
收藏
页码:807 / 830
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A Comprehensive Review of the Novel Weighting Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
    Ayan, Buesra
    Abacioglu, Seda
    Basilio, Marcio Pereira
    INFORMATION, 2023, 14 (05)
  • [22] Multi-criteria decision-making techniques for asset selection
    Harode S.
    Jha M.
    Srivastava N.
    Recent Advances in Computer Science and Communications, 2021, 14 (06) : 1937 - 1954
  • [23] Material selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods: a comparative study
    Athawale, Vijay Manikrao
    Chakraborty, Shankar
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INSTITUTION OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS PART L-JOURNAL OF MATERIALS-DESIGN AND APPLICATIONS, 2012, 226 (L4) : 266 - 285
  • [24] Material selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods: A comparative study
    Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government Polytechnic, India
    不详
    Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part L J. Mat. Des. Appl., 4 (266-285):
  • [25] When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
    Saaty, Thomas L.
    Ergu, Daji
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2015, 14 (06) : 1171 - 1187
  • [26] Optimal Selection of Stock Portfolios Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
    Jing, Dongmei
    Imeni, Mohsen
    Edalatpanah, Seyyed Ahmad
    Alburaikan, Alhanouf
    Khalifa, Hamiden Abd El-Wahed
    MATHEMATICS, 2023, 11 (02)
  • [27] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
    Encheva, Sylvia
    MICBE '09: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10TH WSEAS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTERS IN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS, 2009, : 192 - +
  • [28] A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Ceballos B.
    Lamata M.T.
    Pelta D.A.
    Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 2016, 5 (04) : 315 - 322
  • [29] Applications of Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making to Supplier Selection: A Literature Review
    Otheman, Adawiyah
    Abdullah, Lazim
    Ab Ghani, Ahmad Termimi
    2016 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS (ICBE2016), 2016, : 489 - 491
  • [30] Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review
    Ho, William
    Xu, Xiaowei
    Dey, Prasanta K.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2010, 202 (01) : 16 - 24