Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A robust multi-objective optimization model for project scheduling considering risk and sustainable development criteria

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is limited research that considers the sustainability aspect of the projects’ schedule. The present study proposes a model to cover this gap by considering sustainable development criteria. A multi-objective model with four objective functions, including minimizing cost, risk, and socio-environmental impacts, has been presented to decrease the project’s delay. Since some of the parameters are considered under conditions of uncertainty for the proximity of problems to real projects, the robust programming method is used to deal with the uncertainty, and the epsilon-constraint method was applied to solve the multi-objective model. Several scenarios are also defined to analyze the sensitivity of robust parameters in the generation of Pareto-based solutions, and the obtained results are also investigated. In addition, the design of experiments is applied for response surface methodology to determine the optimal levels of robust parameters that can generate solutions with greater variety. A real case study has been developed to implement different steps of the proposed model. Since the outcomes of the model determine the duration of each activity according to the objectives and different levels of robust parameters, managers and project owners can use this model as a tool to make appropriate decisions for their projects’ schedules.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3:
Fig. 4:
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alcaraz, J., & Maroto, C. (2001). A robust genetic algorithm for resource allocation in project scheduling. Annals of operations Research, 102(1–4), 83–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali, S., Maciejewski, A. A., Siegel, H. J., & Kim, J.-K. (2004). Measuring the robustness of a resource allocation. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 15(7), 630–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almahmoud, E., and Doloi, H. K. (2015). Assessment of social sustainability in construction projects using social network analysis. Facilities.

  • Asasi, M. K. G. (1980). Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Middle East Journal, 34, 181–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badiru, A. B., and Osisanya, S. O. (2016). Project management for the oil and gas industry: a world system approach: CRC Press.

  • Ben-Tal, A., El Ghaoui, L., Nemirovski, A. (2009). Robust optimization (Vol. 28): Princeton University Press.

  • Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2003). Robust discrete optimization and network flows. Mathematical programming, 98(1–3), 49–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, H.-G., & Sendhoff, B. (2007). Robust optimization–a comprehensive survey. Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 196(33–34), 3190–3218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boshkovska, E., Ng, D. W. K., Zlatanov, N., Koelpin, A., & Schober, R. (2017). Robust resource allocation for MIMO wireless powered communication networks based on a non-linear EH model. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 65(5), 1984–1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chawla, V., Chanda, A., Angra, S., & Chawla, G. (2018). The sustainable project management: A review and future possibilities. Journal of Project Management, 3(3), 157–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CPLEX, S. J. I., Armonk, NY (2003). Ilog.

  • Deblaere, F., Demeulemeester, E., Herroelen, W., & Van de Vonder, S. (2007). Robust resource allocation decisions in resource-constrained projects. Decision Sciences, 38(1), 5–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeulemeester, E., Herroelen, W. (2011). Robust project scheduling (Vol. 9): Now Publishers Inc.

  • Farazmand, N., & Beheshtinia, M. (2018). Multi-objective optimization of time-cost-quality-carbon dioxide emission-plan robustness in construction projects. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 11(3), 102–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazır, Ö. (2015). A review of analytical models, approaches and decision support tools in project monitoring and control. International Journal of Project Management, 33(4), 808–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2005). Project scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research potentials. European Journal of Operational Research, 165(2), 289–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 291–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, M. G., El Arbi, F., & Ahlemann, F. (2015). Successful project portfolio management beyond project selection techniques: Understanding the role of structural alignment. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), 126–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ke, H., Liu, H., & Tian, G. (2015). An uncertain random programming model for project scheduling problem. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 30(1), 66–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Kivilä, J., Martinsuo, M., & Vuorinen, L. (2017). Sustainable project management through project control in infrastructure projects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1167–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koo, C., Hong, T., & Kim, S. (2015). An integrated multi-objective optimization model for solving the construction time-cost trade-off problem. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 21(3), 323–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrechts, O., Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2011). Time slack-based techniques for robust project scheduling subject to resource uncertainty. Annals of operations Research, 186(1), 443–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., Zhao, X., & Yan, P. (2016). Risk paths in international construction projects: Case study from Chinese contractors. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(6), 05016002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahmoudi, A., & Feylizadeh, M. R. (2018). A grey mathematical model for crashing of projects by considering time, cost, quality, risk and law of diminishing returns. Grey Systems: Theory and Application.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marcelino-Sádaba, S., González-Jaen, L. F., & Pérez-Ezcurdia, A. (2015). Using project management as a way to sustainability. From a comprehensive review to a framework definition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 99, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavrotas, G., & Florios, K. (2013). An improved version of the augmented ε-constraint method (AUGMECON2) for finding the exact pareto set in multi-objective integer programming problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 219(18), 9652–9669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mir, F. A., & Pinnington, A. H. (2014). Exploring the value of project management: linking project management performance and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), 202–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadipour, F., & Sadjadi, S. J. (2016). Project cost–quality–risk tradeoff analysis in a time-constrained problem. Computers and industrial engineering, 95, 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulvey, J. M., Vanderbei, R. J., & Zenios, S. A. (1995). Robust optimization of large-scale systems. Operations research, 43(2), 264–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muriana, C., & Vizzini, G. (2017). Project risk management: A deterministic quantitative technique for assessment and mitigation. International Journal of Project Management, 35(3), 320–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, J. M., Steyn, H. (2017). Project management for engineering, business and technology: Taylor & Francis.

  • Orm, M. B., & Jeunet, J. (2018). Time Cost Quality Trade-off Problems: A survey exploring the assessment of quality. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 118, 319–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raith, A., Schmidt, M., Schöbel, A., & Thom, L. (2018). Multi-objective minmax robust combinatorial optimization with cardinality-constrained uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 267(2), 628–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rui, Z., Cui, K., Wang, X., Chun, J.-H., Li, Y., Zhang, Z., et al. (2018). A comprehensive investigation on performance of oil and gas development in Nigeria: Technical and non-technical analyses. Energy, 158, 666–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvius, A. G., Kampinga, M., Paniagua, S., & Mooi, H. (2017). Considering sustainability in project management decision making; An investigation using Q-methodology. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1133–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soyster, A. L. (1973). Convex programming with set-inclusive constraints and applications to inexact linear programming. Operations research, 21(5), 1154–1157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svejvig, P., & Andersen, P. (2015). Rethinking project management: A structured literature review with a critical look at the brave new world. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 278–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabrizi, B. H. (2018). Integrated planning of project scheduling and material procurement considering the environmental impacts. Computers and industrial engineering, 120, 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavana, M., Abtahi, A.-R., & Khalili-Damghani, K. (2014). A new multi-objective multi-mode model for solving preemptive time–cost–quality trade-off project scheduling problems. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(4), 1830–1846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilt, B., Braun, Y., & He, D. (2009). Social impacts of large dam projects: A comparison of international case studies and implications for best practice. Journal of environmental management, 90, S249–S257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran, D. H., & Long, L. D. (2018). Project scheduling with time, cost and risk trade-off using adaptive multiple objective differential evolution. Construction and Architectural Management: Engineering.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. R. (2014). Handbook of project-based management (Vol. 92): McGraw-hill New York, NY.

  • Van de Vonder, S., Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2008). Proactive heuristic procedures for robust project scheduling: An experimental analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 189(3), 723–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Han, Q., De Vries, B., & Zuo, J. (2016). How the public reacts to social impacts in construction projects? A structural equation modeling study. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8), 1433–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiahou, X., Tang, Y., Yuan, J., Chang, T., Liu, P., & Li, Q. (2018). Evaluating social performance of construction projects: An empirical study. Sustainability, 10(7), 2329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Fan, Z.-P. (2014). An optimization method for selecting project risk response strategies. International Journal of Project Management, 32(3), 412–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X. (2016). Managing the risks of outsourcing: Time, quality and correlated costs. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 90, 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou, X., Zhang, L., & Zhang, Q. (2018). A biobjective optimization model for deadline satisfaction in line-of-balance scheduling with work interruptions consideration. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6534021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Khomein St- Arak, Iran

    Majid Askarifard & Ehsanollah Zeighami

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Valiasr ST, Tehran, Iran

    Hamidreza Abbasianjahromi

  3. Ģraduate School of Management, Sharif University of Technology, Azadi Street, 1459973941, Tehran, Iran

    Mehran Sepehri

Authors
  1. Majid Askarifard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamidreza Abbasianjahromi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehran Sepehri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ehsanollah Zeighami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamidreza Abbasianjahromi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Askarifard, M., Abbasianjahromi, H., Sepehri, M. et al. A robust multi-objective optimization model for project scheduling considering risk and sustainable development criteria. Environ Dev Sustain 23, 11494–11524 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01123-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01123-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation