Types of Construction methods
Organizations make several types of choices on a daily basis, such as for instance: recruiting people, picking technologies, designing functions, etc. Its logical to consider that several types of choices will need several types of decision-making practices. Roy (1974) made a classification of decisions types. These could be summarized below.
Explaining: Description of each and every option as well as its main effects.
Sorting: Sorting all of the options into classes or groups.
Ranking: Constructing a position of most admissible options.
Choosing: Select one and only one option (or a mix), the best of all.
Additionally other types of decisions described later on by Belton and Stewart (2002).
Choosing a Portfolio: To choose a subset of options from a more substantial group of options.
Designing: to analyze for, determine or produce brand new decision options to generally meet the objectives and aspirations disclosed though the choice process.
Various kinds of methods can support these types of choices. Belton and Stewart made a helpful category of multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. Also, Arroyo (2014) in addition included a unique group, which can be CBA (manufactured by Jim Suhr). We could classify MCDM techniques under four groups:
1. Goal-programming and multi-objective optimization practices (linear optimization)
2. Value-based practices (e.g., AHP and WRC)
3. Outranking techniques (age.g., ELECTRE)
4. Choosing by advantages (age.g., CBA Tabular Method)
The first three practices are found in the literary works about MCDM methods. The fourth strategy is principally found in the lean community literature and is maybe not an element of the decision-making literary works pertaining to operation-research or MCDM practices journals.
A clear inclination for making use of value-based techniques when you look at the AEC industry exists, particularly the AHP technique, that will be frequently made use of and documented into the literary works for choices. Goal-programming and outranking techniques are observed less when you look at the literature compared to AHP. Applications of CBA are typically found in the slim community. CBA differs from the others off their techniques since it focuses in differentiating choices from one another by highlighting advantages.
These methods can yield different choices, also with the exact same raw information. So, which one in the event you make use of? Current studies have unearthed that CBA is an exceptional technique than energy based techniques (AHP and WRC) to supply transparency, and reaching consensus. More over, experiments completed with AEC practitioners declare that achieving consensus is quicker with CBA. Though it calls for an adaptation duration where one needs to unlearn energy base techniques, that have been around in manufacturing toolbox for more than 50 many years.