A Conceptual Model of Agreement Options for Value-based Group Decision on Value Management
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v70.3576Keywords:
Value, agreement, design, decisionAbstract
A group decision must be made when a design process is conducted by more than one person. In this situation, negotiation plays an important role in many design decision. Value Management (VM) is one of design decision methodology in construction. By involving multi disciplines, collaboration and teamwork, negotiation becomes an important role on VM using a value-based group design decision. This paper provides an approach to develop a conceptual model of agreement options for group decision in building wall system selection using value criteria which are function and cost. The characteristic of value criteria has not been applied on previous researches. Existing models which are commonly accepted are optimization-based models, for example aggregation methods, but these are not able to solve the problem of value criteria on VM. Group decision needs to identify the goals that can be optimized and those that can be compromised in order to reach an agreement among decision makers. Agreement options are determined by identifying the potential decision makers followed by determining the optimal solution for each sub-group. Five stages are conducted to identify and determine agreement options as a conceptual model which are determining the weighting factor of criteria for each decision maker; grading alternative for each evaluation criteria; scoring every alternative for every decision maker; determining the optimal solution; and determining the fitness factor of an alternative solution The agreement option model is facilitated to better design decision. The model developed in this research can be used for any development research on group decision and negotiation in design process within the construction industry. Future research in the application of this methodology in many field of decision will build a wide range of knowledge to solve the theoretical and practical gap between automated design and automated negotiation. Â
References
Scott, M. J. 1999. Formalizing Negotiation in Engineering Design. Ph.D. dissertation, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.
Durham, D. R. 2006. The Need for Design Theory Research in Lewis et al (Eds.). Decision Making in Engineering Design. ASME, Three park Avenue NY.
Keyvanfar A., M. Z. A. Majid, A. Shafaghat, H. Lamit, A. Talaiekhozan, M. W. Hussin, C. T. Lee, R. M. Zin, M. A. Fulazzaky. 2013. Application of a Grounded Group Decision-making (GGDM) Model: A Case of Micro-organism Optimal Inoculation Method in Biological Self-healing Concrete. Desalination and Water Treatment. 52(19): 3594–3599.
Lamit H., A. Shafaghat, M. Z. Abd. Majid, A. Keyvanfar, Mohd. Hamdan Bin Ahmad, T. A. Malik. 2013. Grounded Group Decision Making (GGDM) Model. Advanced Science Letter. 19(10): 3077–3080.
Utomo, C., A. Idrus, M. Napiah. 2009. Methodology for Multi Criteria Group Decision and Negotiation Support on Value-Based Decision. International Conference on Advanced Computer Control International Association of Computer Science and Information Technology (IACSIT) and IEEE Society, Singapore, January. 22–24: 365–369.
Clemen, R. T. 2001. Making Hard Decisions with Decision Tools. 2nd ed. Duxbury Press/Thomson Learning, Pacific Grove, California.
Simon, H. 1997. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision Making Processes in Administrative Organization. 3rd ed. The Free Press, NY.
Wang, J. 2007. Essay on Multiple Criteria Decision Making and Negotiations. Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York.
Yadollahi, M., R. Anzari, M. Z. A. Majid, C. H. Yih. 2014. A Multi-Criteria Analysis for Bridge Sustainability Assessment: A Case Study of Penang Second Bridge, Malaysia. Sructure and Infrastructure Engineering. 1–17.
Lamit, H. B., M. Z. A Majid, A. Shafaghat, A. Keyvanfar. 2012. Sidewalk Design Decision Making Model Based on Walking Behavior Pattern Recognition: Proposal Validation. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development. 4(1): 27–34.
Rad, M. S., H. M. Dahlan, Iahad, N. A., R. Zakaria. 2014. Assesing the Factors that Affect Adoption of Social Research Network Site for Collaboration by Researchers Using Multicriteria Approach. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology. 65(1): 170–182.
Majid, A., H. B. Lamit, A. Keyvanfar, A. Shafaghat. 2012. Conceptual Intelligent Building (IB) Design Framework to Improve the Level of User Comfort Towards Sustainable Energy Efficient Strategies: Proposal Validation. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development. 4(1): 11–18.
Rashvand, P., M. Z. A Majid, K. Yahya, R. M. Zin, R. Zakaria. 2013. Critical Review on the Customer Satisfaction Metrics for Project Success in Construction. Advanced Science Letter. 19(10): 3014–3016.
Adnan, A., R. Zakaria, C. K. Wah, A. L. B. Saleh, K. B. Yahya, M. Mustaffar, M. R. A. Shakri. 2012. Decision Making Framework for Earthquake Resistant Building. Advanced Science Letter. 13: 827–830.
Movahednejad, H., S. Ibrahim, M. Sharifi, H. Selamat, A. H. Lashkari, S. G. Tabatabaei. 2014. Novel Security Conscious Evaluation Criteria for Web Service Composition. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology. Maxwell Scientific Organization. 7(4): 673–695.
Movahednejad, H, S. Ibrahim, M. Sharifi, H. Selamat, H. Selamat, A.H. Lashkari, S. G. Tabatabaei. 2014. QoS-Aware Evaluation Criteria for Composition of Web Services. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology. 59(1): 27–44.
Li, Y. 2007. An Intelligent Knowledge-based Multiple Criteria Decision Making Advisor for System Design. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Scott, M. J., E. K. Antonsson. 2000. Arrow’s theorem and Engineering Design Decision Making. Research in Engineering Design. 11(4): 218–228
Thurston, D. L. 2006. Utility Function Fundamentals in Lewis et al (Eds.). Decision Making in Engineering Design. ASME, Three Park Avenue, NY. 15–19.
Tate, A. 1995. Integrating Constraint Management into an AI Planner. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Engineering. 9(3): 221–228.
Li, X., R. Woodhead, F. Ball. 2004. Incorporating Value Analysis into the Design and Performance Evaluation Process. Proceeding of Second International Working Conference Performance Modeling and Evaluation of Heterogeneous Networks. West Yorkshire, U.K. Monday 26th–Wednesday 28th July. T12/1–T12-11.
Geslin, M. M. 2006. An Argumentation-based Approach to Negotiation in Collaborative Engineering Design. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Southern California.
Kelly, J., S. Male, D. Graham. 2004. Value Management of Construction Project. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford UK.
Du, T.C., H-L. Chen. 2007. Building a Multiple Criteria Negotiation Support System. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. 19(6): 904–817.
Wanyama, T. 2006. Decision Support for COTS Selection. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Calgary.
Ghods, M., H. Najafpour, H. B. Lamit, N. Abdolahi, M. S. F. B. Rosley. 2014. Evaluation of the Effective Factors on Online Internet Usage in Organization. Life Science Journal. 11(1): 58–63.
Majid, M. Z. Abd., W. Z. Zakaria, H. Lamit, A. Keyvanfar, A. Shafaghat, E. S. Bakti. 2012. Construction Information Systems for Executive Management in Monitoring Work Progress. Advanced Science Letter. 5(1): 169–171.
Chong, H. Y., R. M. Zin, S. C. Chong. 2013. Employing Data Warehousing for Contract Administration: E-dispute Resolution Prototype. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 139(6): 611–619.
Lindland, O.I., G. Sindre, A. Solvberg. 1994. Understanding Quality in Conceptual Modelling. IEEE Software. March: 42–49.
Macedo, M. C., P. V. Dobrow, J. J. O’Rourke. 1978. Value Management for Construction. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Kaufman, J. J. 2001. Value Management: Creating Competitive Advantage. Financial World Publishing, Canterbury, Kent, UK.
Bytheway, C. W. 2007. FAST Creativity and Innovation: Rapidly Improving Processes, Product Development and Solving Complex Problems. J. Ross Publishing, Florida.
Idrus, A., C. Utomo. 2010. Functionality of Negotiation Agent on Value-based Design Decision. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. 4(3): 351–355.
Kitamura, Y., R. Mizoguchi. 1999. An Ontology of Functional Concept of Artefacts. AI-TR 1
Utomo, C., A. Idrus. 2008. Life Cycle Cost and Function Analysis in Value Based Design Decision. Life-Cycle Civil Engineering-Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE '08.
Idrus, A., C. Utomo. 2010. Cooperative Coalition Formation on Value-based Decision. Proceedings 2010 International Symposium on Information Technology-System Development and Application and Knowledge Society, ITSim'10.
Utomo, C., Idrus, A. 2010. Value-based Group Decision on Support Bridge Selection. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. 4(7): 153–158.
Sanchez, M., F. Prats, N. Agell, G. Ormazabal. 2005. Multiple-criteria Evaluation for Value Management in Civil Engineering. Journal of Management in Engineering. 21(3): 131–137.
Fan, S., Q. Shen, G. Lin. 2007. Comparative Study of Idea Generation Between Traditional VM Workshop and GDSS-Supported Workshop. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 133(10): 816–825.
Hongxia, J., C. Zhipeng. 2007. Performance Appraisal on Supply Chain Based on Value Engineering and Multistage Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation. International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing. IEEE, 21–25 Sept.: 4722–4725.
Green, S. D., S. J. Simister. 1996. Group Decision Support for Value Management on D.A. Langford and A. Retik (Eds.). The Organization and Management of Construction: Shaping Theory and Practice (Vol.Two). E&FN Spon, UK. 529–540.
Shen, Q., P. S. Brandon. 1991. Can Expert Systems Improve Value Management Implementation? International Conference of the Society of American Value Engineer. 168–176.
Hussain, M. A. D. 2001. Value Engineering Expert System in Suburban Highway Design (VEESSHD). Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburg.
Shen, J. K. H. Chung, L. Heng, L. Shen. 2004. A Group Support System for Improving Value Management Studies in Construction. Automation in Construction. 13: 209–224.
Naderpajouh, N., A. Afshar. 2008. A Cased-based Reasoning Approach to Application of Value Engineering Methodology in the Construction Industry. Construction Management and Economics. 26(4): 363–372.
Lawson, C. M. 2008. Group Decision Making in a Prototype Engineering System: The Federal Open Market Committee. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts institute of Technology.
Utomo, C., A. Idrus, M. Napiah, M. F. Khamidi. 2009. Agreement Options and Coalition Formation on Value-based Decision. Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Multi criteria Decision-Making. IEEE Society Nashville, TN, March 30–April 2: 118–125.
Warszawski, A. 1999. Industrialized and Automated Building System: A Managerial Approach. 2nd ed. Taylor and Francis.
Saaty, T. L. 2004. Decision Making–The Analytical Hierarchy Process and Network Process (AHP/ANP). Journal of System Science and System Engineering. 13(1): 1–34.
Caillou. P., S. Aknine, S. Pinson. 2009. Searching Pareto Optimal Solutions for the Problem of Forming And Restructuring Coalitions in Multi Agent System. Group Decision and Negotiation. 18(6).
Utomo, C., A. Idrus. 2008. A Multi Agent System on Collaborative Value-based Design Decision. 12th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering. ISCCBE (International Society for Computing in Civil and Building Engineering) and Tsinghua University. Beijing, China.October 16–18. 283–286.
Utomo, C., A. Idrus, M. Napiah, M.F. Khamidi. 2009. Agreement Options on Multi Criteria Group Decision and Negotiation. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. 3(2): 359–363.
T. Wanyama, B. H. Far. 2007. A Protocol for Multi-agent Negotiation in a Group-choice Decision Making. Journal of Network and Computer Applications. 30: 1173–1195.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.
