i
THE SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER BY USING
ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
LAU HUI SENG
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (Construction Management)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Univeriti Teknologi Malaysia
MAY 2006
PSZ 19 : 16
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS***
JUDUL :
THE SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION’S PROJECT MANAGER
BY USING ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
SESI PENGAJIAN :
2005 / 2006
LAU HUI SENG
Saya
(HURUF BESAR)
mengaku membenarkan tesis *(PSM/Sarjana/Doktor Falsafah) ini disimpan di Perpustakaan Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut:
1. Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
2. Naskah salinan di dalam bentuk kertas atau mikro hanya boleh dibuat dengan kebenaran bertulis daripada
penulis.
3. Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk tujuan pengajian sahaja.
4. Tesis hanya boleh diterbitkan dengan kebenaran penulis. Bayaran royalti adalah mengikut kadar
yang dipersetujui kelak.
5. Saya membenarkan Perpustakaan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran di antara institusi
pengajian tinggi.
6. ** Sila tandakan (√ )
√
SULIT
Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau
kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktud di dalam AKTA
RAHSIA RASMI 1972)
TERHAD
(Mengandungi maklumat terhad yang telah ditentukan oleh
organisasi/badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan).
TIDAK TERHAD
Disahkan oleh
_______________________________
(TANDATANGAN PENULIS)
Alamat Tetap:
Tarikh :
BATU 1 ½ JLN BULAT
96100 SARIKEI
SARAWAK
3 MAY 2006
(TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)
DR ARHAM BIN ABDULLAH
Nama Penyelia
Tarikh :
3 MAY 2006
CATATAN: * Potong yang tidak berkenaan.
** Jika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak berkuasa/organisasi
berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan tempoh tesis ini perlu dikelaskan sebagai
SULIT atau TERHAD.
*** Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis bagi Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana secara penyelidikan
atau disertasi bagi pengajian secara kerja kursus dan penyelidikan atau Laporan Projek Sarjana
Muda.
“I hereby declare that I have read this project report and in my opinion this project report is
sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (Construction Management)”.
Signature
Name of Supervisor I
Date
: ………………………………………………………
DR ARHAM BIN ABDULLAH
: ………………………………………………………
3 MAY 2006
: ………………………………………………………
ii
I declare that this project report entitled “The Selection of Construction’s Project
Manager by Using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)” is the result of my own
research except as cited in the references.
The project report has not been accepted for any degree and
is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any others degree.
Signature
Name
: …………………………………..
LAU HUI SENG
: ………………………………….
Date
3 MAY 2006
: ………………………………….
iii
Special
Dedicated To
My Heavenly Father,
My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ
And
My beloved friends, parents and family.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study would not have been possible without the assistance and support of those
who guided me in the course of my graduate work. First, I would like to thank God
for His grace and mercy throughout this research. It is by His hands and wisdom in
guiding me to finish my work within the study period.
I would like to extend my thanks to my honorable supervisor, Dr Arham Bin
Abdullah, for his academic guidance, support, encouragement, and help during the
course of my study. I would like to specially thank his patience and tolerance
towards me, in which he always trusts me that I am able to do it. His diligence,
dedication and working attitudes are good examples for me to follow.
Last but not least, I also appreciate the love, support and encouragement given to me
by my family members and friends.
v
ABSTRACT
The scope of this research deals with the decision making process concerning
selection of the finalists for position of project manager. The Analytical Hierarchy
Process (AHP) and the Decision Support Software program-Expert Choice was used
to assist with the decision. The research focus on the integration of Analytical
Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Decision Support Software-Expert Choice into overall
decision making process. The first objective of this research is to identify procedure
in selection of a project manager. The second objective is to identify the factor and
criterions that should be considered in selection process. Finally, a new framework as
a Decision Support System (DSS) for evaluating project manager called Project
Manager Selection System (PMSS) will be developed based on AHP. The research
method used includes the knowledge acquisition technique, data analysis, and model
development process. The study will focus on 100 local construction companies to
capture the knowledge from the expert on the selection process. It is believe that the
proposed framework will provide an even more structured approach and assist in
formulating guidelines for construction company in selection of a project manager.
vi
ABSTRAK
Skop kajian ini berkaitan dengan proses membuat keputusan untuk memilih seorang
pengurus projek pembinaan. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) dan Decision
Support Software program-Expert Choice telah digunakan untuk membantu dalam
proses membuat keputusan. Kajian ini memberi fokus kepada gabungan dan
penggunaan Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) dan Decision Support SoftwareExpert Choice dalam proses membuat keputusan keseluruhan. Objektif pertama
kajian ini adalah untuk menentukan prosedur dalam proses pemilihan seorang
pengurus projek pembinaan. Objektif kedua adalah untuk menentukan faktor dan
criteria yang perlu dipertimbangkan dalam proses pemilihan. Akhirnya, satu rangka
Decision Support System (DSS) untuk pemilihan pengurus projek dengan nama
Project Manager Selection System (PMSS) akan dibangunkan berdarsarkan AHP.
Cara kajian yang telah digunakan termasuk teknik pengumpulan maklumat, analisis
data, and proses pembangunan model. Kajian ini fokus kepada 100 syarikat
pembinaan tempatan (kontraktor Kelas A) untuk mendapatkan maklumat awalan
daripada pakar bidang tentang proses pemilihan. Daripada kajian yang telah
dijalankan, terbukti sistem ini dapat menyediakan satu cara yang lebih berstruktur
kepada syarikat pembinaan dalam pemilihan pengurus projek pada masa yang akan
datang.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
CHAPTER 1
SUBJECT
PAGE
TITLE PAGE
i
DECLARATION PAGE
ii
DEDICATION PAGE
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
ABSTRACT
v
ABSTRAK
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii
LIST OF TABLES
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
xiii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
xvii
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
1
1.2
Background of Research
2
1.2.1 Construction Project Manager
3
1.2.2 Selection Process
3
1.2.3 Decision Making
4
Problem Statement
4
1.3
1.4 Research Aim and Objective
5
1.5
Scopes of Studies
5
1.6
Research Methodology
6
1.7 Expectation
7
1.8 Hypothesis
7
1.9
8
Limitation of studies
viii
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Introduction
9
2.2. Overview of Construction Project Manager
9
2.3
2.2.1. Responsibilities of Project Manager
11
2.2.2. Challenges of Project Manager
17
2.2.3. Overview of Selection Process
20
2.2.3.1. Interview the Candidates
26
2.2.3.2. Employee’s Selection
30
Review of Decision Making
2.3.1
Introduction
2.3.2 Decision Making
32
32
2.3.2.1 Multicriteria Decision Making
(MCDM)
33
2.3.2.2
MCDM Analysis
34
2.3.2.3
MCDM Method Adopted for
Research
2.3.3 Analytic Hierarchy Process
CHAPTER 3
39
2.3.3.1
Background of AHP
40
2.3.3.2
AHP Principles
41
2.3.4 Decision Support System (DSS)
2.4
36
46
2.3.4.1
DSS Concepts
47
2.3.4.2
DSS Adopted for the Research
47
Summary
49
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
50
3.2
Research Methodology
50
3.3
Methodology Adopted for the Research
51
3.3.1 Literature Review
52
3.3.2 Defining the Topic
52
3.3.3
53
Identifying Sources of Information
ix
CHAPTER 4
3.3.4 Keeping Records
53
3.3.5
Reading and note taking
54
3.3.6
Knowledge Acquisition
54
3.3.7 Questionnaire Survey
55
3.3.8
Interviews
55
3.3.9
Protocol Analysis
56
3.3.10 Prototype Development
56
3.3.11 Evaluation
57
KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION FOR MODEL
DEVELOPMENT
4.1 Introduction
59
4.2
Questionnaire Survey
59
4.2.1
Questionnaire Design
60
4.2.2
Survey Sample
60
4.2.3
Results
60
4.2.4
Discussion
72
4.3
4.4
CHAPTER 5
Interview
73
4.3.1
Results
73
4.3.2
Discussion
74
Summary
83
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF THE
PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
5.1 Introduction
84
5.2 Functional Architectual of the Prototype System 84
5.3
Development of the AHP Model
85
5.3.1
Problem Definition
85
5.3.2
Rapid Prototyping
86
5.3.3 Developing the AHP Hierarchy
86
x
5.3.4
The Pairwise Comparison
87
5.3.5
Synthesis of the AHP Model
90
5.3.6 Sensitivity Analysis
90
5.3.7
91
Developing the Information Document
5.4 Operation of the Prototype System
5.4.1
Users Requirements
94
5.4.2
System Requirements
94
5.4.3 Starting the Prototype System
94
5.4.4
Assigned Judgment in Pairwise
Comparison
5.5
CHAPTER 6
95
5.4.5 Synthesize to get Results
99
Summary
104
EVALUATION OF THE PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
6.1
Introduction
105
6.2 Evaluation Aim and Objectives
105
6.3
Evaluation Methodology
106
6.3.1
Evaluation Approach
106
6.3.2 Questionnaire Design
107
6.4
Evaluation Results
108
6.5
Discussion
110
6.5.1
Suggestion for Improvement
111
6.5.2
Benefit of the Prototype
112
6.5.3
Limitation of the Prototype
112
6.5.4
Appropriateness of the Evaluation
Approach
6.6 Summary
CHAPTER 7
93
113
113
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Introduction
114
xi
7.2 Summary
114
7.3 Benefits
118
7.4
Limitations
118
7.5
Conclusion
119
7.6
Recommendation for further research
121
7.7
Closing Remarks
122
REFERENCES
123
APPENDICES
125
A
126
B
136
C
142
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO
TITLE
PAGE
2.1
Random Index RI
46
4.2
Procedure in Selection Process
71
6.1
The responses to evaluation questions
108
6.2
Comments from evaluators for prototype system
109
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO
TITLE
PAGE
3.1
Research Methodology
51
4.1
Group of Respondents
62
4.2
Respondent’s Pre-qualification Selection Experience
62
4.3
Category of work involve by respondents
63
4.4
Types of Project Engaged by respondent’s company
63
4.5
Method to determine decision criteria and rules
64
4.6
Information submitted by candidates in pre-qualification
selection
4.7
65
Peoples responsible for candidate’s qualification
evaluation
65
4.8
Decision Criteria Evaluation Techniques
66
4.9
Decision Support System (DSS)
67
4.10
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
67
4.11
Application of methodology Decision Support
System (DSS) for selection process
68
4.12
Types of methodology decision support tools applied
69
4.13
Important of Decision Support System (DSS)
69
5.1
The functional architecture of the Project Manager
Selection System (PMSS)
85
xiv
5.2
Hierarchic Structure for the Project Manager Selection
Model
5.3
Equal rating (1) in pairwise comparison between Jobs
Experience and Academic Achievement
5.4
88
89
Rating of 3 in pairwise comparison between Job
Experience and Medical Evaluation
89
5.5
The Information Document developed in the AHP Model
92
5.6
The Information Document developed in the AHP Model
93
5.7
Project Manager Selection Model
95
5.8
The Verbal Comparison Window
98
5.9
Derived Priorities of the alternatives with respect to Job
Experience
5.10
98
Model View showing the Synthesized Results with
respect to the Goal
99
5.11
Synthesis Window
100
5.12
Dynamic Sensitivity Graph
101
5.13
Performance Sensitivity Graph
101
5.14
Gradient Sensitivity Graph
102
5.15
Head-To-Head Sensitivity Graph
103
5.16
Two Dimensional Sensitivity Graphs
104
6.1
System’s Performance
110
6.2
System’s Applicability
111
6.3
General Rating
111
xv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
AHP
-
Analytic Hierarchy Process
AI
-
Artificial Intelligent
ASij
-
Assigned Score
Bi
-
The ni-1 by ni matrix with row consisting of estimated
Eigenvectors
CI
-
Consistency Index
CIDB
-
Construction Industry Directory
CPM
-
Critical Path Methods
CR
-
Consistency Ratio
C (I, K)
-
The vector of composite weights of elements at level Kit h
with respect to the element on level 1
Cij
-
Raw Score Each Criterion
DSS
-
Decision Support Software
EC
-
Expert Choice
GP
-
Goal programming
IR
-
Inconsistency ratio
KA
-
Knowledge Acquisition
MCDM
-
Multi-criteria Decision Making
MODM
-
Multi-Objective Decision Making
MS
-
Microsoft programs
n
-
Matrix Size
ni
-
The number of element at level i
OSHA
-
Occupational Safety and Health Act
PC
-
Personal Computer
xvi
PDM
-
Precedence Diagramming Method
PMSS
-
Project Manager Selection System
Rj
-
Ranking Number
WPM
-
Weighted Product Model
WSM
-
Weighted Sum Model
λ max
-
Eigenvalue Max
%
-
Percent
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
TITLE
PAGE
A
Questionnaire Survey Form
123
B
Interview Survey Form
132
C
Evaluation Interview Survey Form
137
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Project manager has an overall responsibility for such planning, organizing,
and controlling. They are involved in the project from when the contract document is
picked up to when all construction works has been completed and all changes or
conflict has been resolved. They are responsible for ensuring that the planning phase
of a project involves a complete task description, a thorough resource needs analysis,
a practical time schedule, and a sound definition of requirements. Besides, they also
involved in estimating, submittal preparation, coordination, project scheduling,
correspondence and detail design. The contractor is a ‘for profit’ company and they
typically prefer to have as many jobs as possible. This philosophy requires the project
managers to continuously bid on new project while running the current project. This is
one of the largest challenges or problem for the project manager to running the
multiple jobs.
Project manager plays dynamic roles in a construction company. The company
needs to hire qualified, responsible and high efficiency individual to deal with the job.
Thus, a search committee for the position of project manager was formulated to meet
the need. A job description was developed and advertised in daily news, professional
journals and others publication. A number of qualified professionals will applied for
2
the position. So, it is a need for the search committee to select the most qualified
candidates for the final phases of the interview and selection process. Before
reviewing the material submitted by each candidate, a decision hierarchy was created
that was based on the requirement of position. This requirement research used large
scale survey approach or questionnaire survey to capture preliminary knowledge
especially in identified the criteria which affect the selection process of a project
manager. The depth survey approach, interviews and protocol analysis were used to
validate and to gain a better understanding on the knowledge capture from previous
approach. After reviewing all the material submitted by each applicant, a decision
support software program was used to assist the search committee in the selection of
the most qualified candidates for the position of project manager.
1.2
BACKGROUND OF RESEARCH
The scope of this research focused in decision making process concerning the
selection process of construction project manager. Some of the applications that
relates to this research include the Selection Process of Division Director (Charles
Mclntyre, Merlin Kirschenman, and Scott Seltveit, 1999); Selection of Demolition
Techniques (Arham. B. Abdullah, 2003); Process of Contractor Selection (Jenning
and Holt, 1998; Okaroh and Torrance, 1999; Fong and Choi, 2000); and Decision
Support System (DSS) in Allocation of Resources in Rehabilitation Projects (Igal M.
Shohet, M.ASCE, and Eldad Perelstein, 2004). In this related researches, the
Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Decision Support Software (DSS)
program- Expert Choice was integrated into the overall decision making process. In
selection process of division director (Charles Mclntyre, Merlin Kirschenman, and
Scott Seltveit, 1999), the integration is applied in selection of director at Construction
Management and Engineering Division (CME), North Dakota State University. In
selection of demolition techniques (Arham. B. Abdullah, 2003), the integration is
applied to assist demolition engineers to select the most appropriate demolition
technique. However, in process of contractor selection (Jenning and Holt, 1998;
Okaroh and Torrance, 1999; Fong and Choi, 2000), the integration of AHP and DSS
is developed to assist in contractor selection based on the multiple criteria listed in
tender’s document. This application is also assist in allocation of resources in
rehabilitation project (Igal M. Shohet, M.ASCE, and Eldad Perelstein, 2004). In this
3
research, the extensive literature review focused in 3 major subjects, first, the
responsibilities, characteristic, problem and challenges faced by a construction project
manager. Second, the selection process of project manager and finally the decision
making process. This can provides a theoretical background and form the basis for
continuing further into the research.
1.2.1 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER
This section gives an overview of responsibilities, characteristic, problems and
challenges faced by construction project managers now days in construction industry.
Construction management is usually defined as the organization and direction of man,
materials, and equipment to accomplish the purpose of the designer. Historically,
construction project managers have been contractors that have gained experiencing
running projects or construction inspectors that have moved up the ranks while
gaining valuable experience. It also can be an employee of the contractor or a
potential project owner, which referred to as a construction project manager. The
construction project manager then coordinates and communicates the entire project
process which may include project feasibility, planning, design, construction, and
project implementation. The primary objective is to minimize time and cost while
maintaining project quality.
1.2.2 SELECTION PROCESS
This section gives an overview on how to find qualified personnel. Explained
are the steps in locating candidates, interviewing applicants, and selecting the correct
employee. A hiring checklist provides step to ensure success. Form of job
specification, employment application, interview notes, and applicant evaluation are
investigated to help in selection process. This information provides a theoretical
support in the research.
1.2.3
DECISION MAKING
This section gives a basic concept of decision making including its definition
and phases. The chapter then describes Multi-criteria Decision Making (MCDM) in
4
terms of its method and justified why Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as one of the
MCDM methods was selected for this research. In addition the background and
theoretical aspect of the AHP are presented to give a clear perspective of this
powerful decision support tool. Next, the chapter reviews the basic concept of
Decision Support System (DSS) and justifies why Expert Choice software was
selected as the DSS tool to used in the research.
1.3
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Construction management is a process by which a potential owner engages an
agent, referred to as a construction manager or Project manager. The project manager
then coordinates & communicates the entire project process which may include
project feasibility, planning design, construction, and project implementation. The
primary objective is to minimize time and cost while maintaining project quality.
The project manager has the obligation to serve the owner as if he or she is an
employee of the owner. A construction project manager has the legal authority to
represent the owners and to carry out business dealing in the owners behalf. Besides
working with the owner and general contractor, the project manager has to work with
the designer, testing labs, and equipment suppliers. On each project, the project
manager has a group of inspector to supervise. The project managers has to be
familiar with standard construction practice and keep abreast of new development and
changes in the field. The project managers performs a wide variety of services such as
detail planning and scheduling, construction estimating, operating procedures,
supervision, inspection, plan review, submittal review, property management,
correspondence and testing.
The project managers play a challenging and dynamic role in a construction
company. Thus, the selection of the position of company’s project managers may
need careful consideration. It is not easy to select qualified professional among a
numbers of candidates. Although the selection process can based on the knowledge,
preferences and experience of decision makers, it is more preferable that the company
develop a systematic method to assist in the selection process. The AHP and Expert
choice was integrated into overall decision making process. It is believe that this
5
systematic approach will reduce the time in selection process, save manpower
resources and provide a structured guideline in the selection of the most qualified
candidates for the position of project manager to assist in future decision making
application.
1.4
RESEARCH AIM AND OBJECTIVE
The main aim of the research is to develop a decision support system to aid the
search committee in the selection of most qualified candidate for the position of
project manager. The specific objectives were:
i)
To understand the responsibilities, characteristic and challenges of a
project manager;
ii)
To identified the selection process of project manager in various type of
construction company;
iii)
To investigate and define the criteria which effect the selection process of
project manager; and
iv)
To develop and evaluate a decision support system to assist in the selection
of most qualified candidate for the position of project manager.
1.5
SCOPES OF STUDIES
The scopes of studies are focused on local construction’s company to capture
preliminary knowledge especially in identified the criteria which is significant in the
selection process of a construction project manager.
1.6
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research methodology is the research method used to achieve the specific
objective of the research. A brief description of the research method used is given in
this section. The detailed research methodology is presented in Chapter 3.
6
i)
Literature Review
The extensive literature review focused in two major subject. First, the
responsibilities, characteristic and challenges of a construction project manager.
Secondly, the selection process of project manager in various type of Construction
Company. Literature reviews on these two subjects provide a theoretical
background and form the basis for continuing further into the research. Review of
literature was achieved through several sources, which includes: books and
publication from library, internet searching, and INFOLAN of University library
to assess report, thesis, journals and conferences papers related to the subject.
ii)
Knowledge Acquisition
The process involved capturing and transforming appropriate knowledge
from several sources such as books, publications, journals and experienced expert
into some manageable form in order to develop a decision support system in
selection of a most appropriate project manager. This research used large scale
survey approach or questionnaire survey to capture preliminary knowledge
especially in identified the criteria which affect the selection process of a project
manager. The depth survey approach, interviews and protocol analysis were used
to validate and to gain a better understanding on the knowledge capture from
previous approach.
iii)
Prototype Development
The development of the proposed decision support system was based on
the result capture from the knowledge acquisition process. A decision hierarchy is
developed based on the requirement of the position. Rapid prototyping
methodology was used in the prototype development.
iv)
Evaluation
The complete prototype was evaluated before and after the development
process to access it functionality and usability. The evaluators were drawn from
7
company’s managers and researchers. The selection process of project managers
in 5 construction companies was used as a case study in the evaluation process.
The evaluators were requested to complete a questionnaire that assessed the
prototype from various perspectives.
1.7
EXPECTATION
Integration of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and Decision Support
Software (DSS)-Expert Choice into overall decision making process will give a more
structured and systematic guideline in the selection process of most qualified
candidates for the position of project manager in construction’s companies.
1.8
HYPOTHESIS
The AHP and Expert choice was integrated into overall decision making
process. This systematic approach will reduce the time in selection process, save
manpower resources, and provide a guideline in decision making process.
1.9
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
i) The fundamental construction of a decision hierarchy was the single most
important aspect of the research. So, the criteria or exact requirement of the
position may need careful consideration. Wrong and inadequate information
will effect and reduce the usability of the system.
ii) The research focused on selected construction companies only due to the
limitation of resources. It may affect the overall efficiencies of the system
developed.
8
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter gives an overview of the responsibilities and challenges of a
construction’s project manager in construction industry. Its also discusses various
type of construction firm organizing and the selection process of a construction
project manager.
2.2
OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER
Construction management is usually defined as the organization and direction
of man, materials, and equipment to accomplish the purpose of the designer. The
contractor must price his work before he start, estimating is critical; determining his
efficiency before the work is done is as important as doing it efficiently. The
management cycle is a endless chain of estimate-spend-estimate spend, in which the
weakest link determines the profit of the firm. Historically, construction project
managers have been contractors that have gained experiencing running projects,
construction inspectors that have moved up the ranks while gaining valuable
experience. Besides, in can be an employee of the contractor or a potential project
owner, which referred to as a construction project manager. The construction project
manager then coordinates and communicates the entire project process which may
9
include project feasibility, planning, design, construction, and project implementation.
The primary objective is to minimize time and cost while maintaining project quality.
Project Manager has an overall responsibility for such planning, organizing,
and controlling. They are responsible for ensuring that the planning phase of a project
involves a complete task description, a thorough resource needs analysis, a practical
time schedule, and a sound definition of requirements.
In addition, they must organize the project so that sufficient staffing is
available to produce the necessary services for reaching the project’s objectives. They
must ensure that those individuals participating in the project have sufficient authority
and responsibility to accomplish their tasks.
Project managers have the responsibility for controlling the project. They see
that standard is available to determine the progress of a project and that clear
communication channels exist for providing feedback.
Further, they make sure that there is a timely accounting of the progress in
project by conducting periodic reviews of time and cost. To obtain the necessary
feedback, the project managers periodically compares the actual progress with the
proposed progress to ascertain if there are any serious variances with respect to
costing and scheduling.
Among planning, organizing, and controlling, the third managerial function
has the highest significance to project managers. As the project progresses, project
managers must be able to check that what was planned and organized is, in fact,
occurring. Project managers can specifically accomplish that feat by ensuring that the
following steps occur.
1. Objectives have been converted into meaningful standards.
2. Performance standards are reliable and accurate enough to assess the
progress of a project.
10
3. Reliable budgets and time schedules are formulated so that an accurate
comparison can be made between what was suppose to happen and what
did happen.
4. A means exists for a detailed comparison between resources expended as
of a specific date and what was estimated for what particular point in time.
5. A reevaluation occurs whenever significant variances to project activities
exist.
2.2.1
RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROJECT MANAGER
All managers have three principal functions to perform: planning, organizing,
and controlling. The same is true for construction project managers. Each function
requires a manager to take a certain perspective and to employ certain techniques
throughout a project.
Planning requires managers to be forecasters, that is, to determine future need
s which must be met during the course of a project. This requires them to perform
four major activities.
i)
To establish objectives and their priorities.
ii)
To determine the activities necessary to reach those objective.
iii)
To budget enough monies to finance those activities.
iv)
To develop policies that will direct those activities toward those
objectives.
To accomplish that, a project manager must be able to establish objective,
develop program, schedule activities, forecast resource requirement, establish an
effective organizational structure, and provide a detailed means for implementing its
decisions.
Organizing is the second managerial function. Managers must effectively and
efficiently arrange the personnel and physical resources of a firm in a way which will
expedite the firm’s commitment to reach project objectives. Organizing also entails
having management delegate authority and responsibility throughout a firm. By
11
organizing, management designs the number and kinds of positions that will be
required and assign duties and responsibilities.
The final managerial function is controlling. It measures progress toward
objectives, evaluates the effectiveness of activities, and takes corrective action
whenever the efforts deviate from the accepted norms. Controlling essentially requires
management to make a attempt to ensure that all project activities and event conform
to plans. To do that, management must establish standards to measure performance
and arrange for feedback to indicate any deviations between actual and standard
results. If feedback indicates a deviation between actual performance and accepted
standards, management must decide whether to make any necessary changes in
project’s activities.
The construction project manager has the obligation to serve the owner as he
or she was an employee of the owner. A construction project manager has the legal
authority to represent the owner to carry out business dealing in the owners behalf.
The construction project manager has the right to select the contractor for the owner
and to manage relationships between the contractor and owner. This usually involves
dealing with the contractor’s foreman or construction manager on daily basis.
Besides working with the owner and general contractor, the construction
project manager also has to work with the designers, testing labs, and material and
equipment suppliers. On large project, the construction project manager has a group
of inspectors to supervise. The construction project manager is a challenging dynamic
role. He or she must be familiar with standard construction practice and method and
keep abreast of new developments and changes in the field. The construction manager
perform a wide variety of services, some of which is listed as below.
•
Detail planning and scheduling: The construction project manager has to
schedule necessary testing or others activities. Resources and daily activities
have to be scheduled and planned.
12
•
Construction Estimating: This can be done by the construction project
manager or the design engineers. This involves estimating the project costs
before it is bid to estimating changes during construction.
•
Operating Procedure: This can be expressed orally or in writing to the project
entities by the construction project manager. The communication should be
precise and should clearly identify the responsibilities of each entity.
•
Supervision: The construction project manager may supervise an inspector or
group of inspectors who in turn monitor the day to day construction activity
and perform others duties.
•
Inspection: This done by either daily or spot checking, depending on number
of inspectors on site, of project to meet requirements in plans and specs. The
inspection has the objective to ensure that the construction is performed to the
quality set out in the contract documents.
•
Plan review: Review of project plans and specifications before construction
and during construction. A construction project manager may be used to
review plans & specs during the design phase of a project as a check or aid to
the design engineer/ architect.
•
Submittal Review: Reviewing contractor submitted information for all
materials and equipment supplied, project design details, and any other
submittal information required in the contract documents.
•
Property management: It could be considered as a fringe of construction
project manager services. Property management refers to the performance of
the ongoing maintenance and repair of a construction project after the
completion of the construction phase.
•
Correspondence: The construction project manager has responsibility to
corresponding with owner, designer, contractor, suppliers and others which is
13
relevant to the project. He also provides information and clarifications when
needed.
•
Testing: Once the project is near completion, the construction project manager
reviews and tests the functional elements of the project. This may also be done
during any phase of the project if something has to be tested.
In details, construction project manager responsibilities are shown as below:
Management Skills:
•
Participate in program scoping, design, budget, and scheduling meetings with
Owner and design team.
•
Immediately notify the Owner of any changes in the estimated budget
resulting from discussion, changes in project requirements, changes in known
site conditions, or new alternatives being considered.
•
Recognize varying levels of experience and abilities of team members and
alter leadership style to compensate accordingly.
•
Maintain client and subcontractor satisfaction.
•
Evaluate team members. Performance in relation to their specific
responsibilities and set improvement goal. Assure that proper training is
provided for team members.
•
Communicate with team members openly and effectively by giving
encouragement and feedback regarding positive performance and areas
requiring improvement.
•
Foster teamwork.
•
Possess ability to work effectively with customers that have special and
complex problems.
•
Assist
Operations
Manager
in
implementation
organizational policies and procedures.
and
refinement
of
14
Interpersonal Skills:
•
Work effectively with other members of the design and construction team.
•
Exhibit professionalism in dealing with owners, owner representatives,
architects, design team members, subcontractors and vendors.
•
Effectively communicate in meetings. Develop ability to direct, document and
record key points of discussion. Perceive when a meeting is not meeting its
objective and then make efforts to redirect it to the desired achievement.
•
Demonstrate ability to respond in a problem situation in a manner consistent
with the company’s primary interest.
•
Attend and participate in periodic Operations and Safety meetings. Represent
and advocate company operations and safety requirements and policies with
field personnel, subcontractors and owners.
Prime Contract Management:
•
Sign and execute prime contracts with the owner if granted authority.
•
Prepare and submit change order requests to owner with assistance from
Project Management Team.
•
Negotiate change order requests with owner as required.
•
Assure that prime contract requirements including bonding and pass-down
requirements are met.
•
Take lead in preliminary notification if required on a project.
Project Controls:
•
Scheduling
•
Prepare, monitor and update master program schedule with assistance of the
Project Managers and Site Superintendents in compliance with organizational
standards
•
Monitor 2-week rolling schedule with Program Managers and Site
Superintendents
•
Document project delays and causes.
15
•
Monitor weekly progress meeting documentation. Identify and assign action
items for timely resolution.
•
Work with Site Superintendent and Operations Manager to identify and
resolve all project claims including subcontractor claims, insurance losses, and
personal injuries.
•
Prepare monthly project progress billings with assistance from Project
Managers, Site Superintendents and Construction Accounting.
•
Aided by Construction Accounting, prepare monthly project status reports
including financial and schedule performance.
•
Expedite approval and payment of invoices including follow-up calls as
necessary to the customer to facilitate payment.
Technical:
•
Demonstrate ability to recognize problems and develop workable alternative
solutions for consideration with commitment to follow through to final
resolution.
•
Understand construction techniques to a relatively high degree in principle and
practice including HVAC, electrical distribution systems, low voltage systems,
energy management control systems, fire/life safety systems, plumbing,
framing, building envelope systems, concrete, and environmental issues
(asbestos, lead-based paint, and mold).
•
Possess a good working knowledge of Microsoft Project scheduling software
including resource loading and baseline scheduling.
•
Understand fundamentals of cost estimating including quantity survey (takeoffs), square footage estimated costs, RS Means assembly of values and rates,
$/ton, etc.
•
Possess thorough understanding of prime contract requirements including
plans and specifications developed for the contract.
•
Possess a working understanding of Timberline for project cost accounting
and project contract management.
16
2.2.2
CHALLENGES OF PROJECT MANAGER
Construction projects are costly and time- consuming ventures. To initiate a
project, the company must devote a large measure of its own resources to produce a
result that will be financially rewarding. Capital, labor and land are all invested in an
effort designed to enhance the company’s ability to survive in a competitive world.
All too often, however, company embarks on projects, despite the investment
of large sums of money, without a formal methodology for planning, organizing, and
controlling them. The result can be disastrous. Here are some frequent project
problems.
i)
Poor specification definition.
ii)
Poor resource allocation.
iii)
Inadequate staffing.
iv)
Improper Scheduling.
v)
Inadequate expenditures.
vi)
Lack of authority or direction.
vii)
Poor record keeping.
viii)
Inadequate activity definitions.
ix)
Poor communication.
Why do these problems occur with a typical project?
First, goals and objective are not clearly defined. Many contractors’ company
proceeds without any set plan for exactly what is to be achieved through the efforts of
its employees. Instead, they work toward an ‘idea’ of what will be accomplished.
They have nothing that is written and direct, especially for the rank-and-file
employees in a project environment.
Second, poor financial estimation. Some contractor’s firm do not develop
accurate financial estimates for the completion of specific activities or entire projects.
The result is an unexpected over-expenditure on some activities and an underexpenditure on others.
17
Third, insufficient data. When some firm do make an effort to plan for a
project, they use data that are either too brief, insignificant, dated, or irrelevant. For
example, certain small and medium- sized firms in the construction industry had
mistakenly used outdated financial information, even though the current project was
quit similar to previous one. They either ignored the time value of money or the
continuous changing character of a free market economy. This will contributes to
improper scheduling and inadequate staffing.
Fourth, poor formulation of tasks. This makes operation difficult. Without an
organized approach for breaking tasks down into a cohesive plan, individuals find
themselves in a situation where their responsibilities are ill-defined. Consequently,
they may inadvertently concentrate on activities that do not contribute directly to the
completion of the project.
Fifth, poor time planning. Many firms try to accomplish too much tasks in too
little duration of time. They try to compress activities without determining the
dependencies or constraints that effect the successful completion of a project. This
significantly contributes to improper scheduling, poor allocation of resources, and
inadequate expenditures.
Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, many contractor’s firm lack a systematic
way for the planning, organizing, and controlling of projects. They don’t establish the
means to determine priorities, administrative requirements, manpower resources,
expenditures, or schedules. These firms proceed in a disorganized way because they
lack a plan for:
i)
Defining requirements.
ii)
Defining activities.
iii)
Allocating resources.
iv)
Determining staffing needs.
v)
Scheduling activities.
vi)
Estimating expenditures.
vii)
Providing authority or direction.
viii)
Communicating.
ix)
Record keeping.
18
Besides, there are several common problems a construction project manager
must encounter and work through during any type of project. Some of the more
common problems are discussed below:
Project Schedule:
This is one of the most basic contract administration tools available to the
owner and the contractor. The most common issues related to project scheduling are
those originating from delays, suspension, or acceleration of the times established in
the contract for the completion of the work. The owner must maintain a meaningful
schedule to monitor the contractor’s work progress and to use as a tool in resolutions
of disputes caused by delays and acceleration.
Differing Site Condition:
This constitutes another major source of discussions. Change order and
disputes between the owner and the contractor. The presence of difficult conditions at
the site usually determines the contractor’s profit or loss. Owner can limit their
liability by requiring each contractor to make a prudent site investigation. Differing
site conditions are not uncommon in the construction field especially where
subsurface conditions are not well known or where this isn’t underground utility.
Performance:
By definition, a contract requires both parties to perform all obligation
contained in the contract. However, construction contract are sometimes breached. To
respond to this practical reality, performance, inspection, acceptance and warranty
clauses are included in the contract.
Negotiation Changes:
One of the biggest challenges for the construction project manager is
negotiating contract changes. Contract changes can be driven by owner requested
changes, unforeseen site condition, design errors or omissions, or conflicting
19
information in the contract documents. A contract change usually results in a cost and
time extension for the contractor, although some changes can be a credit for the
owner. Determining the extend of extra work, writing the change order
documentation, and negotiating the cost and time extension with the contractor can be
challenging depending on the scope of the change.
2.2.3
OVERVIEW OF SELECTION PROCESS
This chapter provides basic instruction on how to find qualified personnel.
Explained are the steps in locating candidates, interviewing applicants, and selecting
the correct employee. A hiring checklist provides step to ensure success. Form of job
specification, employment application, interview notes, and applicant evaluation are
importance part in selection process.
There are never enough qualified personnel to go around (Donal M.
Weinroth). Qualified personal always spell the difference between job profit and loss.
If you hire qualified employees and get them doing the right things, there is no limit
to what you can accomplish.
The most successful contractor is those who consistently hire and retain the
best people. This is an obvious truism and worthwhile goal for every owner. Simply
defined, the objective is – seeking out the best qualified, and trains them to company’s
standard. Look for personnel capable of a long term commitment. Studies show that
those loyal, productive employees’ posses the following characteristics:
Problem Solver
Contractor report that the best employees have high problem solving skills.
Investigate candidate’s work history for problem solving success. Keep challenging
these people, and they will arrive each day, eager to learn, and proud to be on the
company team.
20
Good Communicators
Construction placement is done by people. The most qualified like face-toface communication on what performance is expected. Good communicators can tell
and show others.
Salary Is Not Primary Motivator
Salary ranks behind problem solving and job satisfaction in the goal of selfmotivated personal. Look for people who are self- motivated to exceed in spite of pay.
Attracting good workers is like construction. What is need are a schedule,
plans, specification, and a contract. The information bellow is the step by step guide
to locate the best qualified candidate.
1)
Consider Company Goal
Look for candidate who can help achieve company long-term growth goals. It
is best to hire from within the firm. First, look at present employees to see who can be
trained or promoted to his new position. Do not forget to consider who might be
capable of helping the company expand into new market.
2)
Forecast Requirements
Avoid hiring with your back against the wall and your feet to the fire. Identify
future personnel gaps companywide- before you need to fill them. Begin looking for
employees six months ahead of when required on the job. Allow time for personnel
adjustment after hiring. Do not expect jack-rabbit starts. Do not wait till the
competition has hired most of the qualified personnel. For example, if gross revenue
must be increased, plan sufficient time for the new estimator to generate enough
winning bids.
21
3)
Prepare a Job Specification
Job specification presents typical personnel qualification for small an medium
firms. It is hard to find the right person if you don’t know what to look for. Write out
the job specification. State the general experience and education needed. If you want
some one to ‘ leap tall building in a single bound’ and some project require super
humans, state it beforehand. Fix job requirements ahead of time to prevent bad
decision later.
4)
Write a Job Description
Every permanent hire needs a job description. A job description is a contract
stating: Do this and be paid. You and the applicant must have a clear definition to
what is required. Following is an example of job description of a construction project
manager.
Construction Manager Responsibilities Include:
•
Coordination and/or oversight of day-to-day activities related to construction
related projects, such as customer improvements and move-in construction for
assigned portfolios
•
Assisting in the development and management of Preferred Provider Program
•
Reviewing letters of intent, lease proposals and lease drafts to ensure
feasibility
•
Planning, budgeting, and reporting
•
Assisting in development of space plans, schedules, and preliminary budget
estimates
•
Developing detailed schedules and budgets to ensure completion in
accordance with the lease
•
Preparing periodic summary and variance reports
•
Project management
•
Reviewing plans and construction drawings for accuracy and value
•
Administering the bid process
•
Conducting pre-construction kick-off meeting
22
•
Distributing building rules and regulations
•
Monitoring all aspects of construction (scheduling, budgeting, and
communications) to ensure quality completion on-time and on-budget
•
Advising and supporting engineers in overseeing work performed/contracted
by tenants
•
Ensuring that property engineering (MEP's) is completed as necessary on all
projects
•
Maintaining a project file for each construction job with relevant
documentation
•
Supporting move-in process as necessary
•
Close-outs
•
Ensuring property receives all close-out materials
•
As-builds, C of O, etc.
•
Following-up on survey issues in conjunction with other team members
•
Team coordination
•
Attendance at bi-weekly team meetings
•
TI accounting activities
•
Approving payment of invoices as appropriate based on project plan
•
Escalating when necessary and providing communication to appropriate
management
Experience/Education Required:
•
College Degree in business administration, real estate finance, or related field
•
3-5 years experience in commercial construction or related discipline
•
1-3 years of property operations experience
•
Effective written and verbal communication skills, as well as strong
interpersonal skills
•
Proven customer service skills
•
Ability to multi-task and prioritize
•
Proficiency with Microsoft Office and familiarity with project planning
software is recommended.
23
5)
State Job Condition
Write down each position’s employment including salary, bonuses, and
benefit. For example: Salary ranges around RM2000, depending on experience. Be
preparing to state so in the interview.
6)
Use Local Networking
First, locate candidates through personal and professional contact. Studies
show that 40 % of all hires are from a previous contact. Attend association meetings
and mention personnel need to non competitors. Chances are they know of someone
who fill the job specification.
7)
Advertise
Second, advertise in local newspaper and state and national construction
industry journals, such as engineering News Record. Spend enough money on
advertisement to list the job specification, thus screening out unqualified candidates.
8)
Employ a search Firm
Third, use a search firm to locate both local and nationwide talent. Some
search firm is merely listing agencies. For the percentage for the first year salary, you
receive resume of possible candidates. For any responsible position, retain an
executive search firm. They will help you identify your needs. Their mission is to
seek out, screen, and structure a deal acceptable to you and applicant. Seek a firm that
understands you business. Expect to pay from a quarter to a third of the employee’s
salary plus expenses. Make certain the search firm checks out all the candidate’s
previous employers. Make payment of hiring fee contingent on six month’s
satisfactory service by the new employee. Look for executive search capable of:
•
Analyzing the nature of the position.
•
Make position requirement and parameters.
•
Directing search to include investigating related industries, targeting
compatible companies, and identifying qualified candidates.
•
Attracting candidates through extensive interviewing.
•
Conducting indeed background investigations.
•
Preparing a written confidential report on selected candidates.
24
9)
•
Acting as liaison during negotiations.
•
Maintaining close communications throughout the assignment.
Don’t steal from the competition
Circumstances are never correct to go shopping for personnel among your
competitors. Interview competitor personnel only if they first ask for the interview.
Make any offer conditional upon their giving required notice to their employer, prior
to coming to work for you.
10)
Read the resume
Review the resume from back to front. People tend to put more unflattering
information at the end. Disregard functional resumes with broad statement like
‘administers contracts’ Be wary of the well-written resume; it might mean the
candidate has had too many jobs. The best resume states accomplishment in
numerical terms.
11)
Rank order candidates
To fill a critical position, secure qualified resumes before interviewing
candidates. Lesser position require fewer resumes. Rank order the candidates and
interview the top three. If they prove to be unsatisfactory, interview the next three.
12)
Contact the candidates
A contractor’s time is limited. Talk by phone with the top three candidates.
Briefly ask question about their work history. After the first three telephone
interviews, decide to interview someone further down the list.
25
2.2.3.1 INTERVIEW THE CANDIDATES
The purpose of interviewing is to select the best applicant. It is often during
the interview process that you can excite the best candidate about the company. A bad
interview negates the best search plan. Poor interviewing can waste all prior efforts.
Poor interviewing can select the wrong person or have good applicant refuse the job
offer. It is to you and applicant’s best interests to follow well established interviewing
procedures. Below is a guideline for interviewing:
1)
Complete an Employment Application
Prior to the interview, each applicant should complete an employment
application. If answer is not specified enough, have the applicant provide more
information prior to the interview.
2)
Take note
Record the applicant’s answer on an interview form sheet. Writing down
answers helps in preparing the evaluation sheet. Save the interview record as it protect
you legal rights.
3)
Orient the applicant
Explain the interview and selection process. State that the interview takes half
an hour with 15 minutes more for the applicant to ask question.
4)
Explain Company Goals
Begin with a history of the firm. Highlight growth, reputation, and repeat
client work. This track record shows pride in the company and establishes your
credibility in seeking only qualified personnel. Discuss the position and how it relates
overall to the company. Applicant wants to know how they fit it.
26
5)
Avoid Illegal Question
There are certain questions you cannot ask. Unless it has a bearing on the job
requirements, do not ask questions about a person’s age, religion, marital status, race
dependents, including child care, height and weight, physical disabilities, language, or
parent’s names. If you do refer to these, make sure why they are necessary
considerations in selection.
6)
Review the resume
Go over the resume with the applicant. Get detail on any nonworking periods.
These indicate illness or job difficulties. If so, ask for details, and afterwards verify
each group.
7)
Use a job description
Prior to the interview have the applicant review the job description. Ask the
person to list what responsibilities he or she performs and what tasks present a
difficulty. During the interview, compare the job description with each applicant’s
qualifications. Ask applicants to assess their own strengths and weaknesses against
the job description. Ask what they can do to overcome their shortcomings.
8)
State Job Problems
Explain any problem associated with the position. Ask the applicant, ‘How
would you overcome this?’ This allows the applicant the opportunity to respond with
ideas. Note the applicant’s reaction and problem-solving ability.
9)
Check References
Ask how the applicant thinks the references will respond. Later verify this
question with the references. Do not put too much stock in letters of recommendation;
they may be written under the emotional stress of the applicant’s departure.
27
10)
Verify the Impression
First impressions are a good indicator of an applicant’s acceptability. If you
feel in the first few minutes that the person is acceptable, he or she probably is. But
verify you instincts. Have the next two higher supervisors also interview the potential
applicant. For example, For example, a candidate for superintendent should be
interviewed by the general superintendent and the project manager. Reserve final
decision until after comparing notes with other supervisors.
11)
Provide Answers
Supply the answer to the interviewee’s questions. If you cannot answer
completely, provide information within twenty four hours. For each of the applicant,
prepare a information kit detailing your firm, its program, benefits, and goal. For
applicants who have to relocate, be sure to include information about the area.
Providing answers shows you are interested in the applicant as a possible employee.
Whether the offer is acceptable can depend on your promptness.
12)
Consider the problem of Firing
Remember that you may have to fire the person you hire. During the
interview, don’t make promises you can’t keep or promises that will affect the
person’s performance.
13)
Do not make a Commitment
First- choice applicants should be told that they will be notified as soon as the
process is completed. Second choice applicant should be told that you will notify
them by phone in few days. Third choice or unlikely applicants are informed that the
other applicants are more qualified, and you will inform them of and change in their
status.
28
14)
Be Flexible
Set a time for the hiring decision. The closer the final date, the more vigorous
should be the interviewing process. Don’t despair: The right individual is out there.
The 20 candidates’ quota is easy to fill, but it may take twice that number to find three
qualified applicants. Finally, avoid extending an offer at the first interview. The first
interview is aimed at defining the candidate’s qualifications and delineating the facts.
Allow some time to get over initial reaction and preconceived notions.
2.2.3.2 EMPLOYEE SELECTION
What is done after the interview often determines the best selection? An
interview is the basis of sound judgment, but obtaining more facts after the interview
under covers the possibility of employment problem later. Concentrate on making the
post interview phase just as detailed as prior search efforts.
1)
Check reference
Check out all factual information for accuracy. Pay particular attention to
dates of employment, salary information, etc. Gaps in information can lead to
surprising revelations. Obtain at least three references and check them out your self.
Ask critical question such as, “Is this person completely trustworthy?” and “What is
the candidate’s ability to complete jobs to budget, contact, and schedule?”
2)
Call in person.
Sometimes, it is necessary to check references in person. Be as direct and to
the point possible. What is important information to you is often uncritical to the
referenced individual. Know what you want to ask before hand. Ask objective
questions, and follow up during the call with more subjective inquiries. For example,
starts with leading questions like, “Is this person capable of making sound business
decision?” Then follow up with, “Can you give me two examples?”
29
3)
Write it down
Take written notes of all your telephone checks. Notes more objectively
separate candidates.
4)
Interview Again.
Consider a second interview to verify impressions of clear up questions. Bear
in mind that the important of personal considerations in the candidate’s selection.
Consider how the company can make the transition easier for the new employee.
5)
Decide Promptly
Be prepared to make the decision promptly. If some mutual interest is
developed, you do not want to lose it. Set a time frame for decision, and advise all the
candidates of the final decision. Hiring the right people is the key to long-term
company profit, liquidity, and growth. Build on these rules with each new hire and
learn to select qualified people.
2.3
REVIEW OF DECISION MAKING
2.3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter begins with reviewing the basic concept of decision making
including its definition and phases. The chapter then describes Multi criteria Decision
Making (MCDM) in terms of its method and justified why Analytic Hierarchy
Process (AHP) as one of the MCDM methods was selected for this research. In
addition the background and theoretical aspect of the AHP are presented to give a
clear perspective of this powerful decision support tool. Next, the chapter reviews the
basic concept of Decision Support System (DSS) and justifies why Expert Choice
software was selected as the DSS tool to used in the research.
30
2.3.2
DECISION MAKING
A decision is a choice made between two or more available alternatives.
Decision making is the process of choosing the best alternative for reaching
objectives. Turban and Aronson (1998) define decision making as “a process of
choosing among alternative courses of action for the purpose of attaining a goal or
goals”. According to Simon (1977), the decision making process involves four major
phases as below:
•
Intelligence Phase - clarify the purpose of the decision by identifying and
defining the problem occurring in the organization;
•
Design Phase - this involves formulation a model that represents the decision
problem. The model that validated and a set of criteria and alternatives for a
possible course of action are determined;
•
Choice Phase - it includes evaluating the criteria and alternatives, and
recommending an appropriate solution to the model; and
•
Implementation Phase - it can be describe as putting the recommended
solution to work.
According to Samual C.Certo (1997), a decision is a choice of one alternative
from a set of available alternative. The decision making process is the steps the
decision maker take to arrive at this choice. A model of decision making process is as
follows:
1. Identify a existing problem
2. List possible alternative for solving the problem.
3. Select the most beneficial of these alternatives.
4. Implement the selected alternative.
5. Gather feedback to find out if the implemented alternative is
solving the identified problem.
In this research, a search committee as decision makers is faced with decision
problems in the selection of most qualified candidates for the post of construction
31
project manager. In practice, the decision is based on experience, skill and knowledge
of the decision makers in the firm. It is not easy to select qualified professional among
a numbers of candidates. They are many steps and criteria should be considering that
making the decision making process a complex and time remaining process.
Furthermore, they are many element of the problem and the interrelationships among
the elements are very complicated. Before selecting the most qualified candidates, the
decision maker needs to have multi criteria decision making (MCDM) ability. The
next sections discuss the characteristic of the MCDM to give an overview of MCDM
so that a decision model of candidate selection can be developed.
2.3.2.1 MULTICRITERIA DECISION MAKING (MCDM)
Multi-criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is part of more general area of
research called Multi-criteria Decision Aid (MCDA). MCDM has a descriptive
approach and was mainly developed in united State of America (known as American
School), while the MCDM has a constructivist approach and is the one adopted by
most of the European researchers (French School) (Roy and Vanderpooten, 1996).
The descriptive approach in MCDM aims to help decision makers learn the problems
and guide them in identifying a preferred course of action (Zeleny, 1982). The typical
MCDM problem deals with the evaluation of a set of alternatives in term of a set of
decision criteria to determine which the best alternatives are. On the other hand,
MCDA, which has a constructive approach, develops tools to help decision makers in
solving a decision problem with several points of view that have to be taken into
account. MCDA intends to give tools that allow the decision maker to capture,
analyze and understand these points of view, in order to find the way in which the
decision process may be handled. Even if there are some distinction between MCDM
and MCDA the overall objective is the same, which are to help decision makers solve
complex decision problems in a systematic, consistent and more productive way.
MCDM is a critical tool for many scientific and engineering challenges
(Triantaphyllou and Mann, 1995). The application of MCDM are diverse and some of
the applications that relates to this research include in the process of division director
(Charles Mclntyre, Merlin Kirschenman, and Scott Seltveit, 1999); project
procurement selection ( Alhazmi and Mccaffer, 2000; Kamal, 2001; Lee and Kim,
32
2001; Wong et al., 2000); Decision Support Model for the Allocation of Resources in
Rehabilitation Projects (Igal M. Shohet, M.ASCE, and Eldad Perelstein, 2004) and
equipment selection (Amirkhanian and baker, 1992; Naoum and haidar, 2000).
2.3.2.2 MCDM Analysis
As reported by Traintaphyllou (2000) and others authers such as (Hwang and
Masud, 1979; Hwang and Yoon, 1981 b; Vincke, 1992; zeleny, 1982), there are two
types of analyses that can be used to resolve multi-criteria problem:
1. Multi-Objective Decision Making (MODM) is used to solve problems that
required selection from continious sets of options. MODM is also known as
Multiple Criteria Design problem or continuous Multiple Criteria Problem
(Henig Buchanan, 1996; Hwang and Masud, 1979; Keeney and raiffa, 1976;
Salamon and Montevechi, 2001).
2. Multi- Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is used to solve problems that
required selection from multicriteria discrete options. Other equivalent term of
‘ Criteria’ is ‘Attribute’, and therefore, the terms MCDM and MADM have
been used very often to mean the same class of models and denote the same
concept (Triantaphyllou et al, 1998). MCDM is also known as Multiple
Criteria Evaluation Problems and Discrete Multiple Criteria Problems (
Montis et al, 2000; Roy and Vanderpooten, 1996; Vincke, 1992).
In MODM the decision space is continuous where the methods rely primarily
on mathematical algorithms to analyze large, possibly infinite, sets of alternatives.
Solution are predominately defined around the identification of a situation’s single
optimum solution (Hwang and Masud,1979). For analyzing this type of problem,
method like goal programming are used. Goal programming (GP) is a mathematical
programming technique which is used to satisfy more than one goal simultaneously.
According to Hillier and Lieberman (1980) the basic idea is to establish a numerical
goal for each of the objectives, formulate an objective function for each objective, and
then seek a solution that minimizes the (weighted) sum of deviations of these
objective functions from their respective goals. The aim is to rank ordered according
to their priorities of achieving the aspiration levels assigned to them in the decision
33
making context. The main advantage of a GP approach is that it leads to arrive at an
acceptable compromise solution directly. However, the main weakness of GP is that
the aspiration levels of the goals need to be specified precisely in making decision
(Pal and Moitra, 2001).
In contrast, MCDM concentrate on problems with discrete decision space
where the set of decision alternatives ahs been finite and predetermined. Depending
on the type of decision problems, the outcome of a MCDM is either a
recommendation to choose one alternative, or a subset of alternatives containing the
most suitable alternatives. These recommendations were derived by either a ranking
or sorting process ( Hwang and Yoon, 1981a). A variety of standardized frameworks
provide different analytical procedures and decision rules, enabling the actual
decision makers, rather than modelers, to compile, analyze, and synthesis a situation’s
components ( Hwang and Lin, 1987). According to Vinke (1992), the discrete MCDM
problems can be analysed by using the following approaches: the single criterion
synthesis approach and the outranking synthesis approach.
2.3.2.3 MCDM Method Adopted for the Research
There are great numbers of MCDM methods, a situation that may be seen
either as strength or as a weakness (Bouyssou, 1990). The great variety of multicriteria methods makes it possible for the decision maker to choose the appropriate
method for a certain decision making situation. In particular, each method shows it
own properties with respect to the way of assessing criteria, the application and
computation of weights, the mathematical algorithm utilized, the model to describe
the system of preferences of the individual facing decision making, and the level of
uncertainty embedded in the data set (Belton, 1990).
An important aspect to consider when choosing a MCDM method is by
assessing the characteristic of the decision problem. The characteristic of the problem
in this research involve:
34
•
Type of problem- Multi-criteria discrete options problem to select the most
qualified candidate for the position of project manager (the alternative is finite
predetermined);
•
Who makes the decision? -
The search committee members in the
construction’s company;
•
Type of data – deterministic ( goal, criteria and alternatives are predetermined
and defined before applying the decision method by capturing it from the
scope company.) It also involves quantitative and qualitative information; and
•
Output- Improving decision making process by structured the selection
process, ranked all the alternative based on the criteria assessed and finally,
develop a structured approach in selection process for a most qualified
candidate.
With reference to the characteristics of the problem mentioned above, without
any doubt a Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach is required to resolve
the problems. There were two approaches categorize in this type of problem, which
include single criterion synthesis approach and outranking synthesis approach. The
single criterion synthesis approach matches the expected outcome of the research
where the decision maker needs to have good visualization of the whole selection
process before he/she can make a final decision. For example, by using this approach
the decision makers can clearly visualize the goal and the criteria that influenced in
selection process. In addition, all the ranked alternatives can be viewed at the end of
the process. On the other hand, the outranking synthesis approach will not give a
complete ranking of all the alternatives because only partial prioritization of
alternatives is computed, where it reduces the number of alternatives to a subset of
solutions to the problem. Therefore, based on the expected outcome of the research,
which is to provide a clear, structured view of the whole decision process, the single
criterion synthesis approach was selected compared to the outranking synthesis
approach.
35
Several methods are available to be selected based on the single criterion
synthesis approach. After reviewing the characteristic of all available methods, the
AHP method was selected for the research compared to other methods due to a
number of reasons, which include:
1. Improve the decision making process- the hierarchical structure used in
formulating the AHP model enable the search committee to visualize the
selection process systematically in term of relevant criteria, sub criteria and
alternatives;
2. The capability to compare both qualitative and quantitative criteria by using
informed judgment to derive weights and priorities. It also takes into
consideration judgments based on people’s feeling and emotions as well as
their thoughts. This capability matches the nature of the decision made by
search committee where the decision to select a project manager is based on
their experience and knowledge;
3. The AHP pair wise comparison scale makes it easy to create a pair wise
comparison matrix for each relevant element of problem;
4. It has the capability to measure inconsistency in subjective judgments by
calculating the consistency ratio for each judgment;
5. The nature of numerical and pictorial results obtained from the synthesis stage
gives a better understanding and a clear rationale for the choice selected in
decision- making process;
6. The availability of decision support system called Expert Choice software
based on AHP theory makes it easily understood and applied by users; and
7. Results from previous studies by several researchers recommend AHP as a
better decision-making method than most. This include:
36
•
A research by Triantaphyllou and Mann (1989) which compare AHP
with weighted sum model (WSM) and weighted product model
(WPM) methods in term of processing the numerical values to
determine a ranking of each alternative. In WSM, the global
performance of an alternative is computed as the weighted sum of its
evaluations along each criterion. The global performance is used to
make a choice among all the alternatives.
(Guitouni and Martel,
1998). The WPM can be considered as modification of the WSM, and
has been proposed in order to overcome some of its weakness. The
results of their study recommend that for most of the cases of different
weights of the two evaluative criteria AHP appears to be the best
decision making method of all the methods examined;
•
A research by salomon and Montevechi (2001) compared AHP with
other MCDM methods such as TOPSIS and ELECTRE. They
suggested that the use of AHP would give good results or maybe the
optimum solution; and
•
Peniwati (1996) in her research for group decision- making compared
and contrasted AHP with other approaches such as the Delphi Method,
Matrix, Evaluation, Goal Programming and Outranking Method to
problem structuring, ordering and ranking. She concluded that AHP
was the most comprehensive compared to other techniques in structure
analysis, mathematical validity and in producing accurate results.
2.3.3 ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
In practice the decision making process in selection of candidates is based on
experience, skill and knowledge of selected individuals. Furthermore, it involves a
multi-criteria decision making problem, where there are numbers of significant
criteria need to be consider in the selection process. To perform the operation
successfully, the decision maker must first organize and prioritize the problem. Then,
it required an effective decision making technique to systematically evaluate the
37
selection process, which will help the individual to select the most appropriate
candidate for the position of project manager. The Analytical Hierarchy Process
(AHP) was chosen for this study to gives the decision maker the framework of logic
needed to model a complex decision scenario that can integrate perceptions,
judgments and experiences into hierarchy therefore allowing a better understanding of
the problem, its criteria and possible choice. In this section, the background and
theoretical aspects of the AHP will be presented to give clear perspective of this
powerful decision support tool.
2.3.3.1 Background of AHP
AHP is a decision aiding method based on MCDM approach developed by
Saaty in 1970’s and published in his 1980 book, The analytic Hierarchy Process
(Saaty, 1977; Saaty, 1980). Partovi (1994) described AHP as “a decision- aiding tool
for dealing with complex, unstructured and multi-attribute decision”. Golden et al.
(1989) described AHP as analytical by using numbers, hierarchical by structuring the
decision problem into levels and process- oriented because it’s step by step approach.
Fundamentally, the AHP works by developing priorities for alternatives and
the criteria used to judge the alternatives (Saaty, 1994). In more details, AHP uses a
multi-level hierarchy structure of goal, criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives. It also
takes into account judgments based on people’s feeling and emotions as well as their
thoughts (Saaty, 1944). A set of pair-wise comparison are then, used to obtain the
weights of importance of the decision criteria and the relative importance measures of
the alternatives in term of each individual decision criterion and towards the overall
goal of the problem to select the best alternative. In addition, it provides a mechanism
for improving consistency if the comparisons are not perfectly consistent. The
strength of AHP is its ability to structure a complex, multi-criteria problem
hierarchically and then to investigate each level separately, combining the results as
the analysis progress (Mahdi et al., 2002).
Since its introduction, a number of criticisms have been launched at AHP.
Belton and Gear (1983) observe that AHP could subject to rank reversal. Rank
reversal means that the rank of an alternative resulting from AHP may change when
38
another alternative is added to the initial group of alternative compared. Saaty (1987)
responded to this critique saying that with introduction of new alternative also new
information is included in the model. In this regard the decision problem has to be
rethought, and the resulting ranks of alternatives may change. However, the scholars
have identified solution to coupe with the problem in a methodological way. To
overcome this problem, Belton and Gear introduced revised-AHP, which proposed
each column of the AHP decision matrix to be divided by the maximum entry of that
column. Later, Saaty (1994a; 1994b) accepted the variants of the original AHP and it
is now called the Ideal Mode AHP. The latest software for AHP, ‘Expert Choice 2000
Professional’ includes an alternative “ ideal synthesizing mode” which allows that the
sum of alternative adds to more than one. In this respect it is not necessary to newly
calculated priorities of existing alternatives when introducing a new alternative.
Through this the rank reversal problem is excluded. Nevertheless, the original AHP or
the ideal mode is the most broadly accepted method and is considered by many as the
most reliable MCDM method (Triantaphylloy and Mann, 1995).
Since its introduction, AHP has been applied to many types of decision
problems. Application can be found in such diverse fields as portfolio selection,
transportation planning, manufacturing system design and artificial intelligence
(Saaty, 1994a). Some of the selection problem solve by AHP methodology include its
use in project procurement system selection model (Alhazmi and McCaffer,2000,
application of AHP in project management (Kamal, 2001), a multi-criteria approach
to contractor ( Mahdi et al., 2002), and also in other engineering problems (Saaty and
Vargas,2001). The majority of these applications have introduced analytical solutions
for problems involving both quantitative and qualitative criteria, which is similar to
the selection process that is one of the objectives of this research.
2.3.3.2 AHP Principles
There are four basic principles used in the AHP for problem solving, which
includes decomposition; prioritization procedure; synthesis of result; and measuring
inconsistency in decision maker’s judgments. These principles will be discussed in
detail in the following sections.
39
Decomposition
The first problem in AHP is to discompose a problem into a hierarchy. A
hierarchy is a tree-like structure that represents a complex problem on a number of
levels (Saaty, 1994a). The first level is the goal to be achieved, followed by criteria,
sub-criteria and so on down to the last level at which alternative are located. The
number of levels in any hierarchy depends on the amount of information requested by
the decision makers to evaluate the system and the complexity of the problem.
Saaty (1994a) point out the fact that the hierarchy structure is beneficial to a
decision - maker by providing an overall view of the complex relationships inherent
in the situation and in the judgment process. It also allows the decision-maker to
assess whether he or she is comparing issues of the same under of magnitude.
It is essential in constructing the hierarchy to include other people ideas and
debate until the problem is clearly defined and decision makers fully convinced for
the enrichment of the problem solving. If one decided to work based on one’s own
perspective the outcome will be limited to a number of alternatives that might not
reflect the problem characteristic or the decision maker needs.
Priotization Procedure
The second principle in the AHP is the establishment of priorities among the
elements at each level of hierarchy. The decision maker makes judgments, a pair-wise
comparison, the relative preferences, importance, or likelihood of each set of elements
with respect to elements at the immediately higher level in the hierarchy. First pairwise comparisons of the relative preference for the alternatives are made with respect
to each of the lowest level, (sub-criteria). Next pair-wise comparisons are made about
the importance of sub-criteria with respect to each criterion, and then for the relative
importance of the top-level criteria with respect to the goal. For each set of pair-wise
comparisons, mathematical calculations are performed which produce priorities and
include a measure of judgmental consistency (Saaty, 1994a)
40
A trustworthy decision support theory must be uniqueness in the
representation of judgments, the scale derived from this judgment and the scale
synthesized from these scale (Saaty, 1980). In the AHP pair-wise comparison a ninepoint scale is utilized in order to evaluate the preferences for each pair of items. AHP
suggest the nine-point scale because of the psychological limit of 7 ± 2 items in
simultaneous comparison are meaningful in practice and have an element of precision.
The qualitative judgments are also well presented by five attributes: equal weak,
strong, very strong and absolute.
For pair-wise comparison, a matrix is the preferred form. According to Saaty
(1994a) the matrix is a simple and well- established tool that offers a framework for
testing consistency, getting the necessary comparative data and providing sensitivity
analysis of the overall priorities when judgments are changed. Generally, if there are
various elements (say n elements) that need to be compared for a given matrix, a total
of n (n-1)/ 2 judgment are required. The pair-wise comparison matrix may be better
illustrated with the following examples.
Suppose we wish to compare a set of n objects in pairs according to their
relative weights. The objects are donated by A1, A2, …., An which can be represented
by forming n matrix A that has element aij . If the relative weights of the elements of
matrix A are represented as aij = w i / w j .
The pair-wise comparison should be conducted for each level in the hierarchy
with respect to the level above. The process can be done from the top of the hierarchy
to downward in which the decision makers have to evaluate the importance of the
criteria and their preference for the available alternatives. Otherwise, the pair-wise
comparison can proceed from the bottom upward by evaluating the preference of the
alternatives with respect to each criterion before evaluating the importance of the
criteria.
41
Synthesis of Results
Synthesis is the process of weighting and combining priorities through the
constructed hierarchy that lead to the overall results. Synthesis must be performed for
all matrices developed in the pair-wise comparison stage to obtain the overall relative
weights with respect to the main elements. The calculation process summarized by the
following steps:
1. To get the normalized matrix, the value of each column should be added and
then each entry in each column should be divided by the total of the column.
These steps give a meaningful comparison between the elements in the
hierarchy.
2.
To get the priority vector of all matrix elements with respects to the main
elements, the row should be average, the value of each row of the normalized
matrix should be added and dividing the rows by the number of entries in
each.
3. The relative’s weight of various levels of the model should be aggregated to
get a vector of composite weights, which serves as ratings of decision
alternatives in achieving the most general objective of the problem. The
repetitions of this aggregation produce the relative weights of elements at the
lowest level of hierarchy with respect to most general objectives at the first
level. According to Zahedi (1986) the composite relative weight vector of
elements at Ki th level with respect to that of the first level may be calculated
from:
C (I, K) = П Bi
C (I, K)
= The vector of composite weights of elements at level Kit h with
respect
to the element on level 1;
Bi
= The ni-1 by ni matrix with row consisting of estimated eigenvectors;
ni
= The number of element at level i.
42
Measuring Inconsistency in decision Maker’s Judgments
AHP provides a measure to test out the degree of inconsistency called
Consistency Index (CI) in the decision maker’s judgments. It helps decision makers to
identify possible errors in expressing judgments as well as the actual inconsistencies
in the judgment process. According to Saaty (1983) the CI can be calculated for each
matrix as follows:
The Consistency Index, CI:
CI = (λ max - n) / (n-1)
n
= Matrix Size
λ max
= Eigenvalue Max
The difference (λ
perfect consistency (λ
max
max
- n) can be employed to measure inconsistency. For
-n) will be zero. But usually (λ
max
≥ n), where n is
dimension of the pair-wise comparison matrix. The closer the CI to zero the better the
overall consistency matrix of the judgmental comparison of the elements involved.
To obtain λ
max,
first we have to calculate the weighted sum matrices by multiplying
each weight in the pair-wise comparison matrices with each of the priority vectors.
Then λ
max,
could be obtained by dividing all the elements of the weighted sum
matrices by their respective priority vector elements, and then compute the average of
these values. The consistency can be verified by taking the Consistency Ratio (CR)
also term Inconsistency ratio (IR). The IR is a measure of inconsistency in judgment,
where:
Consistency Ratio, (CR) or Inconsistency Ratio, (IR) = CI/RI
The Random Index (RI) is a simulation of a large number of randomly
generated pair-wise comparisons for different sizes of matrices carried out by Saaty,
with regard to calculation of the average consistency indices (CI). The significance
43
value of RI is that the ratio of the CI for a particular set of judgments to the RI of the
same size of matrix. The values of such standard RI are given in Table 2.1 (Saaty,
1980 ; Saaty, 1990; Saaty, 1994 a).
Table 2.1: Random Index RI
of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Random
0
0
0.58
0.9
1.12
1.24
1.32
1.41
1.45
1.49
1.51
1.54
1.56
1.57
1.58
Size
matrix
Index
Dyer (1990) report that in AHP, decision makers should not expect perfect
consistency but a percentage of inconsistency that is considered acceptable or
tolerable in the expression of personal preferences. The Inconsistency Ratio (IR)
between 0 and 0.10 or within 10 percents of what would be the outcome from random
judgments is acceptable (Saaty, 1980; 0994 a; Saaty and Vargas, 2001). A higher IR
(i.e. greater than 0.10) at any level or in the final synthesis revealed that the judgment
are not consistent. Although it does not invalidate the entire model, but it does suggest
the judgment should be reinvestigated and try to find out the possible cause of
inconsistency. If the modification of judgments fails to lead to an improvement of IR,
then it is likely that the problem needs to be restructured by grouping the elements
that are interrelated and have common characteristic (Saaty, 1983).
2.3.4 DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM (DSS)
Decision Support System (DSS) are computer-based systems that provide
interactive support to managers during the decision-making process. The advances in
computer processing and database technology have extended the definition of a DSS
to include software products that help users analytical and scientific methods
decision-making (Turban and Aronson, 1998). DSS operate by using models and
algorithms from disciplines such as decision analysis, mathematical programming and
optimization, stochastic modeling, simulation and logic modeling. DSS can execute,
interpret, visualize and interactively analyze these models over multiple scenarios. It
also allows the decision-maker to retrieve data and test alternative solutions during the
process pf problem solving. When well implemented and used wisely, DSS can
44
significantly improve the quality of the decision- making. DSS provide a structured
framework to model the decision making process by incorporating the expert
knowledge captured in the intelligence phase that mimics human intelligence. The
next sections describe DSS concepts and justify the tool adopted for the research.
2.3.4.1 DSS Concepts
The concept of DSS is based on assumption about the role of computers in
supporting decision-making:
•
DSS requires human intervention that cannot be solved by the computer alone.
It must support the decision maker but not replace his/her judgment. It should
therefore neither provide answers nor impose a predefined sequence of
analysis.
•
The main advantage of DSS is for semi-structured and unstructured problems,
where the analysis can be systemized for the computer but the decisionmaker’s judgments are needed to control the process.
•
Effective problem solving is interactive and is enhanced by dialogue between
the user and system.
2.3.4.2 DSS Adopted for the Research
Several DSS products have emerged in the past few years and commercially
available. These products let a developer build a DSS application simply by
specifying the necessary models and data. They offer a visual and/or textual language
for building model schemes, features for model solution and analysis and commands
and representations for visualizing model results. They minimize development effort
by offering a generic graphical user interface, generic data management features and
generalized solution algorithms and analysis tools. Using these products, someone
who knows the relevant modeling paradigm and the problem domain can develop a
45
DSS application in a few hours or days a significantly shorter time than previously
possible.
The DSS commercial products listed in Table are based on one or more decision
analysis methods and have their own strengths and limitations. Since the research
used the AHP model to solve the MCDM problem in selecting the most appropriate
project manager, therefore the most suitable DSS based on the same methodology as
AHP is the Expert Choice (EC) software package.
In 1983, Dr. Saaty who introduced AHP joined Dr. Eanest Forman, a professor
of management science at George Washington University, to co-found EC. EC is
intended to make structuring the hierarchy and synthesizing judgments quick and
simple, eliminating tedious calculation ( Forman and Shvartsman, 2000). Some of the
features of this software are:
•
It offers user-friendly displays that make decision model building
straightforward and simple.
•
It offers a model view containing either a tree view or cluster view of the
decision hierarchy.
•
It does not require numerical judgment from the decision-maker; rather, pairwise comparisons may be performed numerically, verbally, or graphically.
This is because software converts subjective judgments into the one-to-nine
scale prescribed by AHP theory and then into meaningful priority vectors;
•
It works by examining judgments made by decision-makers, and measures the
consistency of those judgments;
•
It allows for re-examination and revision of judgments for all levels of the
hierarchy, and shows where inconsistencies exist and how to minimize them in
order to improve the decision; and
•
It provides a mathematically rigorous application and proven process for
prioritization and decision- making. By reducing complex decisions to a series
of pair-wise comparison, then synthesizing the results, EC not only helps
decision-makers arrive at the best decision, but also provides a clear rationale
for the decision.
46
2.4
SUMMARY
The nature of the decision making process involves multi-criteria decision
making (MCDM). Therefore the characteristic of MCDM were reviewed to give a
basic understanding on the subject matter before a suitable method for solving the
problem could be selected. From the review, Analytical Hierarchy Process was
selected apart from other MCDM methods because of its ability to overcome the
entire problem characteristic in term of the type of data, the approaches and expected
outcome of the decision process. The research will also use Expert Choice (EC)
software that based on AHP methodology as a Decision Support System (DSS) tools
to assist in structuring the hierarchy and synthesizing judgments and make it quick
and simple by eliminating tedious calculations. The next chapter discusses the
Knowledge Acquisition (KA) process, which involved capturing the expert
knowledge in order to develop a position’s selection system based on AHP
methodology.
47
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
INTODUCTION
This chapter described the methodology adopted in order to realize the aim
and objective of the research. The research methodology adopted several approaches
and is presented through four main sections: literature review; knowledge acquisition;
prototype development; and evaluation of the prototype system.
3.2
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The Oxford Compact English Dictionary defines research as “the systematic
investigation into and study of materials and sources, in order to establish facts and
reach new conclusions” (OCED, 1996). According to Greenfield (2001), research can
also be defined as “an art aided by skills of inquiry, experimental design, data
collection, measurement and analysis, by interpretation and by presentation”.
Research methodology is a process, a set of tools for doing research and obtaining
information, or even a art for doing the work of science (Adam and Schvaneveldt,
1985). According to Mingers (2001) research methodology can be define as
“structured set of guidelines or activities to assist in generating valid and reliable
research results”. The choice of research method influences the way in which the
researcher collects data.
48
3.3
METHODOLOGY ADOPTED FOR THE RESEARCH
The aim of the research is to develop a systematic approach, which act as a
decision- making aid for the selection of project manager. In order to develop the
systematic approach this research adopted both quantitative and qualitative research
depends on the objective need to be achieved. The following section described each of
the methods adopted in detailed. The research methodology is as follow:
Literature Review
Responsibilities and Challenges of a Project Manager
Selection Process of Project manager
Overview of Decision Making Process
Questionnaire Survey
Knowledge Acquisition for Model Development
Interview
Knowledge Acquisition for Model Development
Protocol Analysis
Knowledge Acquisition for Model Development
Evaluation
Evaluation of the Prototype System
Figure 3.1: Research Methodology
49
3.3.1
Literature Review
A crucial element of all research is the review of relevant literature (Cooper,
1984). Literature reviews are used to inform researchers of the background to research
project and to provide context and ideas for the studies. According to Greenfield
(2001), there are good reasons for spending time and effort on a review of the
literature before embarking on a research project. These reasons include:
•
To identify the gaps in the literature;
•
To avoid reinventing the wheel (at the very least this will save time and it can
stop the research from making the same mistakes as others)
•
To carry on from where others have already reached (reviewing the field
allows the research to build on the platform of existing knowledge and ideas);
•
To identify other people working in the same fields;
•
To identify information and ideas that may be relevant to the research; and
•
To identify methods that could be relevant to the research.
Several steps were taken to carry out the reviews of the literatures, which
include: defining the topic; identifying source of information; keeping records; and
reading and note taking.
3.3.2
Defining the Topic
This research selected three main topics to be reviewed based on the objective
of the research, which include:
•
The responsibilities, characteristic, problem and challenges faced by a
construction project manager
•
The selection process of project manager
•
Decision making process
Literature reviewed on those three topics provided a theoretical background
for the research. Other topic that related to the research such as research methodology
was also reviewed.
50
3.3.3
Identifying Sources of Information
Having identified the literature to be reviewed, ways have to be found of
obtaining copies of it all. In this research, most of the books and journal articles have
been obtained, through libraries. The task of searching the published literature is made
easier through the existence of computer databases, computerize catalogues and
searches on the internet.
Because a review is concerned with ‘the literature’, it is easy to assume that
the only interest is in written information. However, people can be very important
sources in a number of ways. One of the most effective ways to get the literature of an
unfamiliar field is to ask for key readings from an acknowledged expert. Such a
person should be able to provide guidance to the ‘specialized’ material, the latest
findings, journals that publish particularly the relevant material, and perhaps to
unpublished material and other useful contacts.
3.3.4
Keeping Records
An important adjunct to the whole process of identifying and locating the
material for a review is the necessity for keeping full and accurate bibliographic
details, including information on the location of materials to help in finding again
quickly if necessary. Index cards are the classic format for storing bibliographic
records (Greenfiled, 2001). However, there is an increasing variety of computer-based
record systems now available, ranging from simple databases which mimic the index
card system in electronic form, to more powerful applications incorporating the ability
to cross-reference, and to attach fields for notes to the bibliographic details.
3.3.5 Reading and Note Taking
All the written materials have been read fully and reflectively, on the lookout
for patterns, argument, new ideas, methodology, and areas of further enquiry. The
information gathered was systematically transferred into notes by classifying it under
various heading. In reviews covering a large amount of quantitative information,
51
clearly presented tables of the data was noted, where as reviews of qualitative material
were noted in text.
3.3.6
Knowledge Acquisition
Turban and Aronson (1998) defined Knowledge Acquisition (KA) as “the
process of extracting, structuring and organizing knowledge from one or more
sources”. It is also referred as the process of getting and transforming appropriate
information from sources of expertise into some manageable form (McGraw and
Harbison-Briggs, 1989). In the process of KA, the researcher carried out the activities
of extracting the knowledge from an expert, checking it with the expert, and then
representing the knowledge in the knowledge base. This activity is known as the
“election of knowledge” (Turban and Aronson, 1998). The aim of knowledge
acquisition is to develop methods and tools that make the tough task of capturing and
validating an expert’s knowledge as efficient and effective as possible. Experts tend to
be important and busy people, hence, it is vital that the methods used minimize the
time each expert spends off the job taking part in knowledge acquisition sessions.
In this research, the KA process involved capturing and transforming
appropriate knowledge from expert in Construction Company into some manageable
form in order to develop a decision support system in selecting the project manager.
The knowledge that needs to be captured from the experts is the criteria that effect the
selection of project manager.
3.3.7
Questionnaire Survey
This research used questionnaire survey as the method for capturing the expert
knowledge to established and develop an analytical hierarchy on selection process. A
questionnaire can be defined as “a list or grouping of written questions which a
respondent answers” (Adams and Schvaneveldt, 1985). It also known as a “manual
expert driven system” or “Expert’s Self-report” (Turban and Aronson, 1998). The
questionnaire survey is a self-reported data collection method. It can be collected
using mail survey through postal services or Internet Survey through web and email.
52
3.3.8
Interviews
Interviews represent an effective method for collecting in –depth information
about a topic or issue through direct verbal interaction between the interviewer and
the respondent. It is the most popular type of knowledge acquisition method and
requires the researcher and expert to talk to each other about the actual problem that
the expert system should solve. It involves collecting information via instruments
such as tape recorders, video camera, questionnaire etc. It is also important that the
researcher has good communication skills and the expert should be able to express his
knowledge to the researcher (McGraw and Harbison-Briggs, 1989). The interviewer
can explain and clarify questions, and probe by asking additional questions, to
enhance the likelihood of obtaining useful responses from the respondent. Interviews
are particularly useful for getting information behind a respondent’s experiences. It
may also be useful as follow-up to certain respondents to questionnaire, e.g., to
further investigate their responses.
Interviews can be conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Like face-to-face
interviews, they allow for some personnel contact between the interviewer and the
respondent. Telephone interviews are typically used before a face-to-face interview
often as a way of undertaking initial screening of respondents.
3.3.9
Protocol Analysis
Tracking methods were used to track the reasoning process of an expert. It
allows the researcher to see what information the expert is using and how he/she is
using it. Tracking method can be a formal one or an informal one, the main formal
approach is Protocol Analysis and an informal approach is Observations (Turban and
Aronson, 1998).
Protocol Analysis is similar to interviewing but more formal and logical. The
expert is asked t carry out a task but he/she has to think out aloud while working
through the problem/task. The different between this and interview is that there is
mainly a one- way communication in protocol analysis as the researcher gives a
scenario and plans the process. In addition, the difference of protocol analysis over
53
interviews is that in interviews the expert tells a researcher, what he thinks should be
done in practice rather than how it is done in practice. The expert will then talk about
what he/she is doing to solve the problem, while the researcher is listening and
recording what is being said, thus enabling the researcher to obtain the accurate result.
Observation approach is another way of generating protocols. Simply
observing and making notes as the expert performs their daily activities can be useful,
although a time- consuming process. Videotaping their task performance can be
useful. On the whole, though, observation approach was rarely used, as they are an
inefficient means of capturing the required knowledge.
3.3.10 Prototype Development
An important element of the methodology used in the research was the
development of prototype system. The prototype system development uses a
methodology known as rapid prototyping. In rapid prototyping interactive prototype
are developed which can be quickly replaced or changed in line with design feedback
(Smith, 1996). This feedback may be derived from the experts or users as they work
with the prototype. The process starts with the design of the prototype system, which
includes designing the system architecture, and identifying the implementation and
operational framework. Then the knowledge was acquire through the knowledge
acquisition process and represented in the prototype. Next, several tests have been
carried out using historical and hypothetical cases for self-evaluation of the prototype
system. Afterwards, the expert was asked to judge the results and evaluate the
prototype where the knowledge representation methods and the software and
hardware effectiveness were checked. The results or findings from the evaluation
were analyzed, and if the improvement is needed the prototype is redesigned. The
prototype went through several iterations with appropriate refinements. The process
continues until the prototype is ready for a formal demonstration. Once the prototype
was demonstrated, it is evaluated again and improved. This process continues until the
final (complete) prototype is ready.
54
3.3.11 Evaluation
According to Preece et al. (1994), evaluation is concerned with gathering data
about the usability of a design or product by a specific group of users for a particular
activity within a specified environment or work context. With respect to human
computer interaction, evaluation can be distinguished into ‘formative’ and
‘summative’ depending upon the stage at which it occurs. Some authors emphasize
that formative evaluation takes place during development and summative evaluation
after development. The definition of these terms includes:
“Formative evaluation is typically conducted during the development
or improvement of a program or product (or person, and so on) and it
is conducted, often more than once, for the in-house staff of the
program with the intent to improve. Summative evaluation of a
program is conducted after completion of the program and for the
benefit of some external audience or decision maker.”
(Sciven, 1991)
“Formative evaluation is evaluation of the interaction design as it is
being developed, early and continually throughout the interface
development process. This is in comparison to summative evaluation,
which is evaluation of the interaction design after it is complete, or
nearly so.”
(Hix and Hartson, 1993)
The prototype system developed was evaluated into two stages. The first stage
involved the evaluation of the prototype system during the development process,
which also known as ‘formative evaluation’. Several management experts participated
in the evaluation process to validate and verify the prototype. The prototype went
through several iterations with appropriate refinements to improve it. The second
stage involve the evaluation of the prototype system after the development process,
which also known as ‘summative evaluation’. Several expert and researchers were
invited to give their views on the final prototype. The comments and
recommendations are noted and some modification made to improve it.
55
CHAPTER 4
KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION FOR MODEL DEVELOPMENT
4.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the result from the knowledge acquisition process
described in Chapter 2. This chapter is divided into three main sections: questionnaire
survey; interviews; and protocol analysis. All the section describes the method
adopted present the results and finally discuss the findings.
4.2
QUSETIONNAIRE SURVEY
The aim of the survey was to obtain preliminary broad knowledge from the
selection process. Four specific objectives have been identified, which include:
•
To identify respondent’s background
•
To identify respondent’s organization
•
To identify selection process
•
To identify criteria in selection process
56
4.2.1
Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire was design in four parts: the introduction (cover letter),
company background information (Section A), respondent’s organization background
(Section B & C) and selection process (Section D). Appendix A shows a copy of the
questionnaire. The majority of the questions were designed as closed type with
sufficient space provided for the respondents to give additional information. Limited
numbers of open-ended questions were also included in the questionnaire to capture
certain knowledge that needs further explanations or views.
4.2.2
Survey Sample
The company manager and in the some cases the human resources manager of
contractor companies are the persons responsible in making decision to select the
project manager of the company. Therefore, the survey population was confined to
these targeted respondents in Johor Bahru. The contact details listed in Construction
Industry Directory (CIDB Malaysia 2004-2005) (100 contact details contractor class
A) were used as the sampling frame for this survey. As mention in Chapter 2, several
techniques can be used to determine the survey sample. The survey sample method
used in this research was based on Convenience sampling method, where the
respondents who are willing and available are selected. All the targeted respondents
were contacted by telephone to make sure of their willingness and confirmation of
address before the questionnaire was sent by post. Finally, 100 respondents were
agreed to participate in this research.
4.2.3
Results
The following sections present the results of the postal questionnaire survey.
Responses
58 questionnaires were returned, out of 100 questionnaires delivered (See
Table 4.1). Of these 55 were usable, representing a response rate of 55%, which
consider as good considering of 20%-30% response rate in postal questionnaire
57
surveys in the construction industry (Akintoye et al., 2000). Three of the
questionnaires returned were unusable because the respondents did not complete it.
Table 4.1: Responses from the Questionnaire Survey
Number of questionnaire sent
100
Number of replies received
58
Number of useable replies
55
Percentage of total replies
58%
Percentage of useable replies
55%
Background Information
The survey indicated that there are four groups of respondents based on their
position in the contractor’s company. The biggest group was the ‘engineer’ category,
which represents 45%, followed by ‘Architect’ with 30%, ‘Quantity surveyor’ with
15% and ‘Others’ 10 % which represents general manager, project manager and
director. Refer to Figure 4.1.
Quantity
Surveyor
15%
Others
10%
Engineer
45%
Architect
30%
Engineer
Architect
Quantity Surveyor
Figure 4.1: Group of Respondents
Others
58
The respondents who had between 1-3 years of pre-qualification selection
experience were the largest group constituting 48% of the total respondents. 30% of
the respondents had between 3-5 years of experience, while 12% had between 5-10
years of experience in selection process. The lowest group of respondents, which had
less than one year experience, made up 10 %. Refer to Figure 4.2.
5-10 Years
12%
< 1Years
10%
1-3 Years
48%
3-5 Years
30%
1-3 Years
3-5 Years
5-10 Years
< 1 Years
Figure 4.2: Respondent’s Pre-qualification Selection Experience
There are four main category of work involve by respondents. The biggest
group was ‘civil engineering’, which represent 46% of work profession, followed by
‘building’ with 30 %, ‘maintenance’ with 20% and finally is ‘testing’ with 4 %. Refer
to Figure 4.3.
M aintenance
20%
Testing
4%
Civil
Engineering
47%
B uilding
29%
Civil Engineering
Maintenance
Building
Testing
Figure 4.3: Category of work involve by respondents
59
For the types of project that respondent’s company engaged recently, A large
number of company involve in ‘civil engineering’ works which consist of 65 %,
followed by ‘building construction’ with 20% and ‘building services’ 15%. Refer to
Figure 4.4.
B uilding
Co nstructio n
21%
B uilding
Service
12%
Civil
Engineering
67%
Civil Engineering
Building Service
Building Construction
Figure 4.4: Types of Project Engaged by respondent’s company
Selection Process
Method to determine decision criteria and rules
From the survey, there are four ways to determine the decision criteria and
rules apply for project manager selection process. They are large number of company
choosing ‘according to experience’ which consist of 54 %, followed by ‘standard
internal guideline from local office’ with 20%. 15% of companies determine the
decision criteria ‘according to management officers’. The lowest groups of companies
choosing ‘corporate quality system’ made up 11%. Refer to Figure 4.5.
60
Co rpo rate
quality system
M anagement 11%
o fficers
15%
Standard
Guideline
20%
Experience
Management officers
Experience
54%
Standard Guideline
Corporate quality system
Figure 4.5: Method to determine decision criteria and rules
Information submitted by candidates in pre-qualification selection
From the survey, the most wanted information from a candidate is ‘academic
achievement’ with 25 %, followed by ‘job experience’ with 22%, ‘personal
information’ with 20 %, ‘professional skills’ with 18% and finally ‘health history’
with 15%. Refer to Figure 4.6.
Health Histo ry
15%
Personal
Skills
18%
Personal
Information
20%
Academic Achievement
Personal Information
Health History
Academic
Achievement
25%
Job
Experience
22%
Job Experience
Personal Skills
Figure 4.6: Information submitted by candidates in pre-qualification selection
61
People responsible for evaluation of candidate’s qualification
From the survey, there are four types of professional that involve in the
evaluation of candidate’s qualification. The biggest group of peoples that involve in
the evaluation of candidate’s qualification is ‘company manager’ that consist of 52 %,
followed by ‘human resources department’ with 25%, ‘director’ 15 % and the
smallest group of people is ‘senior officer’ with 8%. Refer to Figure 4.7.
Directo rs
15%
Senio r
Officers
8%
Human
Reso urces
Department
25%
Co mpany
M anager
52%
Company Manager
Human Resources Department
Directors
Senior Officers
Figure 4.7: Peoples responsible for candidate’s qualification evaluation
Decision criteria evaluation Techniques
There seven types of decision criteria evaluation techniques. From the
questionnaire survey, we found that most of the decision criteria are evaluated ‘based
on experience’ which consist of 42%, followed by ‘professional judgment’ with 20%,
‘rating with no weight’ with 12%, ‘rating with designed weighting’ with 10%, ‘matrix
judgment’ with 8%, ‘decision support system’ with 5%, and 3% are using ‘statistic
analysis’. Refer to Figure 4.8.
62
M atrix
Judgment
8%
Designed
Weighting
10%
Decisio n Statistic
Suppo rt A nalysis
System
3%
5%
No Weight
Rating
12%
B ase On
Experince
42%
P ro fessio nal
Judgment
20%
Base On Experince
No Weight Rating
Matrix Judgment
Statistic Analysis
Professional Judgment
Designed Weighting
Decision Support System
Figure 4.8: Decision Criteria Evaluation Techniques
Decision Support System (DSS)
From the survey, we found that most of the respondent doesn’t hear about the
application of Decision Support System (DSS) in the evaluation process to select a
project manager in his company or organization. This consists of 75% of overall
respondents. Only 25% respondent had heard about Decision Support System (DSS).
Refer to Figure 4.9.
Yes
25%
No
75%
No
Yes
Figure 4.9: Decision Support System (DSS)
63
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
From the survey, we found that there are 80% of respondents never heard
about the application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in selection process. 20%
of them had heard about the Analytic Hierarchy process (AHP) in selection process in
their organizations. Refer to Figure 4.10.
Yes
20%
No
80%
No
Yes
Figure 4.10: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Application of methodology Decision Support System (DSS) for selection process
In application of methodology Decision Support System (DSS) for selection
and evaluation process, most of the respondent choose the answer ‘No’ which consist
of 65% of overall respondent. Only small number of respondents with 35% which
apply the methodology decision support system (DSS) in selection process. Refer to
Figure 4.11.
64
Yes
35%
No
65%
No
Yes
Figure 4.11: Application of methodology Decision Support System (DSS) for
selection process
Type of methodology decision support tools applied
There are eight types of methodology decision support tools applied for
selection & evaluation process. From the 35% of respondent which apply the
methodology in selection process, 30% of respondents choose the ‘multi criteria
judgment’, followed by ‘fuzzy set process’ with 20%, ‘bespoke approach’ with 15%,
‘cluster analysis’ with 12%, ‘multi attribute analysis’ with 10%, ‘multi regression’
with 8%, ‘analytic hierarchy process’ with 3% and finally is ‘ discriminate analysis’
with 2%. Refer to Figure 4.12.
M ulti
Regressio n
M ulti A ttribute
8%
A nalysis
10%
Cluster
A nalysis
12%
A HP
3%
B espo ke
A ppro ach
15%
Multi-Criteria Judgment
Bespoke Approach
Multi Attribute Analysis
AHP
Discriminate
A nalysis
2%
M ulti-Criteria
Judgment
30%
Fuzzy Set
P ro cess
20%
Fuzzy Set Process
Cluster Analysis
Multi Regression
Discriminate Analysis
Figure 4.12: Types of methodology decision support tools applied
65
Important of Decision Support System (DSS) for evaluation and selection process
For the important of Decision Support System (DSS) for evaluation and
selection process, most of the respondent has choose the answer ‘No’ which consist of
70% of overall respondents. Only 15% of them choose the answer ‘Yes’. 10% state
the answer ‘never apply’ and 5 % choose the ‘not necessary’. Refer to Figure 4.13.
No t
Necessary
16%
No
39%
Never A pply
19%
Yes
26%
No
Yes
Never Apply
Not Necessary
Figure 4.13: Important of Decision Support System (DSS)
Ranking of Selection Criteria
A total of 55 respondents answer these questions. There are three main
categories of criteria for the selection of project manager listed in the question 20,
Part D in questionnaire survey, which consists all together 20 sub-criteria. The three
main criteria were ‘basic requirement’, ‘management skills’, and ‘interpersonal
skills’. Under ‘basic requirement’, there are four sub-criteria consist of ‘job
experience’, ‘academic achievements’, ‘effective written and verbal communication
skills’ and ‘proficiency with Microsoft Project and others planning software’. For the
main criteria ‘management skills’, it divided into two major sub-criteria which consist
of ‘project management’ and ‘others’. Under sub-criteria ‘project management’, they
are five sub-criteria which consist of ‘planning’, ‘organizing’, ‘staffing/ directing’,
‘controlling’, ‘monitoring’ and ‘training’. Furthermore, under the sub-criteria ‘others’
there are six sub-criteria which consist of ‘conducting meeting’, ‘documentation and
record keeping’, ‘time management’, ‘resources & property management’ and ‘rules
66
and regulations’. Besides, under the main criteria of interpersonal skills, there are five
criteria such as ‘problem solving’, ‘decision making’, ‘multi-task ability’,
‘correspondences’ and ‘customer service’.
The following steps were used to rank the criteria for selection of project
managers. First the raw score for each criterion was multiplied by the ranking number
(1 to 20) to get the assigned score. Then the total assigned score for each criterion can
be calculated bay adding each of the assigned score at the same row. The lowest total
assigned score is the most important criterion and ranked as 1. For example, ‘job
experience’ had a total assigned score of 86 and the calculation can be expressed as
follows:
Assigned Score (ASij) = Raw Score Each Criterion (Cij) × Ranking Number (Rj)
Total Assigned Score ∑ n (ASij) = ∑-n Cij Rj, where n = 20
Total (AS) Job Experience =
(35×1) + (12×2) + (5×3) + (3 ×4) + ( 0×5) + (0×6) + (0×7) + (0×8) + (0×9) + (0×10)
+ (0×11) + (0×12) + (0×13) + (0×14) + (0×15) + (0×16) +(0×17) + (0×18) + (0×19) +
(0×20) = 86
Note: The same procedure was used to calculate the other 19 criteria.
Selection Procedure
Table outlines the procedures used in selecting a project manager. It shows a
process that consists of eight steps of procedures in selection.
67
Table 4.2: Procedure in Selection Process
Procedure in Selection
1. Preliminary Selection
2. Employment tests
3. Selection interviews
4. Verification of references
5. Medical evaluation
6. Supervisory interview
7. Realistic job preview
8. Hiring Decision
4.2.4
Discussion
The convenience sampling method adopted for the survey proved to be
appropriate when a high response rate was achieved. The responses from the survey
also showed that the majority of the respondents are very knowledgeable and have the
expertise to answer the questions effectively by referring to their experience in
employee selection process.
The respondent identified that the most important criteria that affect the
selection of project manager was job experience follow by others 18 criteria. This
finding are used as a basis for restructuring in-depth interviews with the human
resources specialist and expert, since it is difficult to ask the respondents to justify
their choice in the questionnaire survey.
The rest of the findings were designed to elicit knowledge from the
respondents about the selection process. Several key points that can be highlighted
are:
•
Most of the respondent (nearly 75 %) doesn’t hear about the application AHP
and Decision Support System methodology in selection process.
68
•
Nearly half of the respondents (42%) depend on previous experience in
selection process.
•
Job experience and academic achievement is the most importance criterion in
selection process.
•
Most of the respondents (40 %) ignore the importance application of Decision
Support System (DSS) in evaluation and selection process.
The industry survey through postal questionnaire gathered a considerable
amount of information for the research project and at the same time raised several
issues to be investigated in more detail. However there are limitations to this approach
such as the limited number of questions that can be asked and it would harder to
describe or justifies certain information. The in-depth interviews, there fore, are
needed to investigate these raised issues and overcome the limitations in the
questionnaire survey.
4.3
INTERVIEW
Several interviews with human resources specialist were carried out after the
entire postal questionnaire survey returned and analyzed. The objectives of the
interview were to define and justify the relevance of the identified criteria that
resulted from the questionnaire survey.
To achieve these objectives, semi-structured interview was selected. It was
decided to use a semi- structured interview to encourage in depth discussions and
greater interaction and at the same time maintained a level of comparability between
interviewees. A semi-structured interview template (see Appendix B) was prepared
prior to interview. In addition, a card sorting technique was used during the interviews
to group the criteria in order to develop a hierarchy that represent the decision process
in selecting the project manager. A detail methodology on how to conduct the
interviews was discussed in Chapter 2.
The human resources specialist and expert were carefully selected so that they
could provide the researcher with the required knowledgeable and cooperation. Three
69
experts are selected from five aimed company. Each interview lasted approximately
one hour.
4.3.1 Results
The following is the summary of the knowledge capture during the interviews.
Justification of the Identified Criteria
Following section summarized the justification of each criteria based on
interviewees’ responses. All the interviewees agree that ‘Job experience’ should be
considered as the primary criteria in selecting a project manager. They also point out
that past job experiences of a candidate play a biggest part in decision making
process.
Definition and Grouping the Criteria
The interviewees agreed that the selection criteria are divided into 3 main
categories, which include basic requirement, management skills and interpersonal
skills. There are several sub-criteria under each main criterion. By using the card
sorting method, the group was established and show in figure. The interviewees also
define the smaller sub-criteria that have been group under the main techniques.
4.3.2
Discussion
The criteria justified by the interviewees discussed in the following sections:
A)
Main Criterion
i)
Job Experience
Candidate’s job experience is a key criterion, which must take into significant
consideration when selecting a project manager. Job experience reviews the candidate
jobs background and this may helps candidates to perform well in his works. Job
70
background may made candidates familiar with working environment and the skills
and method needed to improve their performance. This may provide greater credits
for a candidate to be success in the selection. In common practice, companies prefer a
job experienced candidates rather than a fresh graduated candidates because they not
need to pay for the training fee to train up the candidates.
ii)
Academic achievement
Academic achievement always provides a platform for measurement in
candidates’ selection process. It can give an overview of candidate’s talents and
performance. It also reviews the personal characteristic to know what kind of person
is the applicant. A good student always comes out with excellent and flying colors
result. This review some internal or personal characteristic such as hardworking,
responsible, systematic, and intelligent/ knowledge that important for a company to
reach the goals. So, it is a basic criterion to consider getting a quality and qualified
candidates.
iii)
Written and verbal communication Skills
A project manager should equip with effective written and verbal
communication skills. This is an important criterion for a candidate in selecting
process. Communication is the sharing of information between two or more
individuals or groups to reach a common understanding. In order for an organization/
firm to gain a competitive advantage, managers must strive to increase efficiency,
quality, responsiveness to customers/ client, and innovation. Good communication is
essential for reaching each of these four goals and thus is a necessity for gaining a
competitive advantage. Good communication is necessary for a manager to learn
about new technologies, implement them in their project and train workers in how to
use them. Manager need to communicate with all members of an organization the
meaning and importance of high quality and the routes to attaining it. Good
communication can also help to increase responsiveness to client/ customers. When a
two ways communication occurs between both party, managers are batter able to
respond to this needs. Project manager, in turn, must communicate with other subcontractors to determine how best to respond to the client preferences.
71
iv)
Proficiency with Microsoft Project and others planning software
This is an important skill and criterion for a project manager. Due to the
increasing complexity and demand for better performance in managing a project has
forced the players in the construction industry to equip themselves with effective
tools. The trend of using Critical Path Methods (CPM) and Precedence Diagramming
Method (PDM) has taken over the conventional method of using Bar Chart. Network
scheduling has been used by the economist in 1944 but the application of the network
model to the construction project begun in 1957 where US Navy developed a method
known as PERT. CPM was developed in the early 40’ies while PDM was recognized
as one of the planning tool in the 80’ies. The review has indicated that the application
of network planning in the construction industry has started four decades ago. There
are much advantages of using network model such as showing critical activities,
effective resources planning, cost optimization, determination of delays and quick rescheduling if using software. There are many types scheduling software in market
such as Primavera P3, Microsoft Project, Artimes, Pro-Plan, Sure Track Project
Managers and Milestone. However, Microsoft Project is one of the most popular
planning software due to the ease in using the program. It is one of the cheapest
available planning software in the market and designed to interface with other
Microsoft programs. MS project allowing user to monitor activities using tracking
Gantt and reports are available in limited format. Software application to plan and
monitor activities on site is more efficient. To change and adding activities in the
model is much simpler and faster instead of calculating manually which can be
tedious. Monitoring and controlling resources will be much effective. The ability to
identify critical activities can assist the managers to make important decisions. So,
candidates who apply for project manager post need to be familiar with this
scheduling software.
B)
Management skills
i)
Project Management
Project management skills are an important criterion for selecting a project
manager. In an organization, people working together and coordinating their actions
72
to achieve specific goals. Project managers are someone who responsible for
supervising the use of an organization’s resources such as human powers/ peoples,
machinery, raw materials, information, skills, financial support and equipments to
meet its goals. Goal is a desire future condition that the organization seeks to achieve.
Management is the process of using organization’s resources to achieve the
organization’s goals by planning, organizing, leading, staffing, directing, controlling,
monitoring and training.
a)
Planning
This criterion is important and need adequate consideration before selecting a
project manager. For candidates who apply for the project manager post, he should
have enough skills and knowledge in planning. Before starting any project, planning
is an important process used by managers to identify and select appropriate goals and
courses of action for an organization. There are three steps to ensure a good planning.
First, project manager should ask the questions ‘which goals should be pursued?’.
Second question is ‘How should the goal be attained?’ and last question is ‘How
should resources be allocated?’. The planning function determines how effective and
efficient the organization is and determines the strategy of the organization.
b)
Organizing
Organizing is an important skill in project management, especially for
candidates which will become project manager in an organization. In this step, a
project manager creates the structure of working relationships between organizational
member that best allows them to work together and achieve goals. Project managers
will group people into departments according to the tasks performed. He will also lay
out lines of authority and responsibility for members and employees. A good project
manager will come out with a productive and effective organizational structure from
organizing process. This structure coordinates and motivates employees to work
together to achieve the goals.
73
c)
Staffing / Directing / Leading
This criterion is important for a project manager to play his role in staffing,
directing and leading the workforce to achieve the goals. In leading, managers
determine the project’s direction; state a clear vision for employees to follow, and
help employees understand the role they play in attaining goals. A candidate should
have a quality of leadership; know to use their power, influence others towards vision
by persuasion and effective communication skills. The outcome of the leading
function is a high level of motivation and commitment from employees in the
organization.
d)
Controlling / Monitoring
This criterion is important to make sure a project complete within planning
period. In controlling, project manager evaluate how well the organization is
achieving its goals and takes corrective action to improve performance. A good
project manager will monitor individuals, departments, and the organization to
determine if desired performance has been reached in their projects. Manager will
also take action to increase performance as required especially when a extension of
times and delay occurs in a project. The outcome of the controlling function is the
accurate measurement of performance and regulation of efficiency and effectiveness.
ii)
Others
a)
Conducting meeting
This is a basic skill for a project manager to coordinate his workforce to know
the current project execution and to discuss the problem occurs in the project. A
project manager needs to have good communication skills to conduct a meeting. He
should equip with good written and verbal communication skills to lead and
coordinate his work force. This criterion can be tested by their public performance
such as public speaking and their activities histories at the school time.
74
b)
Documentation / Record Keeping
Documentation and record keeping is an important skill to have a systematic
working system. A good project manager should put effort to develop a systematic
filling system to ease the finding process of some important document such as
contract documents, plan, daily working records, purchase order, submittals,
drawings, sketch, letters, transmittals, change order proposal and others important
project’s documents.
c)
Times Management
For a project manager, time management is key role to complete a
successfully project. The project manager must maintain a meaningful schedule to
monitor the contractor’s work progress and to use as a tool in resolutions of disputes
caused by delays and acceleration. He must have an ability to running multi-tasks
works to save the times. Time management is important because the primary
objective of construction industry is to minimize time and cost while maintaining
project quality.
d)
Resources & property management
This consider as an important criterion of a project manager. Project manager
need to have this kind of management skill. He needs to take responsibility and
liability of the resources on site especially the safety of equipment, materials and
workers. Property management refers to the performance of the ongoing maintenance
or repair of a construction project after the completion of the construction phase. So, a
candidate must equip with this kind of skills to have a better quality of works.
e)
Worker welfare management
This criterion is important to make sure the worker’s welfare had been
consider bringing out a harmony working atmosphere. A successful project manager
must provide enough safety consideration and take action to protect their workers
being injured during work construction. They should bear in mind that workers and
75
employees is the main asset in their project and should receive reasonable welfare
consideration. This can lead to a productive working environment.
f)
Rules & regulation
In this aspect, a project manager should have wide knowledge in law and
contract regulations. He has to be familiar with standard construction practice and
methods and keep abreast of new developments and changes in the field. The project
manager needs to know the rules in attaining a contract including the clauses in
contract, Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) regulations, Code of conduct
to success in the project. This is an important criterion in selection of a project
manager.
C)
Interpersonal Skills
i)
Problem Solving
This is one of the important criterions for a project manager to involve in
construction project is problem solving. The construction project manager plays a
challenging and dynamic role. Besides working with the owner and general
contractor, the project manager has to work with designers, testing labs, and material
and equipment suppliers. On larger projects, the project managers may have a group
of supervisors and inspectors to supervise. This leads to the potential and happen a lot
of problems. The most common issues related to project are those originating from
delays, suspension, or acceleration of the times established in the contract for the
completion of work. Besides a differing site condition may presence as a problem
especially where subsurface conditions are not well known. Sometimes, construction
contract are being breach and they need to negotiate the contract changes. A contract
change usually result in a cost and time extension for the contractor. This problem
needs to be solved by a project manager by equip themselves with various problem
solving skills.
76
ii)
Decision making
This interpersonal skill is very important for a project manager. Decision
making is a process which manager respond to opportunities and treats by analyzing
options, and making decision about goals and courses of action. In decision in
response to opportunities, managers respond to ways to improve organizational
performance. Decision in response to threats occurs when managers are impacted by
adverse events to the organization. Generally, there are two types of decision making,
named programmed and non-programmed decision. Programmed decisions means
routine and almost a automatic process for a project manager. He had made decision
many times before. There are rules or guideline to follow. For example: deciding to
reorder the materials supplies in construction site. A non-programmed decision means
unusual situations that have not been often addressed. There are no rules to follow
since the decision is new. These decisions are made based on information, and a
manager’s intuition, and judgment. For example: Should the firm invest in a new
technology? There are six general decision making steps. Recognize need for a
decision, frame the problem, generate and assess alternatives, choose among
alternatives, implement chosen alternative and learn from feedback. A candidate must
know how to make a right and effective decision.
iii)
Multi-task
This criterion plays a significant role for a project manager to achieve good
performance in his work. This is one of the largest challenges for a project manager to
running multiple jobs in a limited duration of time. This is a result of the nature of
general contracting. The contractor is a ‘for profit’ company and they typically prefer
to have as many jobs as possible. This philosophy requires the project manager to
continuously bid one new projects while running the current projects. If project
manager cannot handle such a volume of job, it potentially leads to submittal delays,
scheduling conflicts, and negative impact for the project. So, as a candidate for the
selection of project manager, he should have this criterion or ability to bid with multitask.
77
iv)
Correspondence
This criterion should be taking into consideration in selecting a qualified
project manager. Correspondences mean communication through sharing of
information between two or more individual and group. Effective communication led
to high efficiency to achieve a projects goal. Everyone in site need a good
communication channel, so a project manager play a significant role to keep the
communication with the owners, designer, contractor and suppliers by providing
information and classification when needed. For example: clarification to the contract
documents, change orders negotiations, project schedule updates, and future milestone
completion dates. The candidates should equip with good communication skills to
become a productive project manager.
4.4
SUMMARY
This chapter has discussed the knowledge acquisition (KA) process, in the
development of the decision support system for selection of project manger. The KA
process in this research involved capturing and transforming appropriate information
from the human resources expertise into some manageable form that can be used in
the development of decision model. The KA methods adopted include a questionnaire
survey, semi structures interviews and protocol analysis.
The questionnaire survey was conducted to obtain preliminary knowledge
from the construction industry in project manager selection process. To complement
the findings of the questionnaire survey, semi structured interviews were conducted
with selected experts. These resulted in a list of verified criteria and alternatives in
selection of a project manager. The protocol analysis was used to capture expert
knowledge in selecting a most qualified candidate. The outcome from this method
was a decision support system for selection of project manager. The next chapter
discusses the development and operation of the prototype system based on the
knowledge acquired.
78
CHAPTER 5
DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF THE PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
5.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter starts with the reviewing the functional architecture of the
prototype system. Then, it describes in detail the development process of the
prototype system. It also demonstrates the operation of the prototype system and
highlights the key features of the system.
5.2
FUNCTIONAL ARCHITECTUAL OF THE PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
The proposed intelligent decision support system to help human resources
specialist in selecting the most qualified project manager in their company in called ‘
Project Manager Selection system’ (PMSS). The prototype system will assist the
decision maker to select the most appropriate candidates for the post of project
manager by using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model. The result from the
prototype system is the priorities ranking for the entire decision criterion, which are
also known as the ‘Benefit Priority’. The highest priority ranking in this stage is
considered the most appropriate and qualified candidates for the selection process of
project manager. Figure 5.1 presents the functional architecture of the proposed
Project Manager Selection System (PMSS).
79
Operational
Phase
Development
Phase
To select the most
appropriate candidate for
the post of Project
Manager
Problem Definition
Pair wise comparison of
the criteria that affect the
selection process
The development of
AHP hierarchy to
decompose a decision
problem
AHP Model based on
Expert Choice Software
Synthesis of the AHP
model to get overall
prioritization of the
system
Sensitivity analysis to
see how the alternatives
change with respect to
the importance of criteria
The most appropriate
candidate are selected
based on criterion
Figure 5.1: The functional architecture of the Project Manager Selection System
(PMSS)
5.3
DEVELOPMENT OF THE AHP MODEL
5.3.1
Problem Definition
The problem begins when a contractor’s company wants to hire a project
manager and choose among a numbers of candidates to select a most appropriate
candidate for the post of project manager. The decision was normally based on his/
her experience. There are number of criteria that should be incorporated into the
decision, to ensure that sound judgment can be made based on the criterion
considerations. Based on these problem, the proposed system must have the capability
to evaluate all the criteria that affect the selection of the project manager and stress
the intuitive judgment in the decision making process. The next section describes the
development of the proposed system that can help contractor’s company to solving
this problem.
80
5.3.2
Rapid prototyping
The research used rapid prototyping methodology to develop the prototype
system. The rapid prototyping is a strategy in system development in which an initial
prototype was developed in a short time, tested and improved in several iterations
until the final prototype is ready. Expert Choice software was selected to be the
environment for the development of the prototype because it offers a user-friendly
display that makes decision model building based on AHP methodology simple and
flexible for alteration. The decision model based on AHP involved four basic steps,
which include:
1. Developing the hierarchy;
2. Pair wise Comparisons;
3. Synthesis of the AHP models; and
4. Sensitivity analysis
The next section discusses these steps.
5.3.3
Developing the AHP Hierarchy
The AHP hierarchy is a representation of a complex problem on a number of
levels whose first level is the goal to be achieve, followed by criteria, sub criteria and
so on down to the last level at which the alternatives are located. It is important in
constructing the hierarchy to include the human resources expert ideas and debate
until the problem is clearly defined. For this reasons the criteria and the alternatives
resulted from the questionnaire survey and structured interview with the human
resources experts were used to construct the hierarchy.
The laddering method was used to create the hierarchy in the Expert Choice
software. The human resources experts who participated in the interviews and
protocol analysis were again involved in the development process. The process
involves creating, reviewing and modification of the decision hierarchy with the
experts until the final hierarchy was developed. Figure 5.2 illustrates the hierarchical
structure, which consists of the goal, criteria, sub-criteria and the output.
81
The selection of the most appropriate candidates for the post of project
manager, which is the goal of the decision makers, is located at level 0 of the model to
serve as goal node. Factors affecting the selection of candidates, which hade been
classified into three main categories, were inserted in level 1 of the model to serve as
the main criteria. Level 2 of the modes (18 nodes) define sub-criteria nodes for
categories in level 1. Finally the alternative solution (most appropriate candidate) is
located at level 3 to serve as the choice available for the decision makers.
5.3.4
The Pairwise Comparison
The second step is to define the priority (or weight) for each criterion based on
the decision maker’s judgment by pairwise comparisons. At each level, pairwise
comparisons are undertaken for each category with the ones in the adjacent upper
level, and the ratings are entered into a comparison matrix. The element on the second
level (Basic criteria, management skills, interpersonal skills) are arrange into matrix,
and the decision makers make judgments about the relative importance of the
elements with respect to the overall goal of selecting the most appropriate candidates
for the post of project manager. The judgments are entered using the AHP pairwise
comparisons scale. For example when judging the relative preference of factors
located in level 2 with respected to the Basic Requirement (level 1), a rating of 1 may
be is assigned in the comparison between Job experience and Academic Achievement.
This indicates equal importance between the two criterions (Refer Figure 5.3). The
same procedure can be repeated and the rating of 3 may be assigned in comparing Job
experience with the Medical Evaluation with respect to the Basic requirement (level
1). (Refer Figure 5.4). This indicates that Medical Evaluation moderate favored when
compare with Job Experience. All the remaining pairwise comparison matrices
between the nodes in the hierarchy can be established by following the same
procedure.
82
GOAL
Level 0 (1 Nodes)
CRITERIA
Level 1 (3 Nodes)
SUB-CRITERIA
Level 2 (18 Nodes)
ALTERNATIVE
Level 3 (3 Nodes)
Job Experience
Academic
Achievement
Basic
Requirement
Communication
Skills
Microsoft Project
Software
Planning
Organizing
Directing/
Leading
Select the most
appropriate
candidate for
the post of
Project
Manager
Candidate 1
Controlling
Management
Skills
Conducting
Meeting
Record Keeping
Candidate 2
Candidate 3
Time
Management
Property
Management
Worker welfare
Management
Rules &
Regulation
Problem Solving
Interpersonal
Skills
Decision Making
Multi-Task
Correspondence
Figure 5.2: Hierarchic Structure for the Project Manager Selection Model (PMSS)
83
Figure 5.3: Equal rating (1) in pairwise comparison between Job Experience and
Academic Achievement (Level 2 with respect to Basic Requirement (Level 1))
Figure 5.4: Rating of 3 in pairwise comparison between Job Experience and Medical
Evaluation (Level 2 with respect to Basic Requirement (Level 1))
84
5.3.5
Synthesis of the AHP Model
Synthesis involves the process of weighting and combining priorities
throughout the model after judgment have been made to derive the final result. The
synthesis process converts all the local priorities into global weights of the final’s
selection. The global priorities for each alternative are then summed up to produce
overall or synthesized priorities. The preferred candidate is the one with the highest
priority. In Expert Choice, the Distributive Mode and Ideal Mode are two synthesis
methods that can be used to derive the results.
According to Forman and Shvartsman (2000), the Distribute Mode is suitable
when all alternative matter. The Distributive Mode distributes the weights of the
criteria among the alternatives; thereby dividing the full criteria weights into
proportions relative to the percentage of preference of each of the alternatives.
The Ideal Mode is more appropriate when the decision makers are concerned
with choosing only one alternative and the other alternatives will no longer matter.
The Ideal Mode assigns the full weight of each covering criteria to the alternative that
ranks highest under it. The other alternatives receive a weight in proportion to the
highest alternative per covering criteria. The weights or priorities for all the
alternatives are summed up to display the best alternative. In this research, the
distributive mode is used to derive the final result.
5.3.6 Sensitivity Analysis
Expert Choice provides tools for performing sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity
analysis helps the decision makers to see how the different weights assigned to each
criterion could affect the outcome of the model. The general purpose of the sensitivity
analyses is graphically seen how the alternative change with respect to the importance
of the criteria or sub-criteria. There are five types of sensitivity analyses that can be
carried out in Expert Choice:
•
Performance Sensitivity: Displays how the alternatives perform with respect to
all criteria;
85
•
Dynamic Sensitivity: Displays how the choice priorities of alternatives
changes when the priority of one criterion is varied;
•
Gradient Sensitivity: Display the composite priority of the alternatives with
respect to the priority of a single criterion;
•
Head to Head Sensitivity: Displays how any two alternatives compare with
respect to each criterion and the goal; and
•
Two - Dimensional Sensitivity: Display how alternatives perform with respect
to any two criteria.
5.3.7
Developing the Information Document
Information document are rich text object and can include Microsoft Office
Files (word, Power point, Excel, Access), as well as others files that contain audio,
pictures and video. The information document is primarily used as a way of
communicating with users and for presentation purpose. Figure 5.5 & figure 5.6
shows the screenshot of the information document developed in AHP model. It
contains several files including:
•
Texts that describe the goal, give additional information as to why particular
criteria or sub-criteria were selected, and how pair-wise comparisons were
made;
•
Microsoft word files that act as an information source on selection process.
The information capture during the literature review process used to develop
these files.
•
Microsoft Excel files that act as a data input workbook, which gathers all the
necessary information into the manageable file. The information gathered is
used to support decision making especially during the pair wise comparison
process of the AHP model. Several spreadsheets were developed in the data
input workbook, which contains:
•
General information - Information on the candidates regarding background
information, work experience, academic achievement, health history,
interpersonal skills and so on.
86
•
Media information - The users can insert photos of candidates for the selection
process.
•
Selection criterions - The importance selection criterions such as basic
requirement, management skills and interpersonal skills.
Figure 5.5: The Information Document developed in the AHP Model
Figure 5.6: The Information Document developed in the AHP Model
87
5.4
OPERATION OF THE PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
The Project Manager Selection system (PMSS) developed provides a decision
support tool to help human resources specialist in selecting the most appropriate
candidate for the post of project manager. It was designed to allowed the judgment
input from users in the decision making process.
The operational objectives of the prototype system were to:
•
Provide clear and structured framework of the decision- making process to
help the user in selecting the most appropriate candidate for the post of project
managers after considering the criterions developed in AHP;
•
Provide information on the selection process to support the decision making
process;
•
Enable human resources specialist to make rational and justified decision by
using graphical reports and sensitivity analysis.
5.4.1
Users Requirements
The end users of the prototype system will be the human resources expert who
has the experience and considerable knowledge in selecting the most qualified
candidate for the project manager post. This characteristic is importance because the
prototype system was designed to incorporate expert judgment in the selection
process. Inexperience human resources officers can also use the prototype system as a
training tool, since the selection process is well structured and the system has
considerable information on the demolition technique.
5.4.2
System Requirements
The prototype system has been designed to operate on a Personal Computer
(PC) running Windows 2000 or better. It requires Expert Choice 2000, Microsoft
Word 2000 (or above) and Microsoft Excel 2000 (or above) to be installed. About 37
Mb of Ram is required to run the Expert Choice software (including 5 Mb for data
storage)
88
5.4.3
Starting the Prototype System
The PMSS application is stored as an Expert Choice file called ‘PMSS.ahp’
and is held in directory named ‘Selection’. To start the application from the Expert
Choice Menu, the user select ‘File: Open’. When the file is opened, the first window
that appears is a Model View. Figure 5.7 shows the Model View panel that is divided
into three major section or panes:
Tree View- The hierarchy displayed in this pane consists of three main criteria
and twenty sub-criteria with the goal being to select the most appropriate candidate
for the project manager’s post in the company.
Information Document- This includes information on operating the system and
links to other information document files, which were described in section 5.3.6. To
view the information document the user has to click on the toolbar.
Tree View Pane
Information Document Pane
Figure 5.7: Project Manager Selection Model
Alternative Pane
89
5.4.4
Assigned Judgment in Pairwise Comparison
After completing the data input workbook, the user may then undertake the
pair wise comparisons. One of the main strength of AHP is the use of pair wise
comparisons to derive accurate ratio scale priorities, instead of using traditional
approaches of ‘assigning’ weights, which is difficult to justify. The pair wise
comparison process compares the relative importance, preference, or likelihood of
two elements with respect to each other. A judgment is made as to which is more
important and by how much. Pair wise comparisons are carried out throughout an
Expert Choice model to established priorities. Judgment about the relative importance
of criteria are made with respect to the parent node in the hierarchy (either the goal or
a higher-level criterion). Judgments about the relative preference of candidate are
made with the respect to each criterion. For example, the user makes judgments about
the preference of candidates with respect to the criterion, ‘Job Experience’. The steps
include:
1. Click on the sub-criteria Job Experience under the first set of criteria in the
hierarchy ‘ Basic Requirement’
2. From the menu select Assessment; then select Pair wise. The user will take to
the verbal comparison window. Verbal judgments are used to make
comparisons using the word Equal, Moderate, Strong, Very Strong and
Extreme. Equals require no explanation. Extreme means rating of magnitude
of about 9 or 10 to 1. Judgments between these words, such as ‘Moderate to
Strong’ are also possible.
3. Since the users compares the candidates with respected to the criteria, the
judgment type is ‘preference’. The verbal scale indicator can be moved up and
down to appropriate position to make the judgment that best describes the user
feeling. Figure 5.8 shows the example judgment; it means that Candidate 1 is
strongly to very strongly prefer to candidate 2 with respect to Job experience
of the candidate. Note: If the user prefers Candidate 2 to Candidate 1, the he or
she has to drag the indicator down.
4. The process above repeated until all comparisons for ‘job experience’ have
been made. Note: The inconsistency, shown in the bottom left cell of the
matrix. The inconsistency measure is useful for identifying possible errors in
90
judgment as well as actual inconsistencies in the judgments themselves. In
general, the inconsistency ratio should be less than 0.1 or so to be considered
reasonable consistent. The user should only change an inconsistent judgment
if they feel that their initial comparison was in error and did not truly represent
their feeling.
5. After all the judgments have been made, the user will be prompted to ‘Record
Judgments and Calculate’, select ‘Yes’; the user will be returned to the Model
View.
6. Priorities for the candidate with respect to ‘job experience’ have been
calculated automatically and are displayed in the Pane of the Model View.
Figure 5.9 shows the priorities for the candidate with respect to the ‘job
experience’. If the resulting relative priorities do not adequately represent the
user’s feeling, the user can repeat the pair wise comparison process.
7. Process 1 to 5 repeated until all comparison for sub-criteria (20 nodes, refer to
Figure: Hierarchic structure for the demolition techniques selection model)
have been made.
8. To assign judgment for the sub-criteria against criteria, the user needs to
change the comparison type from Preference to Importance. To change the
assessment type, select Assessment, Type, and then select Importance.
9. Process 1 to 5 repeated until all comparisons for the criteria (3 nodes) have
been made. The user can begin assigning the criteria judgment
10. To assign judgment about the importance of the criteria with respect to the
goal, click goal node, and then select Assessment, followed by Pairwise and
repeat process 1 to 5 of pair-wise comparison process.
Now the user should have made judgments for all factors (criteria, sub-criteria
and alternatives) in the AHP model. The next section describes how to synthesize the
results and perform sensitivity analyses.
91
Figure 5.8: The Verbal Comparison Window
Figure 5.9: Derived Priorities of the alternatives with respect to Job Experience
92
5.4.5
Synthesize to get Results
A synthesis is automatically performed after all the judgments in the AHP
model have been made and priorities have been calculated. When focus is returned to
the Model View the priorities for the candidates are shown in the Alternative pane
(see Figure 5.10). Priorities of the criteria are also shown in the View in both
graphical and numerical form.
To examine the synthesis: Select Synthesis, With respect to the Goal to produce the
display shown in Figure 5.11. The difference in results obtained using the ideal or
distributive synthesis modes is usually negligible and more of theoretical than
practical interest. The ideal Synthesis should be used when one is interested in only
one alternative and remaining alternatives are no longer relevant. Distributed
Synthesis is used when the users are interested in prioritizing alternatives from which
they may pick more than one alternative. Because each synthesis mode combines
priorities differently, the user should note that each mode might yield different,
although normally very similar in results. After examining the synthesis to get the
priorities of the candidates, the user can examine the graphical sensitivity analyses of
the results. The user must close the synthesis window and return to the Model View.
Figure 5.10: Model View showing the Synthesized Results with respect to the Goal
93
Figure 5.11: Synthesis Window
Sensitivity analyses from the Goal node will show the sensitivity of the
alternatives with respect to all the criteria below the goal. Because the AHP model
developed has more than three levels, the sensitivity analysis can also be performed
from the nodes under the goal to show the sensitivity of the alternatives with respect
to criterion and sub-criterion. When performing a sensitivity analysis the user may
change the priorities of the criteria and observe how the priorities of the alternatives
would be change. The users can use five types of graphical sensitivity analyses:
Performance, Dynamic, Head to head and Two Dimensional Plot.
To see the Dynamic Sensitivity graph: from the Tree View, click on the goal,
and from the menu select Sensitivity Graph, and the select dynamic. Dynamic
Sensitivity analysis is used to dynamically change the priorities of the objectives to
determine how these changes affect the priorities of the alternative choices. By
dragging the objective’s priorities back and forth in the left column, the priorities of
the alternatives will change in the right column. If the decision-maker thinks a
criterion might be more or less importance than originally indicated, the decisionmaker can drag that objective’s bar to the right or left to increase or decrease the
criterion priority and see the impact on alternatives. Figure 5.12 show a Dynamic
Sensitivity graph.
94
Figure 5.12: Dynamic Sensitivity Graph
The Performance Sensitivity analysis shows how the alternatives were
prioritized relative to other alternatives with respect to each criterion as well as
overall (see Figure 5.13). It display how the alternatives (candidates 1, 2, 3) perform
with respect to all three main criteria and overall. Dragging the criteria bars up and
down can temporarily alter the relationship between the alternatives and their criteria.
Figure 5.13: Performance Sensitivity Graph
Figure 5.14 shows the gradient sensitivity graph. This graph shows the
alternative’s priorities with respect to one criterion at a time. The vertical solid line
represents the priority of the selected criterion and is read from the X-axis
95
intersection. The priorities for the alternatives are read from the Y-Axis. To change an
objective’s priority, drag the vertical solid bar to either the left or right; then a vertical
doted bar showing the new objective’s priority will be displayed.
Figure 5.14: Gradient Sensitivity Graph
Figure 5.15 show how two alternatives compared to one another against the
criteria in a decision. One alternative is listed on the left side of the graph and the
other is listed on the right. The alternative on the left is fixed while the alternative on
the right can be varied, by selecting a different tab on the graph. Down and middle of
the graph are listed the criteria in decision. If the left hand alternative is preferred to
the right hand alternative with respect to a criterion, a horizontal bar is displayed
towards the left. If the right-hand alternative is better, the horizontal bar will be on the
right. If the two choices are equal, no bar is displayed. The overall result is displayed
at the bottom of the graph and shows the overall percentage by which one alternative
is better than the other.
96
Figure 5.15: Head-To-Head Sensitivity Graph
Figure 5.16 shows the two dimensional sensitivity graphs. This graph shows
how well the alternatives perform with respect to any two criteria. In this example,
‘basic requirement’ is represent on X Axis and ‘Management Skills’ on Y Axis. The
alternatives (Candidate) represented by the circle. The area of the 2D plot is divided
into quadrants. The most favorable alternatives as defined by the criterion and
judgments in the model will be shown in the upper right quadrant (the closer to the
upper right hand corner the better) in this case candidate 1, while in opposition, the
least favorable alternatives will be shown in the lower left quadrant (candidate3).
Candidates located in the upper left and lower right quadrants indicate key tradeoffs
where there is conflict between the two criteria.
97
Figure 5.16: Two Dimensional Sensitivity Graphs
5.5
SUMMARY
The prototype system (PMSS) functional architecture was discussed to give an
overview of the system at the beginning of the chapter. The chapter then described in
detail the development process for the AHP model. This model was used to select the
most appropriate candidates for the post of project manager. Finally, the operational
framework of the PMSS was presented to demonstrate the operation of the system.
The next chapter discusses the evaluation of the prototype system.
98
CHAPTER 6
EVALUATION OF THE PROTOTYPE SYSTEM
6.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the evaluation of the prototype system. It includes the
aim and objectives of the evaluation, methodology results and discussion on the
overall evaluation process. The chapter concludes with a summary.
6.2
EVALUATION AIM AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of the evaluation was to determine the usability and functionality of
the finished prototype. To achieve this aim, the specific objectives of the evaluation
were:
•
To assess the performance of the prototype system and the accuracy of the
output;
•
To determine the applicability of the prototype system to the human resources
selection process;
•
To assess the effect of interaction on the user with the prototypes system; and
•
To obtain comments and recommendation for improving the prototype system.
99
6.3
EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
In this research, formative evaluation has been undertaken during the
development process of the prototype system. A series of interview was conducted
with human resources experts with the intent to validate and verify several aspects of
the prototype system at the development stage. Validation is a part of evaluation that
deals with the performance of the system or building the right system that performs
with an acceptable level of accuracy. Verification is building the system right, with
the system correctly implemented to its specifications; the prototype went through
several iterations with appropriate refinements to improve it. The process continues
until the prototype is ready for the demonstration. Once the prototype was
demonstrated, the summative evaluation was undertaken and the findings were used
to improve the final prototype. The next section will discuss the evaluation approach
adopted to achieve the aim and objective of the evaluation stated in section 6.3.
6.3.1 Evaluation Approach
The evaluation was carried out after the prototype was developed and involved
groups of people which consist of 3 human resources expert from contractor’s
company. This group was selected to give feedback from the main end-user’s points
of view. Their wide experience in the human resources planning, analysis,
recruitment, selection and previous involvement in the development process provided
a basic knowledge and understanding of the prototype system and therefore ensure
their capability to evaluate the system thoroughly.
The research adopted focus group and questionnaire techniques in the
evaluation process. The focus group was adopted because the participants could
discuss together and give appropriate comment on the prototype during the evaluation
process and saved the researcher’s time to travel to each human resources expert. The
questionnaire technique was adopted to measure the usability of the prototype system.
Evaluation workshops were conducted for this group of experts. The
workshops were conducted in a seminar room at building C07 of the Construction
Management Department. This workshop consisted of three parts and lasted
100
approximately one and half hours. The workshop started with a presentation on the
background to the prototype system. Then followed by a demonstration of the
prototype system, which involve a example of three candidates to be selected for the
post of project manager. The participants were encouraged to participate by giving
their comments during the demonstration. The participants were asked to complete the
evaluation questionnaire, which was the last part of the workshop. The evaluation was
successful been carried out.
6.3.2 Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire was designed based on the aim and objectives of the
evaluation stated in section 6.2. A sample of the evaluation questionnaire is provided
in appendix B. The questionnaire was divided into three sections as follows:
1. Section A requested information about the participant’s name, position in their
organization and experience.
2. Section B contained 5 questions about various aspects of the prototype system.
For each questions in Section B, participants were asked to tick the box that
best represents their assessment on the scale of 1 (poor), 2 (fair), 3
(Satisfactory), 4 (Good) and 5 (Excellent). It was divided into the following
three sub headings:
•
The System Performance
•
Applicability to Human resources selection Process
•
General
3. Section C requested two comments, including the main benefits of the
prototype system and ways to improve the system.
101
6.4
EVALUATION RESULTS
This section reports feedback from the evaluation participants that responses
to the questions and give comments for further improvements. Table 6.1shows the
results from section B in the evaluation questionnaire. The table presents, the
percentage (%) of respondents from human resources experts with regard to the
assessment scale for each question. There were a total of three respondents involve in
this evaluation. Detail discussions on the various sections of the questionnaire are
presented in Section 6.5.
Table 6.1: The responses to evaluation questions
Rating
PMSS Evaluation Questions
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10.
11.
12.
13.
(Satisfy)
3
1.25%
28.75%
4
(Good)
5
(Excellent)
30%
62.5%
70%
20%
80%
How well are the selection techniques explained in the
system?
How useful will the system be in supporting the human
resources selection process?
How well does the Information Document help in making
a decision?
How appropriate is the Pair wise comparison aspect of the
system?
How well does the system reflect the decision-making
ability in a real situation?
How useful do you find the sensitivity analysis within the
system?
30%
60%
10%
50%
30%
10%
20%
80%
20%
70%
40%
60%
20%
50%
30%
20%
70%
80%
50%
50%
30%
70%
20%
80%
30%
70%
63.3%
60%
Applicability (Overall Rating )
9.
2
(Fair)
How well does the system help in understanding how a
selection process in Human resources planning?
How clearly the selection criteria defined in the system?
The System Performance (Overall Rating )
1
1
(Poor)
How effective/ accurate is the system in the human
resources selection?
How convinced are you that the human resources
expertise will accept the system?
How effectively will the system increase the speed of the
decision making process?
To what extent does it represent an improvement in the
decision making process?
To what extent is the system flexible in human resources
selection process?
10%
14.
How well organized is the system?
30%
20%
15.
How user friendly is the system?
30%
70%
16.
What is your overall rating of the prototype system?
40%
60%
General (Overall rating)
7.5%
10%
30%
6.7%
20%
102
Table 6.2 presents the comments made by the evaluators from section C.
These related to the benefits of the prototype system, suggestion on how to improve
the system and other further comments. These comments are discussed further in
section 6.5.
Table 6.2: Comments from evaluators regarding the prototype system
Benefit of the prototype
system
•
As an outside aid to
ensuring all criteria
have been considered
•
As a marketing aid to
impress potential client
•
To provide a tools for
human resources
specialist in selection
process
•
It provides a systematic
approach to selecting a
candidate in human
resources planning
process
•
Assisting in selecting
and analyzing the
appropriate candidates
•
As a teaching tool
•
Good structured
approach and more
informed decision
could be made in
selecting a candidate
Suggestion for Improvement
•
More detail in drop
down boxes
•
Further information
‘drop panels’ with
greater detail
•
More explanation to the
information document
•
More information on
the criterion needed in
selection process
•
Developed
commercialized
software
•
Flexibility for example
allows users to add the
criteria that current
model have not
addressed
•
Should put into
industry for further
testing/ evaluation
•
A provision should be
made in order for the
user to understand the
system limitation
Others Comment
•
Have an interface that
works well throughout
the system
•
The system should
provide an interface for
data input to evaluate
more candidates at one
time
103
6.5
DISCUSSION
The outcome from the evaluation of the prototype system is discussed below
under five main headings: Results; Suggestion for Improvement; Benefits;
Limitations; and Appropriateness of the Evaluation Approach.
Results
The participants were satisfied with the performance and effectiveness of the
prototype system. Figure 6.1 shows the overall rating on the systems performance
when referred to question 1 to question 8 based on Table. From the human resources
expert point of view, the system performance can be reflected as ‘Good’,
‘Satisfactory’, ‘Excellent’ and ‘Fair’. Based on this finding, it can be summarized that
the prototype system gives an overall good performance.
System's Performance
Poor
0%
Fair
1%
Excellent
8%
Satisfactory
29%
Good
62%
Figure 6.1: System’s Performance
The applicability of the prototype system in human resources selection also
demonstrates a positive view from the experts. Figure 6.2 shows the overall rating
given by experts in applicability of the prototype system. (Refer to table question 913). The majority of the human resources expert rated the applicability of the
prototype system as ‘Good’ and ‘Satisfactory’. Based on this finding, it can be
summarized that the prototype system is applicable in the human resources selection
system.
104
System's Applicability
Poor
0%
Fair
0%
Excellent
0%
Satisfactory
30%
Good
70%
Figure 6.2: System’s Applicability
Figure 6.3shows the overall rating given by the human resources experts
(Refer to Table, question 14-16). The rating given by the experts regarding this
section is mainly ‘Good’, ‘Satisfactory’ and ‘Excellent’. Based on this finding, in
general, most of the respondents agreed that the overall rating for the prototype
system is ‘Good’.
General Rating
Satisfactory
30%
Poor
0%
Fair
0%
Excellent
7%
Good
63%
Figure 6.3: General Rating
6.5.1
Suggestion for Improvement
All respondents made comment in the evaluation questionnaire as presented in
Table. The findings may demonstrate that the respondents had given their full
cooperation during the evaluation process. The main suggestion is to provide more
information on the drop down panel in the data input spreadsheet and more
105
explanation in the information document. One of the respondents suggests that more
information should be given regarding selection criterion in the system and the system
should be commercialized. Besides that, the respondents also suggested that a
provision should be made in order for the user to know the system’s limitations. Some
actions have been taken based on the suggestion. For example, input further
information and explanation in the prototype system and provide guidance on the use
of prototype system. The offer of further evaluation of the prototype system by human
resources experts in others companies may illustrate that they are interested in using
the prototype system for practical purposes and that it has the potential to be
commercialized.
6.5.2
Benefits of the Prototype
Through the evaluation the respondents identified several benefits of the
prototype system, which includes:
•
The prototype system demonstrated an effective and systematic approach in
selecting a candidate to assist in human resources planning.
•
The prototype system provides an effective tool in selecting and analyzing the
most appropriate candidates for the post.
•
The prototype system can also be improved to create a potential in marketing
aid to impress client because its capability to give rational and structured
guidance in candidate’s selection.
6.5.3
Limitation of the Prototype
The comments regarding the limitations of the prototype system were made
during discussion session in the evaluation workshop. They highlighted that the
prototype system cannot be used without guidance from an experienced human
resources expert which have at least 5 years experience in human resources planning
process. The criterion should be improved from time to time to adopted with the
environment changes.
106
6.5.4
Appropriateness of the Evaluation Approach
The evaluation approach adopted helped to test all aspects of the system
identified in the evaluation objectives and was considerably successful. This was
reveal by the positive feedback received from the evaluators. Although there were
limitation, further evaluation and improvement of the system would facilitate the use
of the prototype for practical purposes. The evaluation approach conducted
highlighted several points including:
•
The focus group conducted in the evaluation workshop provides a platform for
the participants to discuss and give their views to the evaluated prototype.
•
All the evaluators are human resources experts who experienced in human
resources planning and this ensured a relatively through assessment on the
practicality of the prototype.
•
The questionnaire covered all the major aspects of the prototype that needed to
be evaluated and was useful for obtaining essential feedback from the
evaluators.
6.6 SUMMARY
This chapter has describes the summative evaluation of the prototype system.
The research adopted focus group and questionnaire techniques in evaluating the
prototype system. The results from the evaluation show that the prototype system has
a good performance and have a potential to use in human resources planning process.
Finally, the comments and suggestions from the evaluation were used to refine the
prototype system. The next chapter presents the conclusion and recommendation of
the research.
107
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter concludes the research project, which resulted in the development
of a decision support system named ‘Project Manager Selection system (PMSS)’. This
chapter summarizes the overall findings of the research, followed by the benefits and
limitations of the prototype system. It also presents the conclusion and makes
recommendations for further research.
7.2
SUMMARY
The rational for undertaking this project was the need to improve the selection
process for the project manager, which rely on the decision making and hiring
experience of the human resources specialist. To full fill this need, the aim of the
research was to develop a systematic approach that can help human resources
specialist in selecting the most appropriate candidates for the post of project manager.
The aim was achieved through several specific objectives:
•
To understand the job description and specification of a project manager;
•
To explore the potential for using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to
integrated into Decision support System in selection process;
108
•
To investigate and define the criteria which affect the selection process of a
construction project manager;
•
To develop and evaluate a decision support system to assist the human
resource specialist in selecting the most appropriate candidates for the post of
project manager; and
•
To make recommendation on how selection consideration can be taken into
account at the design stage.
Various research methodologies and strategies were adopted to achieve the
defined objective of the research. The initial strategies include extensive literature
review; participation at workshop, seminars and conferences to interact with other
human resources experts. The knowledge acquisition process was undertaken after the
initial stage to capture the expert’s knowledge in selecting the project manager. The
methods used include an industry survey through the postal questionnaire, semistructured interviews and protocol analysis. After the knowledge capture, the rapid
prototype methodology was used in developing the prototype system. The prototypes
were evaluated during and after the development process to verifies, validate and
improve the prototype. Chapter 2 described the basic concepts and principles of the
research methodology.
Literature review on selection process presented in chapter 2 reveal the human
resources specialist need a systematic procedure on the selection of project manger.
Normally, they just make judgments based on their skills, relevant knowledge, their
perspective, feeling or experience. Furthermore, the number of candidates with
different qualification had increase dramatically now a day and there are many criteria
that need to be considered before they can select the most appropriate candidate for
the post. It is important that all these relevant criteria be thoroughly examined in order
to develop an efficient and useable decision support system. With current practice, the
human resources specialist may make wrongly selection on the candidates as there is
no structured procedure that they can follow. This chapter also gives an overview of a
project manager, overview of a selection process, review of decision making which
include the theory and concept of Analytic hierarchy Process (AHP) and Decision
109
Support System (DSS). The subjects discussed were used later in the development of
the proposed prototype system.
A potential Artificial Intelligent (AI) technique that can be used as Decision
Support System (DSS) for the proposed prototype was reviewed in Chapter 2. The
review revealed the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) could provide the framework
of logic needed to model a complex decision scenario. AHP can integrate perception,
feelings, judgments and experiences of the human resources specialist into hierarchy
therefore allowing a better understanding of the problem, its criteria and possible
choice. Since the research used AHP model to solve the problem in selecting the most
appropriate candidates, therefore the most suitable development environment based
on the AHP methodology was the Expert Choice software package. Expert Choice
was used to structure the decision problem into a hierarchy and synthesized
judgments. This made system development simple by eliminating tedious calculation.
Knowledge Acquisition (KA) is a necessary part of the development of an
intelligent system for the selection of candidates. The decision making process of the
selection of most appropriate candidates in human resources planning needed to be
capture in order to develop a decision model for the system. For this reason, the
Knowledge Acquisition (KA) process was presented in Chapter 3. The KA process
involved capturing and transforming appropriate knowledge from human resources
experts into some manageable form to develop the decision model. The knowledge
that needed to be captured included the relevant criteria, which may affect the
selection of candidates for the post of project manager. The criteria captured form the
experts were then represented by a decision tree based on AHP approach to develop a
decision model. The research adopts three approaches to knowledge acquisition:
questionnaire survey, semi-structured interview and protocol analysis.
An industry survey through postal questionnaires was used as an approach to
obtaining preliminary knowledge from the construction industry. The aim of the
survey was to identify a list of factors that may affect the selection of candidates for
the post of project manager. The objective of the semi-structured interviews included:
to define and justify the relevance of the identified criteria that result from the
questionnaire survey; and to define and group the selection criteria obtain from the
110
questionnaire survey. The researcher used the findings from the two approaches as a
guide to developing a complete hierarchical structure that simplifies the decision
process of selecting the most appropriate candidates.
The proposed prototype system was named ‘Project Manager Selection
System’ (PMSS). The development and operation of the PMSS was described in
Chapter 5. The system focused on assisting the decision maker in selecting the most
appropriate candidates for the post of project manager by using Expert Choice
Software based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model.
The evaluation of the prototype system after it has been developed was
described in Chapter 6. The research adopted focus group and questionnaire
techniques in evaluating the prototype system using evaluation workshops. There
were groups of participants involved in the workshops consists of 3 human resources
specialist from 3 selected company. This group of participants was selected to give
feedback from the end-user point of view. The evaluation confirmed that, even though
there were some improvements required to make the system more effective, it does
provide many benefits, demonstrates good performance and is highly applicable for
the use in the industry. It can be seen from the above, that the objectives of the
research project had generally been achieved.
7.3
BENEFITS
The benefits of the prototype system include:
•
The prototype system offers many benefits to human resources specialist in
the human resources planning especially in selection decision making;
•
It provides a clear and structure framework of the decision-making process to
help the users in selecting the most appropriate candidates in human resources
selection process;
111
•
It serves as information sources that contain a variety of information on human
resources selection process;
•
It represents an easy to use prototype system that is capable in making rational
and justifiable decisions using graphical reports and sensitivity analysis;
•
The system can make the selection process faster and easier;
•
The system can be use as a marketing aid to impress potential clients to apply
in human resources planning and analysis because of its capability to give
rational and structured decisions making with the capability of generating
graphical reports and sensitivity analysis.
7.4
LIMITATIONS
The limitations of the prototype system include:
•
The prototype system cannot be adequately used without guidance from an
experienced human resources experts who alert and aware of the changing
selection criterion as a results from rapid environment and technology
changing. The systems was designed to act as a tool that support the decision
making process by structuring and systematically evaluating each criteria that
may effect the selection of candidates. The system still relies on experts’
judgment to assess all the criteria based on the framework developed.
•
Although the formative evaluation carried out during the development process
a summative evaluation after the prototype was developed have been done by
groups of human resources experts, the systems still needs further evaluation
to improve its performance and applicability to the industry. The prototype
system needs to be tested in a real selection process to ensure its accuracy and
effectiveness.
112
7.5
CONCLUSION
Several conclusions can be drawn from the research. These include:
•
The current human resources selection process is typically performed in an
unstructured intuitive manner with considerable reliance on the experience,
skill, knowledge, or judgment of the human resources specialist. There is
scope for error and inconsistencies in this approach. The prototype system
developed provides users with a clear, systematic and structured framework
that could improve the decision making process. It still requires the judgment
of the decision makers and therefore ensure the users, total control of the
decision making process especially in the final selection. All aspects and
criterions are carefully considered to ensure that a sound and rational
judgment is made in selecting the most appropriate candidates in selection
process.
•
There are three main criteria must be considered that may affect the selection
of project manager. These include basic requirements, management skills and
interpersonal skills. There are all together nine-teen sub-criterions under these
three main criterions. All criterions are evaluated in the preliminary stage of
selection, employment testing and rating form in selection interview process to
select most appropriated candidates.
•
In this research, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) provides a convenient
approach for solving complex Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)
problems in selecting the most appropriate candidates. It should be noted that
the Expert Choice software package has significantly contributed to the wide
acceptance of the AHP methodology. MCDM concepts have been proven to
be useful in choice analysis, by taking account of the wide variety of aspects
inherent in any decision problem and by offering an operational framework for
a multidisciplinary approach to practical choice problem. The research
concluded that MCDM methods should be used as decision supports tools and
not as means for deriving final answer. The conclusion of the solution should
113
be used only as indications to what may be the best answer. Although the
search for finding the best MCDM method may never end, research in this
area of decision making is still critical and very important in many scientific
and engineering applications.
•
The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was an appropriate method to use for a
number of reasons:
•
It improves the decision making process – the hierarchical structure used in
formulating the AHP model enables the human resources specialist to
visualize the selection problem systematically in terms of relevant criteria,
sub-criteria and alternatives;
•
It provides the capability to compare both qualitative and quantitative criteria
by using informed judgment to derive weights and priorities. It also takes into
consideration judgments based on people’s feelings and emotions as well as
thoughts. This capability matches the nature of the decision making process
those human resources specialists go through in selecting the candidates;
•
It has a capability for measuring inconsistency in subjective judgments by
calculating the consistency ration for each judgment;
•
The nature of numerical and pictorial results obtained from the synthesis stage
gives a better understanding and a clear rationale for the choice selected in the
decision-making process.;
•
The availability of the Expert Choice software based on AHP theory made it
easy to understand and apply in this domain; and
•
The results obtained mirror results from previous studies by several
researchers, which recommend AHP for multi-criteria decision making.
114
7.6
RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
This research project has revealed a number of areas for further research and
development, including:
1. Further improvement to the prototype system with respect to:
•
Adding more information in the ‘Information Document’ with several
case studies on various types of human resources selection process;
•
Regularly updating the existing ‘Information Document’ with new and
latest information in selection process; and
•
Improving the user interface in the Data Input Spread sheets through
better layout and better user guidance.
2. Further testing of the prototype on real selection process with a numbers of
candidates is considered necessary. The feed back from these can further
demonstrate the system’s applicability to the selection process.
3. Further research should be carried out to improve the prototype, so that it can
be use as a teaching tool not only for students and researchers in university but
also aid as the references for human resources specialist in construction
industry.
4. From the observation during the research project, it seems that the researches
and development in human research planning and selection still need more
consideration. Therefore, more research should be done to improve the
selection process in human resources planning and development to benefits the
industry.
5. The research has explored in detail and gathered various types of information
regarding the criterion needed in human resources selection process, which
can be used as a basis to do further research on human resources planning and
design.
115
7.7
CLOSING REMARKS
The research has revealed that, the current human resources selection practice
performed by human resources specialist are based on their knowledge, feeling and
experience without any systematic procedure that can be followed to support the
decision making process. This research has demonstrated how the prototype system
developed provides the users with a clear, systematic and structured framework that
could improve current decision making process. AHP in particular, with the use of
Expert Choice software can enhance the decisions made by decision makers. The
human resources specialist in construction industry should take advantage of the
prototype system developed in this research as it presents many benefits in terms of
technical aspect in human resources planning and development to ensure a faster,
easier and structured selection process.
116
REFERENCES
Arham Bin Abdullah (2003). “Intelligent Selection of Demolition Techniques.”
Thesis PhD.
Biju A. George, B. R. S. Reddy, N. S. Raghuwanshi, and W. W. Wallender. (2002)
“Decision Support System for Estimating Reference Evapotranspiration” J.
Irrig. and Drain. Engrg. 128, 1.
Braham, Barbara J. (1992) “Problem solving and decision making.” Cincinnati, OH :
South-Western Pub. Co.
Brinkers, Henry S. (1972) “Decision-making : creative, judgement, and systems”
Columbus : Ohio State Uni. Press.
Byars, Lloyd L.(1991) “Human resource management” Homewood, Ill. : Irwin.
Charles Mclntyre, Merlin Kirchenman, and Scott Seltveit. (1999). “ Applying
Decision Support Software in Selection of Division Director.” J. Constr.
Engrg. and Mgmt.
David I. Cleland, Lewis R. Ireland. (2000) “Project manager's portable handbook .”
New York : McGraw-Hill.
Deborah J. Fisher, Michael W. O'Neill, and Jeffrey C. Contreras. (1995) “Drilled
Shaft Decision Support System” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt. 121, 86.
Fong and Choi, Jenning and Holt, Okaroh and Torrance. (1998,1999,2000). “A
Decision Framework for Contractor Selection.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt.
Ford, Robert Clayton. (1980) “Principles of management : a decision-making
approach” Reston, Va. : Reston.
George T Milkovich, John W Boudreau. (1991) “Human resource management.”
Homewood, IL : Irwin.
Igal M. Shohet and Eldad Perelstein. (2004). “Decision Support Model for the
Allocation of Resources in Rehabilitation Projects.” J. Constr. Engrg. and
Mgmt. 130, 249.
Jeffrey K. Pinto, O. P. Kharbanda. (1995) “Successful project managers : leading your
team to success.” New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Karumanasseri, G and AbouRizk, S. (2002) “ Decision Support System for
Scheduling Steel Fabrication Projects” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt. 128, 392.
Koorosh Gharehbaghi and Kerry McManus. (2003) “Effective Construction
Management” Leadersh. Manage. Eng. 3, 54.
117
Liberatore, Matthew. (2003) “Decision technology : modeling, software and
applications.” Haboken, New Jersey : John Wiley & Sons.
Lloyd L. Byars, Leslie W. Rue. (1991) “Human resource management.” Homewood,
Ill. : Irwin.
Milkovich, George T. (1991) “Human resource management” Homewood, IL : Irwin.
Mohammed Fadhil Dulaimi and David Langford. “Job Behavior of Construction
Project Managers: Determinants and Assessment.” J. Constr. Engrg. and
Mgmt. 125, 256.
Neuman, William Lawrence. (1991) “Social research methods : qualitative and
quantitative approaches” Boston : Allyn and Bacon.
Pinto, Jeffrey K. (1995) “Successful project managers: leading your team to success”
New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Rafikul Islam. (2003) “The analytic hierarchy process : an effective multi-criteria
decision making tool.” Kuala Lumpur : International Islamic University
Malaysia.
Ralph L Keeney. (1976) “Decisions with multiple objectives : preferences and value
tradeoffs.” New York : Wiley.
Robert J. Thierauf, Robert C. Klekamp. (1975) “ Decision making through operations
research.” New York : John Wiley.
Robert J. Thierauf. (1988) “User-oriented decision support systems : accent on
problem finding.” Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
Royer. King. (1974) “The construction manager” Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey :
Prentice-Hall.
Royer, King. (1981) “The construction manager in the 80's.” Englewood Cliffs, N J :
Prentice-Hall.
Saaty, Thomas L. (Thomas Lorie). (1991) “Prediction projection and forecasting :
applications of the analytic hierarchy processes in economics, finance, politics,
games and sports” Boston : Kluwer Academic Pubs.
Thierauf, Robert J.(1988) “User-oriented decision support systems : accent on
problem finding” Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
118
• APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY FORM
• APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW SURVEY FORM
• APPENDIX C: EVALUATION INTERVIEW SURVEY
FORM
119
APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY FORM
120
UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY OF MALAYSIA
FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
THE SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION’S PROJECT MANAGER BY
USING ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
Prepared by:
LAU HUI SENG
Master of Science Construction Management
Faculty of Civil Engineering
University Technology of Malaysia
121
PART 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
This survey is part of a research ‘Masters Project’ program at
University Technology of Malaysia. The purpose of this
questionnaire is to capture the expert’s knowledge and experience
for project manager’s selection criteria to identify the factor that
should be considered in selection process. A new framework as a
Decision Support System (DSS) for evaluating construction’s
project manager will be developed based on AHP. We hope that
the finding from this survey will provide an even more structured
approach and assist in formulating guidelines for selection of a
construction project manager in construction’s company.
Structured question have been formulated to achieve this goal. You
are require to answer the questions by ticking and filling in the box.
Your respond to this questionnaire is highly appreciated and will be
treated as confidential with the strictest confidence. All the
information will be used in academic purpose only.
Please answer and return this questionnaire survey to following
address before 11 FEBRUARY 2006 (SATURDAY) to assist in
these studies. Your corporation is highly appreciated.
Any Inquiries and further information please contact:
LAU HUI SENG
No 11, Jalan Timah 8, Taman Sri Putri,
81300, Skudai, Johor Darul Takzim.
Tel: 019-8985021 @ 075579734
Thank You.
122
PART 2: INFORMATION SURVEY
A) Company Background Information
Name of Respondent: ________________________________________
Position in Company:_________________________________________
Working’s Experience :___________(Years)__________(Months)
Name of Company and
address:______________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Tel. No:______________________(Off) Tel.No:___________________(H/P)
Fax No: ______________________
Email Add/ URL:
_________________________________________________________
123
B) Respondent’s Background
1)
Your discipline and specialist
□
□
□
□
2)
Decision- Making
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Costing Manager
General Manager
Director
Others
………………………………
………………………………
□
□
□
□
Advisory
Information Provider
Not involved
Others
………………………………
………………………………
Experience in pre-qualification and selection process
□ None
□ 1-3 years
□ 3- 5 years
4)
□
□
□
□
What is your role in the selection and pre-qualification of a Company’s project
manager ?
□
□
□
□
3)
Architect
Engineer
Quantity Surveyor
Project Manager/ Senior
Project Manager
□ 5-10 years
□ > 10 years
Category of work involved in your profession.
□
□
□
□
Building
Civil Engineering
Maintenance
Specialist
□ Testing
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
124
C) About Your Organization
Note: The answer should base on the office that you currently work.
5)
Type of organization/ practice
□
□
□
□
6)
Class A
Class B
Class C
Class D
< 5 millions
5-10 millions
10-20 millions
30-50 millions
□ >50 millions
□ Others
………………………………
…………………....................
What type of project that your company engaged recently?
□
□
□
□
10)
□ Others
………………………………
…………………....................
What is the average size of contract your company involves?
□
□
□
□
9)
□ Class E
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
Did your organization Bumiputera owned company?
□ Yes
□ No
8)
□ Sub-contractor
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
If the answer is B, What is your PKK registration?
□
□
□
□
7)
Developer
Contractor
Quantity Surveyor
Project management
consultant
Building
Civil Engineering
Maintenance
Building Services
□ Specialist works
□ Others
………………………………
……………………................
How many projects did your company undertake for last 5 years?
□ 1 to 2 projects
□ 2 to 3 projects
□ 3 to 4 projects
□ > 5 projects
125
D) Selection Process
11)
How your organizations determine the decision criteria and rules apply for project
manager selection process?
□ Standard internal guideline
from your local office
□ Corporate quality system
□ According to Management
officers
12)
What information has to be submitted by the candidates in pre-qualification or
resume? (Please tick the related information)
□
□
□
□
□
□
13)
Personnel information
Job experiences
Academic achievements
Professional skills
Special qualifications
Additional qualifications
Ability to perform duties
Health History
Strength
Weaknesses
Expected salary/ Desired Pay
Others.………………………
………………………………
□ Senior Officer
□ Others
………………………………
……………………................
How does the decision criteria being evaluated?
□ Rating with no weight
□ Rating with designed
weighting
□ Based on experience
□ Matrix Judgment
□ Statistic Analysis
15)
□
□
□
□
□
□
Who is responsible for evaluating candidate’s qualification?
□ Human resources department
□ Company’s manager
□ Director
14)
□ According to experience
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
□ Professional judgment
□ Decision support system
(DSS)
□ Others
………………………………
……………………...............
Have you ever heard about the usage of Decision Support System (DSS) in the
evaluation process?
□ Yes
□ No
126
16)
Have you ever heard about Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) used in selection
process?
□ Yes
□ No
17)
Did your company apply any methodology decision support system for selection
and evaluation process?
□ Yes
□ No
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
If the answer is yes, please answer the question 18
18)
What kind of methodology decision support tools applied for selection &
evaluation process in your company?
□
□
□
□
□
□
19)
Bespoke Approach
Fuzzy Set Process
Analytic Hierarchy Process
Cluster Analysis
Multi Criteria Judgment
Multi Attribute Analysis
□ Multi Regression
□ Discriminate Analysis
□ Others
………………………………
………………………………
Did your company consider Decision Support System (DSS) is important for
evaluation and selection the appropriate project manager?
□
□
□
□
□
Yes
No
Not necessary
Never apply
Others.………………………
………………………………
127
20)
What are the primary consideration and most important criteria in selection for
the position of project manager? Please tick in the boxes provided. If any
decision criterion not included, please specify it. The criterion rank from 0 - 5
which mean:
5=
4=
3=
2=
1=
0=
Decision Criteria
Basic Requirements
1) Job experience
2) Academic achievements
3) Effective written and verbal
communication skills
4) Proficiency with Microsoft Office
and others planning software
Management Skills
(A) Project Management
1) Planning
•
•
Detail planning and
scheduling
Budgeting/ Estimating
2) Organizing
3) Staffing/ Directing
•
Operating procedure
•
Advising
4) Controlling
•
Supervision
•
Inspection
5) Monitoring
•
Project Tracking
6) Training
(B) Others
1) Conducting meeting
Most importance
Very important
Moderate
Less importance
Not so importance
Not importance
0
1
Importance
2
3
4
5
Comments
128
2) Documentation/ record keeping
3) Times management
4) Resources & property
management
5) Worker welfare management
6) Rules & regulations
Interpersonal Skills
1) Problem solving
2) Decision making
3) Multi-task
4) Correspondences
5) Customer services
Others …………………………..
Others …………………………..
Others …………………………..
Others …………………………..
Others …………………………..
129
APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW SURVEY FORM
130
UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY OF MALAYSIA
FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
INTERVIEW SURVEY
THE SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION’S PROJECT MANAGER BY
USING ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
Prepared by:
LAU HUI SENG
Master of Science Construction Management
Faculty of Civil Engineering
University Technology of Malaysia
131
PART I: INTRODUCTION TO INTERVIEW SURVEY:
This survey is part of a research ‘Masters Project’ program at
University Technology of Malaysia. The purpose of this interview
survey is to capture the expert’s knowledge and experience for
project manager’s selection criteria to identify the factor that
should be considered in selection process. A new framework as a
Decision Support System (DSS) for evaluating construction’s
project manager will be developed based on AHP. We hope that
the finding from this survey will provide an even more structured
approach and assist in formulating guidelines for selection of a
construction project manager in construction’s company.
Semi-structured question have been formulated to achieve this
goal. You are requiring answering the questions by filling the most
appropriate ranking numbers in the box. There is also an
opportunity for you to add your comments and extra opinion. Your
respond to this survey is highly appreciated and will be treated as
confidential with the strictest confidence. All the information will
be used in academic purpose only.
Any queries please contact 019-8985021, Your corporation is
highly appreciated.
ThankYou.
132
PART II: RESPONDENT’S INFORMATION
Date
: …………………………………………………………………
Time
: …………………………………………………………………
Venue
: …………………………………………………........................
……………………………………………………………..........
Name of respondent : …………………………………………………………………
Position
: …………………………………………………………………
Company Name
& Address
: …………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………..
Phone No
: ………………………….(H/P) ………………………...(OFF)
Email Add
: …………………………………………………………………
133
PART III: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1) Would your agreed with the criteria’s ranking identified from the
questionnaire survey as below?
Criteria
Rank
2) What is your opinion and justification with the questionnaire results above?
Criteria
Rank
134
3) What information is used to access the main criteria during the selection
process?
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
4) How efficient are your current selection procedures?
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
5) Did you consider the important of the decision support system in the final
evaluation process?
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
135
APPENDIX C
EVALUATION INTERVIEW SURVEY FORM
136
UNIVERSITY TECHNOLOGY OF MALAYSIA
FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
EVALUATION INTERVIEW SURVEY
THE SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION’S PROJECT MANAGER BY
USING ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)
Prepared by:
LAU HUI SENG
Master of Science Construction Management
Faculty of Civil Engineering
University Technology of Malaysia
137
PART A: RESPONDENT’S INFORMATION
Date
: …………………………………………………………………
Time
: …………………………………………………………………
Venue
: …………………………………………………........................
……………………………………………………………..........
Name of respondent : …………………………………………………………………
Position
: …………………………………………………………………
Company Name
& Address
: …………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………..
Phone No
: ………………………….(H/P) ………………………...(OFF)
Email Add
: …………………………………………………………………
138
PART B: EVALUATION QUESTIONS
Please tick in the boxes provided. The evaluation rank from 1 - 5 which mean:
5=
4=
3=
2=
1=
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Rating
PMSS Evaluation Questions
The System Performance (Overall Rating )
1
How well does the system help in understanding how a
selection process in Human resources planning?
2.
How clearly the selection criteria defined in the system?
3.
How well are the selection techniques explained in the
system?
4.
How useful will the system be in supporting the human
resources selection process?
5.
How well does the Information Document help in making a
decision?
6.
How appropriate is the Pair wise comparison aspect of the
system?
7.
How well does the system reflect the decision-making
ability in a real situation?
8.
How useful do you find the sensitivity analysis within the
system?
Applicability (Overall Rating )
9.
How effective/ accurate is the system in the human
resources selection?
10. How convinced are you that the human resources expertise
will accept the system?
11. How effectively will the system increase the speed of the
decision making process?
12. To what extent does it represent an improvement in the
decision making process?
13. To what extent is the system flexible in human resources
selection process?
General (Overall rating)
14. How well organized is the system?
15.
How user friendly is the system?
16.
What is your overall rating of the prototype system?
1
(Poor)
2
(Fair)
3
(Satisfa
ctory)
4
(Good)
5
(Excell
ent)
139
PART C: COMMENTS
1.)
Benefits of the prototype system:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
2.)
Recommendations to improve the system:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………..