2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An economic–probabilistic model for project selection and prioritization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
42
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 80 publications
0
42
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…All steps are described well in the rest of this section. (Dutra et al, 2014) presented a summary of the criteria used for selecting projects that meet certain evaluative criteria and classified them into an endogenous and an exogenous class. Based on a review of literature, this paper uses the following evaluation criteria for project selection: Improve competitiveness, strategic alignment, social benefits, relation to other projects, staff requirements, market potential, overall profitability, technical significant of the project, invest return, complexity of the project, execution time, ease of implementation, degree of innovation, project scope, overall investment, infrastructure requirements and technological costs.…”
Section: Develop a Methodology For Decision Makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All steps are described well in the rest of this section. (Dutra et al, 2014) presented a summary of the criteria used for selecting projects that meet certain evaluative criteria and classified them into an endogenous and an exogenous class. Based on a review of literature, this paper uses the following evaluation criteria for project selection: Improve competitiveness, strategic alignment, social benefits, relation to other projects, staff requirements, market potential, overall profitability, technical significant of the project, invest return, complexity of the project, execution time, ease of implementation, degree of innovation, project scope, overall investment, infrastructure requirements and technological costs.…”
Section: Develop a Methodology For Decision Makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To achieve these goals there are several methods and tools that can be used in PPM (Dutra et al, 2014). In a systematic review on the subject, Carvalho et al (2013) observed that the most cited methods and tools are financial, mathematical programming, and statistical models; and the criteria for the selection of projects that stand out most are now based on market potential, economic-financial analysis, and risk/ uncertainty analysis.…”
Section: Environmental Sustainability and Project Portfolio Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some studies (Abrantes & Figueiredo, 2015;Dutra et al, 2014) emphasize that the application of these methods and tools associated with PPM tends to help companies improve their evaluation, selection, project prioritization, scope management and allocation of resources among different projects. In routine cases, PPM can determine how to allocate resources among projects, thereby safeguarding the global interest (portfolio) against local interests (projects) in order to guarantee good performance in environments in which resources tend to be scarce (Kock et al, 2015;Teller et al, 2012).…”
Section: Environmental Sustainability and Project Portfolio Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some studies considered projects as zero-one variables (Hassanzadeh et al, 2014;Pendharkar, 2014;Shakhsi-Niaei et al, 2011) that choosing or not choosing the projects is the goal. Some solve the problem in a way of prioritization of projects (Dutra et al, 2014;García-Melón et al, 2015;Mohanty et al, 2005). This attitude determines the priority of projects to be implemented.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each method considers the problem in its particular attitude. (Dutra et al, 2014;Medaglia et al, 2007) used Monte Carlo simulation. Fuzzy theory is another way to handle uncertainty (Ghapanchi et al 2012;KhaliliDamghani et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%