Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection

被引:160
作者
Liesio, Juuso [1 ]
Mild, Pekka [1 ]
Salo, Ahti [1 ]
机构
[1] Helsinki Univ Technol, Syst Anal Lab, Helsinki 02015, Finland
关键词
multiple criteria decision analysis; project selection; investment appraisal; portfolio optimization; incomplete information; robustness; MULTIATTRIBUTE DECISION-MAKING; INCOMPLETE INFORMATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejor.2005.12.041
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In decision analysis, difficulties of obtaining complete information about model parameters make it advisable to seek robust solutions that perform reasonably well across the full range of feasible parameter values. In this paper, we develop the Robust Portfolio Modeling (RPM) methodology which extends Preference Programming methods into portfolio problems where a subset of project proposals are funded in view of multiple evaluation criteria. We also develop an algorithm for computing all non-dominated portfolios, subject to incomplete information about criterion weights and project-specific performance levels. Based on these portfolios, we propose a project-level index to convey (i) which projects are robust choices (in the sense that they would be recommended even if further information were to be obtained) and (ii) how continued activities in preference elicitation should be focused. The RPM methodology is illustrated with an application using real data on road pavement projects. (C) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1488 / 1505
页数:18
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]   APPROXIMATE ARTICULATION OF PREFERENCE AND PRIORITY DERIVATION [J].
ARBEL, A .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1989, 43 (03) :317-326
[2]  
Archer N. P., 1999, International Journal of Project Management, V17, P207, DOI 10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00032-5
[3]   New product portfolio management: Practices and performance [J].
Cooper, RG ;
Edgett, SJ ;
Kleinschmidt, EJ .
JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, 1999, 16 (04) :333-351
[4]  
Dias LC, 2000, J OPER RES SOC, V51, P1070, DOI 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601012
[5]   SMARTS AND SMARTER - IMPROVED SIMPLE METHODS FOR MULTIATTRIBUTE UTILITY MEASUREMENT [J].
EDWARDS, W ;
BARRON, FH .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1994, 60 (03) :306-325
[6]   A survey and annotated bibliography of multiobjective combinatorial optimization [J].
Ehrgott M. ;
Gandibleux X. .
OR-Spektrum, 2000, 22 (4) :425-460
[7]   Approximating multiobjective knapsack problems [J].
Erlebach, T ;
Kellerer, H ;
Pferschy, U .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2002, 48 (12) :1603-1612
[8]   SELECTING A PORTFOLIO OF SOLAR-ENERGY PROJECTS USING MULTIATTRIBUTE PREFERENCE THEORY [J].
GOLABI, K ;
KIRKWOOD, CW ;
SICHERMAN, A .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1981, 27 (02) :174-189
[9]   SELECTING A GROUP OF DISSIMILAR PROJECTS FOR FUNDING [J].
GOLABI, K .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, 1987, 34 (03) :138-145
[10]  
Hamalainen R.P., 2004, DECIS ANAL, V1, P26