Research Article A Novel Hybrid MCDM Procedure...
Transcript of Research Article A Novel Hybrid MCDM Procedure...
Research ArticleA Novel Hybrid MCDM Procedure for Achieving AspiredEarned Value Project Performance
Shou-Yan Chou1 Chien-Chou Yu1 and Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng23
1Department of Industrial Management National Taiwan University of Science and Technology No 43 Section 4Keelung Road Taipei 106 Taiwan2Graduate Institute of Urban Planning College of Public Affairs National Taipei University No 151 University RoadSan Shia New Taipei City 23741 Taiwan3Institute of Management of Technology National Chiao Tung University No 1001 Ta-Hsueh RoadHsinchu 300 Taiwan
Correspondence should be addressed to Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng ghtzengmailntpuedutw
Received 30 December 2015 Revised 14 April 2016 Accepted 19 April 2016
Academic Editor Danielle Morais
Copyright copy 2016 Shou-Yan Chou et alThis is an open access article distributed under the Creative CommonsAttribution Licensewhich permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited
A better-performing project gains more subsequent businesses Many organizations worldwide apply an earned value management(EVM) system to monitor and control their projectsrsquo performance However a successful EVM application requires handlingmultiple interinfluenced criteria with feedback effects for decision-making and continuous improvements throughout theapplication life cycleThe conventional decision approaches assume that preferences between criteria are independent and put theirfocuses on decision-making This study employs a hybrid multiple criteria decision-making (HMCDM) method to devise a novelprocedure to fulfil the deficiencies The proposed procedure enables us to evaluate interinfluence effects and gap indices amongcriteriadimensionsalternatives and then systemize the evaluation results in a context of influential network relation map (INRM)The INRM provides managers with visual information to find a route in making application decisions while identifying criticalgaps for continuous improvements A numerical example is presented to illustrate the applicability of the proposed procedureTheresults show that by employing the HMCDM method the proposed procedure can provide organizations with a foundation toensure that the aspired EVM application outcomes are achieved at different levels within an organization
1 Introduction
A project is ldquoa temporary endeavor undertaken to transformlimited resources into a unique product service or resultrdquo inorder to satisfy the needs of society users and customers [1]A better-performing project gainsmore subsequent business-es and is ultimately of strategic importance to an organization[2 3] To attain high performances many organizationsworldwide apply an earned valuemanagement (EVM) systemto monitor and control their projects [4 5] A successfulEVM application enables us to produce reliable performanceindices at initial stages of a project as early as 15 to 20 percentof the project process [6 7] thus allowing organizations tounderstand project health predict future trends and takerequired control actions to minimize deviations thereby
attaining the aspired performances throughout the projectlife cycle [8ndash10]
According to Kim et al [11] EVM application can beformulated as a multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM)problem which requires experts to analyze a set of interin-fluenced application criteria with feedback effects through-out the application process Some of these criteria includethe following using information systems to report projectprogress in an accurate and timely manner [11] using aproject management process to break down the project scopeand organizational structure [7] training stakeholders in theeffective use of EVM [12] and providing ongoing efforts toimprove the application of EVM [10] According to Flemingand Koppelman [7] a lack of accurate understanding ofthe above-mentioned interinfluenced criteria can lead to
Hindawi Publishing CorporationMathematical Problems in EngineeringVolume 2016 Article ID 9721726 16 pageshttpdxdoiorg10115520169721726
2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
a series of shortcomings in the implementation of an EVMKwak and Anbari [5] have also noted that without adequateanalysis upfront even after an application decision has beenconceived and implemented unanticipated efforts will berequired to solve new problems as the implementation pro-ceedsThese studies demonstrate the importance of adoptinga systematic procedure to analyze interinfluenced criteriaassociated with the EVM application decision Additionallyto obtain aspired application outcomes continuous improve-ments should be also early considered in order to preventthe selected decisions from producing negative outcomes[2 13 14]
However according to the literature review of this studymost traditional MCDM approaches assume that the pref-erences between decision variables are independent andput their emphasis on evaluation and selection of decisionalternativeswithout addressing practicalmeans to implementrequired improvements [15ndash20] Yet as discussed previouslyEVM application requires a decision approach that addressesthese issues Consequently this study employs a hybrid mul-tiple criteria decision-making (HMCDM) method to devisea novel procedure to fulfil the above-mentioned deficienciesThe HMCDM method contains a decision-making trial andevaluation (DEMATAEL) technique [21] aDEMATEL-basedanalytical network procedure (DANP) [22] and a mod-ified multicriteria optimization and compromise solution(ViseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje inSerbian VIKOR) method [23] This combined approach wasintroduced by Tzeng [17] as a new trend of decision-makingRecently it has been successfully applied in different businessfields to solve and improve complex and interdependent real-world problems [18 22 24ndash27] and is thus examined in thisstudy
The proposed novel procedure uses expertsrsquo judgmentsto model interdependent EVM application problems witha decision framework considering improvement require-ments The procedure then employs the HMCDM methodto quantify gap indices with respect to aspiration levels ofEVM application based on interinfluence effects among fac-torsdimensionsalternatives within the decision frameworkFinally the HMCDM method systemizes the quantitativeresults in the context of influential network relation maps(INRM) The INRM helps managers find a route for EVMapplication decisions while identifying critical gaps for priorimprovements throughout the life of the decisions implemen-tation A numerical example is presented to illustrate how theproposed procedure operates in practice The results showthat by employing the HMCDMmethod the proposed pro-cedure can provide organizations with a foundation to ensurethat the aspired EVM application outcomes are achievedat different levels within an organization The remainder ofthis paper is organized as follows In Section 2 the EVMliterature is reviewed in relation to the proposed procedurein Section 3 essential concepts of the HMCDM model arepresented and the proposed procedure is introduced inSection 4 a numerical example showing the applicability ofthe proposed procedure is presented and main findings arediscussed conclusions are provided in the final section
2 The Literature Review aboutEarned Value Management
This section briefly reviews research literature associatedwith EVM application and then identifies the dimensionsand factorscriteria for establishing a decision frameworkin formulating the proposed procedure for pursuing theaspiration levels of EVM application through better decision-making and continuous improvements
The EVM was originally developed as a technique bythe United States Department of Defense (DoD) in the1960s to manage the financial aspects of major acquisitionprojects In 1967 the DoD adopted the 35 standardizedEVM managerial criteria defined by the United StatesAir Force as the Cost Schedule Control System Criteria(CSCSC) This regulatory system was used by the DoD andits contractors to monitor and control various projects overthe next three decades [7] In 1996 the National DefenseIndustrial Association reduced the EVM criteria to a totalof 32 which were formally accepted by ANSIEIA in 1998 intheir publication of the ANSIEIA 748-98 standard knownas EVM system [6] During the following year the ProjectManagement Institute (PMI) adopted EVM as a managerialtool and technique to monitor projects as stated in itspublication titled A Guide to the Project Management Bodyof Knowledge (PMBOKGuide) and subsequently describedin a separate publication Practice Standards for EarnedValueManagementThese publications and the promotion of EVMprinciples including their regulation standardization andsimplification have led to increasing interest in the useand development of innovative applications of EVM amongorganizations and experts worldwide [3 5 6 8 11]
However while EVM has been widely accepted as oneof the most pragmatic systems for managing project perfor-mances in both public and private organizations the studieshave also noted that the development of EVM elements andthe wide acceptance of EVM do not in themselves guaranteethat the EVM application will be successful for projects in allorganizations [2 6] Some of the common issues arising inprojects managed through EVM in different organizationsincluding the US government and its subsidiary agenciesinclude overbudgeting schedule delays and unsatisfactoryperformance [5 11] These phenomena indicate that evenin organizations with long-term operational experiencethe implementation of EVM can result in deviations fromorganizationsrsquo aspiration level [7] Hence the subject of theeffective EVM application requires further study to assistorganizations in obtaining intended outcomes In particularorganizationmust enable us to assess the current capability ofeach subordinate unit to understand whether EVM applica-tion decisions could eventually help the unit to bettermanageproject performance What application factors should be inplace for each unit to apply EVM and to avoid the needfor unintended efforts during the implementation of EVMdecisions Furthermore if the EVM application is justified asinappropriate then how can each unit improve its weaknessto facilitate benefits through EVM application in the future
According to the American National Standards InstituteElectric Industries Association a reliable EVM application
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3
should consider 32 criteria belonging to five categories (1)organization (2) planning and budgeting (3) accounting(4) analysis and revision and (5) data maintenance [28]Fleming and Koppelman [7] who conducted research onmany software projects proposed ten ldquomust-havesrdquo thatare required to fully grasp and apply the critical earnedvalue concept in enhancing the management of all types ofprojects in an industry These ten ldquomust-havesrdquo require thecomplete definition of a projectrsquos scope of work using a workbreakdown structure (WBS) at the outset of project planningas well as through the continuous management of all changesduring project execution Another study by Kwak and Anbari[5] based on the National Aeronautics and Space Association(NASA) indicated that key success factors for the imple-mentation of EVM included the early introduction of EVMthe full involvement of users and consistent communicationwith all stakeholders Lipke [10] argued that the elementsrequired for executing projects and facilitating continuousimprovement are necessary ingredients for EVM applicationto ensure successful project outcomes These studies haveprovided useful information for understanding the factorsinfluencing the successful EVM application from differentperspectives but lack an integrated or systematic procedurefor analyzing level of readiness of these factors when makingapplication and improvement decisions
Stratton [12] proposed a five-stepmaturemodel of earnedvalue management to enhance the quality and use of EVMwithin an organization This model can be linked to theANSIESI standard 748 to create assessment matrices thathelp users to evolve an EVM within their own organizationsand to assess the relative strengths of various EVM appli-cations This study has focused on developing a systematicprocedure for analyzing effectively EVM implementationwhile assuming the independence of the factors in theassessment matrices This assumption conflicts with the real-world application situations discussed in many other studies[3 5 10]
A more comprehensive study by Kim et al [11] used sur-veys mailed to 2500 individuals and on-site case studies con-ducted within six organizations and concluded that approx-imately 40 interactive factors in four dimensions (the EVMuser the EVM methodology the implementation processand the project environment) could influence significantlythe EVM application in four ways (1) accepting the concept(2) applying EVM by project managers and team members(3) enabling projects to be completed within constraints andwith satisfactory performance and (4) bringing overall sat-isfaction to users of this methodology The study concludedby proposing an implementation framework to assist bothindustrial and government agencies applying EVM moreeffectively for different sizes and types of projects Howeverthe proposedmodel and frameworkwere qualitative in natureand did not provide a systematic mean to quantitativelyanalyze interrelated effects among the dimensionsfactors forapplication decisions and management actions
According to the literatures discussed above the fac-torscriteria influencing the effective EVM application canbe grouped into four dimensions the EVM user the EVMmethodology the implementation process and the project
environment Each dimension contains respective factors asshown in Table 1 In the next section a novel procedurebased on the HMADM method is proposed to evaluate andanalyze these interdependent application dimensionsfactorsin relation to the selection and improvement of applicationdecisions with the goal of obtaining aspiration levels of EVMapplication
3 The Proposed Procedures for Obtainingthe Aspiration Levels of EVM Application
To explain the proposed procedure this section first brieflyintroduces the essential concepts related to the HMCDMmodel that combines the following elements DEMATELtechnique DEMATEL-base ANP andmodifiedVIKOR sub-sequently this section discusses how the model is employedto develop the proposed procedure
The HMCDM model was proposed by Tzeng [17] whocombined new concepts and techniques to handle complicateand dynamic real-world problems First theHMCDMmodelemploys the DEMATEL technique to quantify interinfluenceeffects among decision variables and visualize the effects onan influential network relationmap (INRM)TheDEMATELtechnique was developed by the Battelle Geneva Institute in1972 for assessing and solving complex groups of problems[29] This technique used Boolean operation and MarkovProcess to quantify cause and effect relationships on eachdimensioncriterion within a system (or subsystem) Quan-titative values results are then systemized on a single mapshowing degree and direction that each dimensioncriterioncan influence each other and to the overall system per-formance [30] The interinfluence values of DEMATELcan not only help managers gain valuable information forunderstanding specific societal problems but also be furtherused with other methods to obtain more precise weight-ing values and gap indices in dealing with the real-worlddecision and improvement problems [21 31] Second thismodel provides a procedure known as DANP that appliesa basic concept of the analytic network procedure (ANP)to transform the interinfluence value of DEMATEL intoinfluential weights (IWs) for prioritizing decision variablesANP was proposed by Saaty [32] to address interdependenceand feedback among the factors dimensions or alternativesassociated with a decision-making problem However ANPassigns identical weights for each cluster per group on thenormalized supermatrix neglecting the influence in differentdegree DANP used DEMATEL technique to adjust the ANPequal weighting assumption for better communication ofreal interdependent situations and improvement alternativesand decisions [22 31] These features avoid the assumptionof traditional decision models such as AHP TOPSIS pathanalysis and SEM that the value creation criteria are inde-pendently and hierarchically structured thereby enablinginterdependent decision situations to be viewed as decisionprocess and outcomes [18]
Third this model adopts the principle of ldquoaspirationlevelsrdquo [33] to replace the traditional maxmin approach [1534] through a modified VIKOR method when choosing
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 1 Evaluation factors and dimensions
Dimensionsfactors DescriptionsEVM users (119863
1)
Experience (1198621) Experience in using EVMS
Training (1198622) Training at school and on-job training to understand how to use
EVMSAdministrative capabilities (119862
3) Administrative expertise of project managers
Technical capabilities (1198624) Technical expertise of project managers
Changes in work contents (1198625) Acceptance of power shift after implementing EVMS
EVM methodology (1198632)
WBS (1198626) Using work breakdown structure (WBS) details project scopes
CPM (1198627) Using the Critical Path Method (CPM) as scheduling tool of
projects
IPT (1198628) Using Integrated Project Team (IPT) facilitates understanding
among project participantsComputer system (119862
9) Using automated computer system as part of EVMS process
Integrated project management (11986210) Using a project management system including EVMS
Implementation process (1198633)
Open communication (11986211) Open communications among project team players including
customersSufficient resources (119862
12) Provision of sufficient resources in the EVMS process
Top-down approach (11986213) Top management perceives EVMS as a pragmatic way in managing
project effectively
Integrated change control system (11986214) Using separated office to handle required changes justified by
EVMSContinuous improvement (119862
15) Providing ongoing efforts to improve application of the EVMS
Project management environment (1198634)
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) A colleague-based project management environment as opposed
to bureaucratic cultureOwnership of EVM to lower level project managers (119862
17) Flexibility allowed lower level project managers
Risk free (11986218) Allowing project players to select their own form of EVMS use
within a general frameworkCulture (119862
19) A strong trust and supportive culture in which project is performed
Regulations (11986220) Complete regulations for implementing EVMS
a relatively good solution from existing alternatives Thisfeature produces the size of performance gaps to aspirationlevels on each criteriondimensionalternative thus enablingmanagers to use a single value for both decision-makingand continuous improvements [25]The VIKORmethod wasproposed by Opricovic [35] to solve problems that involveincommensurable and conflicting factors Originally thismethod focused on analyzing a set of alternatives and select-ing a compromise solution closest to the ideal state [34] Theideal state was defined as a set of maximumminimum valuesrelating to each benefitcost criterion among all alternativesHowever these traditional compromises can entail ldquochoosingthe best among inferior optionsalternativesrdquo that is pick thebest apple in a barrel of rotten apples thus the traditionalprocedure has to entail ldquoimprovingrdquo the potential solutions[18] Hence Tzeng [17] proposed the modified VIKORmethod to replace the maximumminimum approach withldquoaspired-worstrdquo by setting 119891
lowast
119895= 10 and 119891minus
119895= 0 as the
aspiration level and the worst level respectively for criterion
119895 if performance scores with measuring range are from 0to 10 in questionnaires of each criterion as complete dis-satisfactionbad larr 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 rarr extremesatisfactiongood Recently this method has been used to aiddecisionmakers in identifying critical gaps in need of furtherimprovement [36 37]
Combining all these concepts and techniques theHMCDMmodel allowsmanagers to avoid ldquochoosing the bestamong inferior optionsalternativesrdquo (ie avoiding ldquopickingthe best apple among a barrel of rotten applesrdquo) [17] Moreimportantly the HMCDMmodel extends the evaluation andselection of decision functions to include identification ofcritical gaps for continuous improvement over the life ofdecision implementation [24 27 37] The detailed descrip-tions notations and computational processes can be foundin [17 19 26 38]
This study applies the HMCDM model to devise a novelprocedure for obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applica-tion through four main stages (1) form an expert team
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5
Develop a decision framework
Compute initial-average influence relation matrix AExpert questionnaire
Form expert team
User questionnaire
Construct influentialnetwork relation map
INRM
Top management
Make decisions and determine strategies
for continuousimprovements
DEMATEL technique
DANP
Modified VIKOR methodCompute gap indices using Rl = Sl + (1 minus )Ql
the maximal regret using Ql = maxjrlj | j = 1 n
Normalize flj using rlj = (|flowast
jminus flj|)(|f
lowast
jminus f
minus
j|)
Set aspiration level and the worst level fminusj
f+
j
Performance values flj
Compute weighted supermatrix W120572= T120572
DW
Transpose into W = (T120572C)998400 Normalize into T120572
D
Normalize A into initial-influence matrix D = As
Compute total-influence matrix T = D(I minus D)minus1
Classify factors into correspondent dimension TC
Average each dimension into TDNormalize into T120572C
Compute influential weights (IWs) on factorsdimensions(W120572
)urArr w = (w1 wj wn)limurarrinfin
Compute the average value using Sl = sumn
j=1wjrlj and
Figure 1 A graphical representation of the proposed procedure
(2) develop a decision framework (3) systemize and visualizedecision information using HMCDM model and (4) makeapplication decisions and determine improvement strategiesbased on INRM A graphical representation of our procedureis depicted in Figure 1
As shown in Figure 1 the proposed procedure first formsan expert team (ET) through a top management commit-tee according to the predetermined qualifications Secondthe ET identifies influencing criteria to develop a noveldecision framework (Figure 2) which considers both thedecision-making and continuous improvements associatedwith an interrelated decision problem The decision frame-work developed in this stage is different from traditionalones which only consider decision-making Third based on
the decision framework the procedure uses the HMCDMmodel to evaluate systemize and visualize decision andimprovement information including the following comput-ing interinfluence effects using the DEMATEL techniquecomputing influential weights using DANP computing gapindices using modified VIKOR method and lastly sys-temizing the decision information obtained from the pre-vious steps on the visualized DEMATELrsquos INRM showingpreference of alternatives and how much improvement isrequired for each criterion and dimension associated witheach alternative Finally referring to the INRM the ETgains valuable information to finalize application decisionswith top management and stakeholders while determiningstrategies for continuous improvements in achieving the
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
2 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
a series of shortcomings in the implementation of an EVMKwak and Anbari [5] have also noted that without adequateanalysis upfront even after an application decision has beenconceived and implemented unanticipated efforts will berequired to solve new problems as the implementation pro-ceedsThese studies demonstrate the importance of adoptinga systematic procedure to analyze interinfluenced criteriaassociated with the EVM application decision Additionallyto obtain aspired application outcomes continuous improve-ments should be also early considered in order to preventthe selected decisions from producing negative outcomes[2 13 14]
However according to the literature review of this studymost traditional MCDM approaches assume that the pref-erences between decision variables are independent andput their emphasis on evaluation and selection of decisionalternativeswithout addressing practicalmeans to implementrequired improvements [15ndash20] Yet as discussed previouslyEVM application requires a decision approach that addressesthese issues Consequently this study employs a hybrid mul-tiple criteria decision-making (HMCDM) method to devisea novel procedure to fulfil the above-mentioned deficienciesThe HMCDM method contains a decision-making trial andevaluation (DEMATAEL) technique [21] aDEMATEL-basedanalytical network procedure (DANP) [22] and a mod-ified multicriteria optimization and compromise solution(ViseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje inSerbian VIKOR) method [23] This combined approach wasintroduced by Tzeng [17] as a new trend of decision-makingRecently it has been successfully applied in different businessfields to solve and improve complex and interdependent real-world problems [18 22 24ndash27] and is thus examined in thisstudy
The proposed novel procedure uses expertsrsquo judgmentsto model interdependent EVM application problems witha decision framework considering improvement require-ments The procedure then employs the HMCDM methodto quantify gap indices with respect to aspiration levels ofEVM application based on interinfluence effects among fac-torsdimensionsalternatives within the decision frameworkFinally the HMCDM method systemizes the quantitativeresults in the context of influential network relation maps(INRM) The INRM helps managers find a route for EVMapplication decisions while identifying critical gaps for priorimprovements throughout the life of the decisions implemen-tation A numerical example is presented to illustrate how theproposed procedure operates in practice The results showthat by employing the HMCDMmethod the proposed pro-cedure can provide organizations with a foundation to ensurethat the aspired EVM application outcomes are achievedat different levels within an organization The remainder ofthis paper is organized as follows In Section 2 the EVMliterature is reviewed in relation to the proposed procedurein Section 3 essential concepts of the HMCDM model arepresented and the proposed procedure is introduced inSection 4 a numerical example showing the applicability ofthe proposed procedure is presented and main findings arediscussed conclusions are provided in the final section
2 The Literature Review aboutEarned Value Management
This section briefly reviews research literature associatedwith EVM application and then identifies the dimensionsand factorscriteria for establishing a decision frameworkin formulating the proposed procedure for pursuing theaspiration levels of EVM application through better decision-making and continuous improvements
The EVM was originally developed as a technique bythe United States Department of Defense (DoD) in the1960s to manage the financial aspects of major acquisitionprojects In 1967 the DoD adopted the 35 standardizedEVM managerial criteria defined by the United StatesAir Force as the Cost Schedule Control System Criteria(CSCSC) This regulatory system was used by the DoD andits contractors to monitor and control various projects overthe next three decades [7] In 1996 the National DefenseIndustrial Association reduced the EVM criteria to a totalof 32 which were formally accepted by ANSIEIA in 1998 intheir publication of the ANSIEIA 748-98 standard knownas EVM system [6] During the following year the ProjectManagement Institute (PMI) adopted EVM as a managerialtool and technique to monitor projects as stated in itspublication titled A Guide to the Project Management Bodyof Knowledge (PMBOKGuide) and subsequently describedin a separate publication Practice Standards for EarnedValueManagementThese publications and the promotion of EVMprinciples including their regulation standardization andsimplification have led to increasing interest in the useand development of innovative applications of EVM amongorganizations and experts worldwide [3 5 6 8 11]
However while EVM has been widely accepted as oneof the most pragmatic systems for managing project perfor-mances in both public and private organizations the studieshave also noted that the development of EVM elements andthe wide acceptance of EVM do not in themselves guaranteethat the EVM application will be successful for projects in allorganizations [2 6] Some of the common issues arising inprojects managed through EVM in different organizationsincluding the US government and its subsidiary agenciesinclude overbudgeting schedule delays and unsatisfactoryperformance [5 11] These phenomena indicate that evenin organizations with long-term operational experiencethe implementation of EVM can result in deviations fromorganizationsrsquo aspiration level [7] Hence the subject of theeffective EVM application requires further study to assistorganizations in obtaining intended outcomes In particularorganizationmust enable us to assess the current capability ofeach subordinate unit to understand whether EVM applica-tion decisions could eventually help the unit to bettermanageproject performance What application factors should be inplace for each unit to apply EVM and to avoid the needfor unintended efforts during the implementation of EVMdecisions Furthermore if the EVM application is justified asinappropriate then how can each unit improve its weaknessto facilitate benefits through EVM application in the future
According to the American National Standards InstituteElectric Industries Association a reliable EVM application
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3
should consider 32 criteria belonging to five categories (1)organization (2) planning and budgeting (3) accounting(4) analysis and revision and (5) data maintenance [28]Fleming and Koppelman [7] who conducted research onmany software projects proposed ten ldquomust-havesrdquo thatare required to fully grasp and apply the critical earnedvalue concept in enhancing the management of all types ofprojects in an industry These ten ldquomust-havesrdquo require thecomplete definition of a projectrsquos scope of work using a workbreakdown structure (WBS) at the outset of project planningas well as through the continuous management of all changesduring project execution Another study by Kwak and Anbari[5] based on the National Aeronautics and Space Association(NASA) indicated that key success factors for the imple-mentation of EVM included the early introduction of EVMthe full involvement of users and consistent communicationwith all stakeholders Lipke [10] argued that the elementsrequired for executing projects and facilitating continuousimprovement are necessary ingredients for EVM applicationto ensure successful project outcomes These studies haveprovided useful information for understanding the factorsinfluencing the successful EVM application from differentperspectives but lack an integrated or systematic procedurefor analyzing level of readiness of these factors when makingapplication and improvement decisions
Stratton [12] proposed a five-stepmaturemodel of earnedvalue management to enhance the quality and use of EVMwithin an organization This model can be linked to theANSIESI standard 748 to create assessment matrices thathelp users to evolve an EVM within their own organizationsand to assess the relative strengths of various EVM appli-cations This study has focused on developing a systematicprocedure for analyzing effectively EVM implementationwhile assuming the independence of the factors in theassessment matrices This assumption conflicts with the real-world application situations discussed in many other studies[3 5 10]
A more comprehensive study by Kim et al [11] used sur-veys mailed to 2500 individuals and on-site case studies con-ducted within six organizations and concluded that approx-imately 40 interactive factors in four dimensions (the EVMuser the EVM methodology the implementation processand the project environment) could influence significantlythe EVM application in four ways (1) accepting the concept(2) applying EVM by project managers and team members(3) enabling projects to be completed within constraints andwith satisfactory performance and (4) bringing overall sat-isfaction to users of this methodology The study concludedby proposing an implementation framework to assist bothindustrial and government agencies applying EVM moreeffectively for different sizes and types of projects Howeverthe proposedmodel and frameworkwere qualitative in natureand did not provide a systematic mean to quantitativelyanalyze interrelated effects among the dimensionsfactors forapplication decisions and management actions
According to the literatures discussed above the fac-torscriteria influencing the effective EVM application canbe grouped into four dimensions the EVM user the EVMmethodology the implementation process and the project
environment Each dimension contains respective factors asshown in Table 1 In the next section a novel procedurebased on the HMADM method is proposed to evaluate andanalyze these interdependent application dimensionsfactorsin relation to the selection and improvement of applicationdecisions with the goal of obtaining aspiration levels of EVMapplication
3 The Proposed Procedures for Obtainingthe Aspiration Levels of EVM Application
To explain the proposed procedure this section first brieflyintroduces the essential concepts related to the HMCDMmodel that combines the following elements DEMATELtechnique DEMATEL-base ANP andmodifiedVIKOR sub-sequently this section discusses how the model is employedto develop the proposed procedure
The HMCDM model was proposed by Tzeng [17] whocombined new concepts and techniques to handle complicateand dynamic real-world problems First theHMCDMmodelemploys the DEMATEL technique to quantify interinfluenceeffects among decision variables and visualize the effects onan influential network relationmap (INRM)TheDEMATELtechnique was developed by the Battelle Geneva Institute in1972 for assessing and solving complex groups of problems[29] This technique used Boolean operation and MarkovProcess to quantify cause and effect relationships on eachdimensioncriterion within a system (or subsystem) Quan-titative values results are then systemized on a single mapshowing degree and direction that each dimensioncriterioncan influence each other and to the overall system per-formance [30] The interinfluence values of DEMATELcan not only help managers gain valuable information forunderstanding specific societal problems but also be furtherused with other methods to obtain more precise weight-ing values and gap indices in dealing with the real-worlddecision and improvement problems [21 31] Second thismodel provides a procedure known as DANP that appliesa basic concept of the analytic network procedure (ANP)to transform the interinfluence value of DEMATEL intoinfluential weights (IWs) for prioritizing decision variablesANP was proposed by Saaty [32] to address interdependenceand feedback among the factors dimensions or alternativesassociated with a decision-making problem However ANPassigns identical weights for each cluster per group on thenormalized supermatrix neglecting the influence in differentdegree DANP used DEMATEL technique to adjust the ANPequal weighting assumption for better communication ofreal interdependent situations and improvement alternativesand decisions [22 31] These features avoid the assumptionof traditional decision models such as AHP TOPSIS pathanalysis and SEM that the value creation criteria are inde-pendently and hierarchically structured thereby enablinginterdependent decision situations to be viewed as decisionprocess and outcomes [18]
Third this model adopts the principle of ldquoaspirationlevelsrdquo [33] to replace the traditional maxmin approach [1534] through a modified VIKOR method when choosing
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 1 Evaluation factors and dimensions
Dimensionsfactors DescriptionsEVM users (119863
1)
Experience (1198621) Experience in using EVMS
Training (1198622) Training at school and on-job training to understand how to use
EVMSAdministrative capabilities (119862
3) Administrative expertise of project managers
Technical capabilities (1198624) Technical expertise of project managers
Changes in work contents (1198625) Acceptance of power shift after implementing EVMS
EVM methodology (1198632)
WBS (1198626) Using work breakdown structure (WBS) details project scopes
CPM (1198627) Using the Critical Path Method (CPM) as scheduling tool of
projects
IPT (1198628) Using Integrated Project Team (IPT) facilitates understanding
among project participantsComputer system (119862
9) Using automated computer system as part of EVMS process
Integrated project management (11986210) Using a project management system including EVMS
Implementation process (1198633)
Open communication (11986211) Open communications among project team players including
customersSufficient resources (119862
12) Provision of sufficient resources in the EVMS process
Top-down approach (11986213) Top management perceives EVMS as a pragmatic way in managing
project effectively
Integrated change control system (11986214) Using separated office to handle required changes justified by
EVMSContinuous improvement (119862
15) Providing ongoing efforts to improve application of the EVMS
Project management environment (1198634)
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) A colleague-based project management environment as opposed
to bureaucratic cultureOwnership of EVM to lower level project managers (119862
17) Flexibility allowed lower level project managers
Risk free (11986218) Allowing project players to select their own form of EVMS use
within a general frameworkCulture (119862
19) A strong trust and supportive culture in which project is performed
Regulations (11986220) Complete regulations for implementing EVMS
a relatively good solution from existing alternatives Thisfeature produces the size of performance gaps to aspirationlevels on each criteriondimensionalternative thus enablingmanagers to use a single value for both decision-makingand continuous improvements [25]The VIKORmethod wasproposed by Opricovic [35] to solve problems that involveincommensurable and conflicting factors Originally thismethod focused on analyzing a set of alternatives and select-ing a compromise solution closest to the ideal state [34] Theideal state was defined as a set of maximumminimum valuesrelating to each benefitcost criterion among all alternativesHowever these traditional compromises can entail ldquochoosingthe best among inferior optionsalternativesrdquo that is pick thebest apple in a barrel of rotten apples thus the traditionalprocedure has to entail ldquoimprovingrdquo the potential solutions[18] Hence Tzeng [17] proposed the modified VIKORmethod to replace the maximumminimum approach withldquoaspired-worstrdquo by setting 119891
lowast
119895= 10 and 119891minus
119895= 0 as the
aspiration level and the worst level respectively for criterion
119895 if performance scores with measuring range are from 0to 10 in questionnaires of each criterion as complete dis-satisfactionbad larr 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 rarr extremesatisfactiongood Recently this method has been used to aiddecisionmakers in identifying critical gaps in need of furtherimprovement [36 37]
Combining all these concepts and techniques theHMCDMmodel allowsmanagers to avoid ldquochoosing the bestamong inferior optionsalternativesrdquo (ie avoiding ldquopickingthe best apple among a barrel of rotten applesrdquo) [17] Moreimportantly the HMCDMmodel extends the evaluation andselection of decision functions to include identification ofcritical gaps for continuous improvement over the life ofdecision implementation [24 27 37] The detailed descrip-tions notations and computational processes can be foundin [17 19 26 38]
This study applies the HMCDM model to devise a novelprocedure for obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applica-tion through four main stages (1) form an expert team
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5
Develop a decision framework
Compute initial-average influence relation matrix AExpert questionnaire
Form expert team
User questionnaire
Construct influentialnetwork relation map
INRM
Top management
Make decisions and determine strategies
for continuousimprovements
DEMATEL technique
DANP
Modified VIKOR methodCompute gap indices using Rl = Sl + (1 minus )Ql
the maximal regret using Ql = maxjrlj | j = 1 n
Normalize flj using rlj = (|flowast
jminus flj|)(|f
lowast
jminus f
minus
j|)
Set aspiration level and the worst level fminusj
f+
j
Performance values flj
Compute weighted supermatrix W120572= T120572
DW
Transpose into W = (T120572C)998400 Normalize into T120572
D
Normalize A into initial-influence matrix D = As
Compute total-influence matrix T = D(I minus D)minus1
Classify factors into correspondent dimension TC
Average each dimension into TDNormalize into T120572C
Compute influential weights (IWs) on factorsdimensions(W120572
)urArr w = (w1 wj wn)limurarrinfin
Compute the average value using Sl = sumn
j=1wjrlj and
Figure 1 A graphical representation of the proposed procedure
(2) develop a decision framework (3) systemize and visualizedecision information using HMCDM model and (4) makeapplication decisions and determine improvement strategiesbased on INRM A graphical representation of our procedureis depicted in Figure 1
As shown in Figure 1 the proposed procedure first formsan expert team (ET) through a top management commit-tee according to the predetermined qualifications Secondthe ET identifies influencing criteria to develop a noveldecision framework (Figure 2) which considers both thedecision-making and continuous improvements associatedwith an interrelated decision problem The decision frame-work developed in this stage is different from traditionalones which only consider decision-making Third based on
the decision framework the procedure uses the HMCDMmodel to evaluate systemize and visualize decision andimprovement information including the following comput-ing interinfluence effects using the DEMATEL techniquecomputing influential weights using DANP computing gapindices using modified VIKOR method and lastly sys-temizing the decision information obtained from the pre-vious steps on the visualized DEMATELrsquos INRM showingpreference of alternatives and how much improvement isrequired for each criterion and dimension associated witheach alternative Finally referring to the INRM the ETgains valuable information to finalize application decisionswith top management and stakeholders while determiningstrategies for continuous improvements in achieving the
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 3
should consider 32 criteria belonging to five categories (1)organization (2) planning and budgeting (3) accounting(4) analysis and revision and (5) data maintenance [28]Fleming and Koppelman [7] who conducted research onmany software projects proposed ten ldquomust-havesrdquo thatare required to fully grasp and apply the critical earnedvalue concept in enhancing the management of all types ofprojects in an industry These ten ldquomust-havesrdquo require thecomplete definition of a projectrsquos scope of work using a workbreakdown structure (WBS) at the outset of project planningas well as through the continuous management of all changesduring project execution Another study by Kwak and Anbari[5] based on the National Aeronautics and Space Association(NASA) indicated that key success factors for the imple-mentation of EVM included the early introduction of EVMthe full involvement of users and consistent communicationwith all stakeholders Lipke [10] argued that the elementsrequired for executing projects and facilitating continuousimprovement are necessary ingredients for EVM applicationto ensure successful project outcomes These studies haveprovided useful information for understanding the factorsinfluencing the successful EVM application from differentperspectives but lack an integrated or systematic procedurefor analyzing level of readiness of these factors when makingapplication and improvement decisions
Stratton [12] proposed a five-stepmaturemodel of earnedvalue management to enhance the quality and use of EVMwithin an organization This model can be linked to theANSIESI standard 748 to create assessment matrices thathelp users to evolve an EVM within their own organizationsand to assess the relative strengths of various EVM appli-cations This study has focused on developing a systematicprocedure for analyzing effectively EVM implementationwhile assuming the independence of the factors in theassessment matrices This assumption conflicts with the real-world application situations discussed in many other studies[3 5 10]
A more comprehensive study by Kim et al [11] used sur-veys mailed to 2500 individuals and on-site case studies con-ducted within six organizations and concluded that approx-imately 40 interactive factors in four dimensions (the EVMuser the EVM methodology the implementation processand the project environment) could influence significantlythe EVM application in four ways (1) accepting the concept(2) applying EVM by project managers and team members(3) enabling projects to be completed within constraints andwith satisfactory performance and (4) bringing overall sat-isfaction to users of this methodology The study concludedby proposing an implementation framework to assist bothindustrial and government agencies applying EVM moreeffectively for different sizes and types of projects Howeverthe proposedmodel and frameworkwere qualitative in natureand did not provide a systematic mean to quantitativelyanalyze interrelated effects among the dimensionsfactors forapplication decisions and management actions
According to the literatures discussed above the fac-torscriteria influencing the effective EVM application canbe grouped into four dimensions the EVM user the EVMmethodology the implementation process and the project
environment Each dimension contains respective factors asshown in Table 1 In the next section a novel procedurebased on the HMADM method is proposed to evaluate andanalyze these interdependent application dimensionsfactorsin relation to the selection and improvement of applicationdecisions with the goal of obtaining aspiration levels of EVMapplication
3 The Proposed Procedures for Obtainingthe Aspiration Levels of EVM Application
To explain the proposed procedure this section first brieflyintroduces the essential concepts related to the HMCDMmodel that combines the following elements DEMATELtechnique DEMATEL-base ANP andmodifiedVIKOR sub-sequently this section discusses how the model is employedto develop the proposed procedure
The HMCDM model was proposed by Tzeng [17] whocombined new concepts and techniques to handle complicateand dynamic real-world problems First theHMCDMmodelemploys the DEMATEL technique to quantify interinfluenceeffects among decision variables and visualize the effects onan influential network relationmap (INRM)TheDEMATELtechnique was developed by the Battelle Geneva Institute in1972 for assessing and solving complex groups of problems[29] This technique used Boolean operation and MarkovProcess to quantify cause and effect relationships on eachdimensioncriterion within a system (or subsystem) Quan-titative values results are then systemized on a single mapshowing degree and direction that each dimensioncriterioncan influence each other and to the overall system per-formance [30] The interinfluence values of DEMATELcan not only help managers gain valuable information forunderstanding specific societal problems but also be furtherused with other methods to obtain more precise weight-ing values and gap indices in dealing with the real-worlddecision and improvement problems [21 31] Second thismodel provides a procedure known as DANP that appliesa basic concept of the analytic network procedure (ANP)to transform the interinfluence value of DEMATEL intoinfluential weights (IWs) for prioritizing decision variablesANP was proposed by Saaty [32] to address interdependenceand feedback among the factors dimensions or alternativesassociated with a decision-making problem However ANPassigns identical weights for each cluster per group on thenormalized supermatrix neglecting the influence in differentdegree DANP used DEMATEL technique to adjust the ANPequal weighting assumption for better communication ofreal interdependent situations and improvement alternativesand decisions [22 31] These features avoid the assumptionof traditional decision models such as AHP TOPSIS pathanalysis and SEM that the value creation criteria are inde-pendently and hierarchically structured thereby enablinginterdependent decision situations to be viewed as decisionprocess and outcomes [18]
Third this model adopts the principle of ldquoaspirationlevelsrdquo [33] to replace the traditional maxmin approach [1534] through a modified VIKOR method when choosing
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 1 Evaluation factors and dimensions
Dimensionsfactors DescriptionsEVM users (119863
1)
Experience (1198621) Experience in using EVMS
Training (1198622) Training at school and on-job training to understand how to use
EVMSAdministrative capabilities (119862
3) Administrative expertise of project managers
Technical capabilities (1198624) Technical expertise of project managers
Changes in work contents (1198625) Acceptance of power shift after implementing EVMS
EVM methodology (1198632)
WBS (1198626) Using work breakdown structure (WBS) details project scopes
CPM (1198627) Using the Critical Path Method (CPM) as scheduling tool of
projects
IPT (1198628) Using Integrated Project Team (IPT) facilitates understanding
among project participantsComputer system (119862
9) Using automated computer system as part of EVMS process
Integrated project management (11986210) Using a project management system including EVMS
Implementation process (1198633)
Open communication (11986211) Open communications among project team players including
customersSufficient resources (119862
12) Provision of sufficient resources in the EVMS process
Top-down approach (11986213) Top management perceives EVMS as a pragmatic way in managing
project effectively
Integrated change control system (11986214) Using separated office to handle required changes justified by
EVMSContinuous improvement (119862
15) Providing ongoing efforts to improve application of the EVMS
Project management environment (1198634)
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) A colleague-based project management environment as opposed
to bureaucratic cultureOwnership of EVM to lower level project managers (119862
17) Flexibility allowed lower level project managers
Risk free (11986218) Allowing project players to select their own form of EVMS use
within a general frameworkCulture (119862
19) A strong trust and supportive culture in which project is performed
Regulations (11986220) Complete regulations for implementing EVMS
a relatively good solution from existing alternatives Thisfeature produces the size of performance gaps to aspirationlevels on each criteriondimensionalternative thus enablingmanagers to use a single value for both decision-makingand continuous improvements [25]The VIKORmethod wasproposed by Opricovic [35] to solve problems that involveincommensurable and conflicting factors Originally thismethod focused on analyzing a set of alternatives and select-ing a compromise solution closest to the ideal state [34] Theideal state was defined as a set of maximumminimum valuesrelating to each benefitcost criterion among all alternativesHowever these traditional compromises can entail ldquochoosingthe best among inferior optionsalternativesrdquo that is pick thebest apple in a barrel of rotten apples thus the traditionalprocedure has to entail ldquoimprovingrdquo the potential solutions[18] Hence Tzeng [17] proposed the modified VIKORmethod to replace the maximumminimum approach withldquoaspired-worstrdquo by setting 119891
lowast
119895= 10 and 119891minus
119895= 0 as the
aspiration level and the worst level respectively for criterion
119895 if performance scores with measuring range are from 0to 10 in questionnaires of each criterion as complete dis-satisfactionbad larr 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 rarr extremesatisfactiongood Recently this method has been used to aiddecisionmakers in identifying critical gaps in need of furtherimprovement [36 37]
Combining all these concepts and techniques theHMCDMmodel allowsmanagers to avoid ldquochoosing the bestamong inferior optionsalternativesrdquo (ie avoiding ldquopickingthe best apple among a barrel of rotten applesrdquo) [17] Moreimportantly the HMCDMmodel extends the evaluation andselection of decision functions to include identification ofcritical gaps for continuous improvement over the life ofdecision implementation [24 27 37] The detailed descrip-tions notations and computational processes can be foundin [17 19 26 38]
This study applies the HMCDM model to devise a novelprocedure for obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applica-tion through four main stages (1) form an expert team
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5
Develop a decision framework
Compute initial-average influence relation matrix AExpert questionnaire
Form expert team
User questionnaire
Construct influentialnetwork relation map
INRM
Top management
Make decisions and determine strategies
for continuousimprovements
DEMATEL technique
DANP
Modified VIKOR methodCompute gap indices using Rl = Sl + (1 minus )Ql
the maximal regret using Ql = maxjrlj | j = 1 n
Normalize flj using rlj = (|flowast
jminus flj|)(|f
lowast
jminus f
minus
j|)
Set aspiration level and the worst level fminusj
f+
j
Performance values flj
Compute weighted supermatrix W120572= T120572
DW
Transpose into W = (T120572C)998400 Normalize into T120572
D
Normalize A into initial-influence matrix D = As
Compute total-influence matrix T = D(I minus D)minus1
Classify factors into correspondent dimension TC
Average each dimension into TDNormalize into T120572C
Compute influential weights (IWs) on factorsdimensions(W120572
)urArr w = (w1 wj wn)limurarrinfin
Compute the average value using Sl = sumn
j=1wjrlj and
Figure 1 A graphical representation of the proposed procedure
(2) develop a decision framework (3) systemize and visualizedecision information using HMCDM model and (4) makeapplication decisions and determine improvement strategiesbased on INRM A graphical representation of our procedureis depicted in Figure 1
As shown in Figure 1 the proposed procedure first formsan expert team (ET) through a top management commit-tee according to the predetermined qualifications Secondthe ET identifies influencing criteria to develop a noveldecision framework (Figure 2) which considers both thedecision-making and continuous improvements associatedwith an interrelated decision problem The decision frame-work developed in this stage is different from traditionalones which only consider decision-making Third based on
the decision framework the procedure uses the HMCDMmodel to evaluate systemize and visualize decision andimprovement information including the following comput-ing interinfluence effects using the DEMATEL techniquecomputing influential weights using DANP computing gapindices using modified VIKOR method and lastly sys-temizing the decision information obtained from the pre-vious steps on the visualized DEMATELrsquos INRM showingpreference of alternatives and how much improvement isrequired for each criterion and dimension associated witheach alternative Finally referring to the INRM the ETgains valuable information to finalize application decisionswith top management and stakeholders while determiningstrategies for continuous improvements in achieving the
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
4 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 1 Evaluation factors and dimensions
Dimensionsfactors DescriptionsEVM users (119863
1)
Experience (1198621) Experience in using EVMS
Training (1198622) Training at school and on-job training to understand how to use
EVMSAdministrative capabilities (119862
3) Administrative expertise of project managers
Technical capabilities (1198624) Technical expertise of project managers
Changes in work contents (1198625) Acceptance of power shift after implementing EVMS
EVM methodology (1198632)
WBS (1198626) Using work breakdown structure (WBS) details project scopes
CPM (1198627) Using the Critical Path Method (CPM) as scheduling tool of
projects
IPT (1198628) Using Integrated Project Team (IPT) facilitates understanding
among project participantsComputer system (119862
9) Using automated computer system as part of EVMS process
Integrated project management (11986210) Using a project management system including EVMS
Implementation process (1198633)
Open communication (11986211) Open communications among project team players including
customersSufficient resources (119862
12) Provision of sufficient resources in the EVMS process
Top-down approach (11986213) Top management perceives EVMS as a pragmatic way in managing
project effectively
Integrated change control system (11986214) Using separated office to handle required changes justified by
EVMSContinuous improvement (119862
15) Providing ongoing efforts to improve application of the EVMS
Project management environment (1198634)
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) A colleague-based project management environment as opposed
to bureaucratic cultureOwnership of EVM to lower level project managers (119862
17) Flexibility allowed lower level project managers
Risk free (11986218) Allowing project players to select their own form of EVMS use
within a general frameworkCulture (119862
19) A strong trust and supportive culture in which project is performed
Regulations (11986220) Complete regulations for implementing EVMS
a relatively good solution from existing alternatives Thisfeature produces the size of performance gaps to aspirationlevels on each criteriondimensionalternative thus enablingmanagers to use a single value for both decision-makingand continuous improvements [25]The VIKORmethod wasproposed by Opricovic [35] to solve problems that involveincommensurable and conflicting factors Originally thismethod focused on analyzing a set of alternatives and select-ing a compromise solution closest to the ideal state [34] Theideal state was defined as a set of maximumminimum valuesrelating to each benefitcost criterion among all alternativesHowever these traditional compromises can entail ldquochoosingthe best among inferior optionsalternativesrdquo that is pick thebest apple in a barrel of rotten apples thus the traditionalprocedure has to entail ldquoimprovingrdquo the potential solutions[18] Hence Tzeng [17] proposed the modified VIKORmethod to replace the maximumminimum approach withldquoaspired-worstrdquo by setting 119891
lowast
119895= 10 and 119891minus
119895= 0 as the
aspiration level and the worst level respectively for criterion
119895 if performance scores with measuring range are from 0to 10 in questionnaires of each criterion as complete dis-satisfactionbad larr 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 10 rarr extremesatisfactiongood Recently this method has been used to aiddecisionmakers in identifying critical gaps in need of furtherimprovement [36 37]
Combining all these concepts and techniques theHMCDMmodel allowsmanagers to avoid ldquochoosing the bestamong inferior optionsalternativesrdquo (ie avoiding ldquopickingthe best apple among a barrel of rotten applesrdquo) [17] Moreimportantly the HMCDMmodel extends the evaluation andselection of decision functions to include identification ofcritical gaps for continuous improvement over the life ofdecision implementation [24 27 37] The detailed descrip-tions notations and computational processes can be foundin [17 19 26 38]
This study applies the HMCDM model to devise a novelprocedure for obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applica-tion through four main stages (1) form an expert team
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5
Develop a decision framework
Compute initial-average influence relation matrix AExpert questionnaire
Form expert team
User questionnaire
Construct influentialnetwork relation map
INRM
Top management
Make decisions and determine strategies
for continuousimprovements
DEMATEL technique
DANP
Modified VIKOR methodCompute gap indices using Rl = Sl + (1 minus )Ql
the maximal regret using Ql = maxjrlj | j = 1 n
Normalize flj using rlj = (|flowast
jminus flj|)(|f
lowast
jminus f
minus
j|)
Set aspiration level and the worst level fminusj
f+
j
Performance values flj
Compute weighted supermatrix W120572= T120572
DW
Transpose into W = (T120572C)998400 Normalize into T120572
D
Normalize A into initial-influence matrix D = As
Compute total-influence matrix T = D(I minus D)minus1
Classify factors into correspondent dimension TC
Average each dimension into TDNormalize into T120572C
Compute influential weights (IWs) on factorsdimensions(W120572
)urArr w = (w1 wj wn)limurarrinfin
Compute the average value using Sl = sumn
j=1wjrlj and
Figure 1 A graphical representation of the proposed procedure
(2) develop a decision framework (3) systemize and visualizedecision information using HMCDM model and (4) makeapplication decisions and determine improvement strategiesbased on INRM A graphical representation of our procedureis depicted in Figure 1
As shown in Figure 1 the proposed procedure first formsan expert team (ET) through a top management commit-tee according to the predetermined qualifications Secondthe ET identifies influencing criteria to develop a noveldecision framework (Figure 2) which considers both thedecision-making and continuous improvements associatedwith an interrelated decision problem The decision frame-work developed in this stage is different from traditionalones which only consider decision-making Third based on
the decision framework the procedure uses the HMCDMmodel to evaluate systemize and visualize decision andimprovement information including the following comput-ing interinfluence effects using the DEMATEL techniquecomputing influential weights using DANP computing gapindices using modified VIKOR method and lastly sys-temizing the decision information obtained from the pre-vious steps on the visualized DEMATELrsquos INRM showingpreference of alternatives and how much improvement isrequired for each criterion and dimension associated witheach alternative Finally referring to the INRM the ETgains valuable information to finalize application decisionswith top management and stakeholders while determiningstrategies for continuous improvements in achieving the
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 5
Develop a decision framework
Compute initial-average influence relation matrix AExpert questionnaire
Form expert team
User questionnaire
Construct influentialnetwork relation map
INRM
Top management
Make decisions and determine strategies
for continuousimprovements
DEMATEL technique
DANP
Modified VIKOR methodCompute gap indices using Rl = Sl + (1 minus )Ql
the maximal regret using Ql = maxjrlj | j = 1 n
Normalize flj using rlj = (|flowast
jminus flj|)(|f
lowast
jminus f
minus
j|)
Set aspiration level and the worst level fminusj
f+
j
Performance values flj
Compute weighted supermatrix W120572= T120572
DW
Transpose into W = (T120572C)998400 Normalize into T120572
D
Normalize A into initial-influence matrix D = As
Compute total-influence matrix T = D(I minus D)minus1
Classify factors into correspondent dimension TC
Average each dimension into TDNormalize into T120572C
Compute influential weights (IWs) on factorsdimensions(W120572
)urArr w = (w1 wj wn)limurarrinfin
Compute the average value using Sl = sumn
j=1wjrlj and
Figure 1 A graphical representation of the proposed procedure
(2) develop a decision framework (3) systemize and visualizedecision information using HMCDM model and (4) makeapplication decisions and determine improvement strategiesbased on INRM A graphical representation of our procedureis depicted in Figure 1
As shown in Figure 1 the proposed procedure first formsan expert team (ET) through a top management commit-tee according to the predetermined qualifications Secondthe ET identifies influencing criteria to develop a noveldecision framework (Figure 2) which considers both thedecision-making and continuous improvements associatedwith an interrelated decision problem The decision frame-work developed in this stage is different from traditionalones which only consider decision-making Third based on
the decision framework the procedure uses the HMCDMmodel to evaluate systemize and visualize decision andimprovement information including the following comput-ing interinfluence effects using the DEMATEL techniquecomputing influential weights using DANP computing gapindices using modified VIKOR method and lastly sys-temizing the decision information obtained from the pre-vious steps on the visualized DEMATELrsquos INRM showingpreference of alternatives and how much improvement isrequired for each criterion and dimension associated witheach alternative Finally referring to the INRM the ETgains valuable information to finalize application decisionswith top management and stakeholders while determiningstrategies for continuous improvements in achieving the
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
6 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Goal
Dimensions
Criteria(factors)
Alternatives
Gaps
Implementationprocess
Opencommunication
Sufficient resources
Top-down approach
Integrated changecontrol
Continuousimprovement
Unit 2
EVM users
Experience
Training
Administrativecapabilities
Technicalcapabilities
Changes in workcontents
EVMmethodology
WBS
CPM
IPT
Computersystem
Integratedproject
management
Unit 1
Projectenvironment
Colleague-basedwork environment
Ownership of EVMto lower level
project managers
Risk free
Culture
Regulations
z units in an organization
D1
D2 D3D4
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
U3 Uz
Unit 3 Unit zU1 U2
D1 D2
D3D4
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5
C6 C7 C8
C9 C10
C11 C12
C13
C14 C15
C16 C17
C18
C19 C20
Obtaining aspiration levels of EVM application across an organization for z units
Figure 2 The decision framework for EVM application
aspired EVM application outcomes in an organization In thenext section a numerical example is presented to illustratehow the proposed procedure operates in practice
4 A Numerical Example to Illustratethe Proposed Procedure
In this section we use an empirical example from a defenseorganization to illustrate the application of the proposedprocedure to a real-world problem To preserve confidential-ity all data related to the example have been transformedinto equivalent units by normalization which does notcompromise the analysis or gap measurement for each factor
and dimension and overall alternatives in order to reach thedesired aspiration levels
41 Problem Descriptions The Ministry of National Defense(MND) of a country has been experiencing difficultiesobtaining sufficient defense funding during the economicrecession and is consequently considering whether to applyEVM to its acquisition units to sustain superior defensecapacities with limited resources by ensuring better reg-ulation of the performance and progress of its projectsHowever the MND has many acquisition units As a resultof the multisourcing strategy adopted by theMND to acquireits projects from manufacturers in the US Europe and
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 7
the domestic market each unit exhibits certain differencesin infrastructure for the management of the projects fromdifferent sources These differences have made EVM appli-cation in the MND more complicated than in organizationswith mature or identical project management infrastructuresfor their subordinates To better manage this complicatedsituation theMND required a comprehensive and systematicevaluation to analyze select and improve the appropriatedecisions that would enable the aspired EVM applicationoutcomes to be achieved in the different units The MNDtherefore applied the proposed procedure in a pilot projectto assess two units and obtain satisfactory outcomes
42 Application of the Procedure Here we illustrate thestepwise process by which the MND applied our procedureto obtain application decisions and improvement strategies toassist subordinate units in determining how to accept and useEVM to manage project performances with aspired results
421 Form a Team The MND formed an ET with sevenexperts one from each of following sectors acquisitiontechnology manufacturing logistics end users procure-ment and finance All experts were selected based on theirproficiency in relation to EVM as assessed by a top manage-ment MND committee according to a set of predeterminedqualifications
422 Develop a Novel Decision Framework In this stage theET members identify 20 influencing factors as evaluationcriteria in 4 dimensions and develop a decision frameworkas shown in Figure 2
In Figure 2 the highest level of the decision frameworkis the goal obtaining aspiration levels of EVM applicationacross MND for two acquisition units (two alternatives)denoted by 119880
1and 119880
2 where two units also represent the
alternatives to be evaluated at the fourth level of the decisionframework The second and third levels contain dimensionsand factors (groups of interinfluence factors) used to evaluatethe alternatives The fifth and final levels include the gaps foreach dimension and factor to be measured in terms of how toreach aspiration levels through continuous improvements
423 Systemize and Visualize Decision Information UsingHMCDM Model In this stage the ET members firstemployed the DEMATEL technique to evaluate the interin-fluence effects among 20 factors within the DF and averagedthe results in an initial-average 20-by-20matrixA = [119886
119894119895]20times20
(Table 2)The initial-average matrix was further normalized as an
initial-influence matrixD (Table 3) using
D =A119904
= [119889119894119895]119899times119899
(1)
where 119904 = max(max1le119894le119899
sum119899
119895=1119886119894119895max1le119895le119899
sum119899
119894=1119886119894119895)
Subsequently throughmatrix operation using (2) a total-influence matrix T was obtained as in Table 4 In Table 4all factors in T were further classified into the corresponding
dimensions as matrix T119862 and each dimension was averaged
to obtain matrix T119863
T = D (I minus D)minus1
when lim119906rarrinfin
D119906 = [0]119899times119899 (2)
where I is an identity matrix D = [119889119894119895]119899times119899
0 le 119889119894119895
lt 1 0 lt
sum119899
119895=1119889119894119895
le 1 0 lt sum119899
119894=1119889119894119895
le 1 If the summation of at leastone column or one row (but not all) is equal to one then wecan guarantee that lim
119906rarrinfinD119906 = [0]
119899times119899
In matrix T the inconsistency rate (IR) of the evaluationresults from all experts was only 270 which is less than 5This result implied that the inclusion of an additional expertin this study would not influence the findings and that thesignificant confidence level is 9730
According toTable 4 the ET employedDANP to computethe influential weights (IWs) for the dimensions and factorsDuring this process the matrices T
119862and T
119863obtained
throughDEMATELwere normalized asT120572119862andT120572
119863 and then
we transposed matrix T120572119862into an unweighted supermatrix
W = (T120572119862)1015840 Subsequently T120572
119863was multiplied byW to obtain
a weighted supermatrix W120572 = T120572119863W as shown in Table 5
and finally multiplied by W120572 until it converged into IWs forfactors and dimensions as shown in Table 6
As shown in Table 6 the ET generally agreed that interms of the IWs of DANP all dimensions and factors havethe similar level of importance for effective EVM applicationHowever the DEMATEL results (Table 4) provide managerswith additional information to justify the level of interinflu-ence among factorsdimensions to achieve the aspired EVMapplication
After the DANP steps the ET administered a question-naire to collect the opinions of users at different units regard-ing the outcomes that their units can achieve through EVMapplication based on their current operational capabilitiesTypically the main components of the questionnaire canbe designed as shown in Table 7 set scores to evaluate therespective performance outcomes on a scale from 1 to 5 ldquoNA(1)rdquo ldquoA (2)rdquo ldquoAU (3)rdquo ldquoAUP (4)rdquo and ldquoAUPS (5)rdquo
In this case 18 and 20 respondents in 1198801and 119880
2were
interviewed respectively The ET averaged all responses asperformance value 119891
119897119895and then set the worst value 119891minus
119895= 1
and the aspiration level (best value) 119891lowast119895
= 5 Subsequentlythe modified VIKOR method was employed to compute thegap indices through using (3)sim(6)The computational resultsare summarized in Table 8
119903119897119895=
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891119897119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816)
(10038161003816100381610038161003816119891lowast119895
minus 119891minus119895
10038161003816100381610038161003816) (3)
119878119897=
119899
sum119895=1
119908119895119903119897119895 119897 = 1 2 119898 (4)
where 119908119895is the IWs of the factor from DANP
119876119897= max119895
119903119897119895| 119895 = 1 2 119899 119897 = 1 2 119898 (5)
119877119897= V (119878
119897) + (1 minus V) (119876
119897) (6)
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
8 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 2 The initial-average matrix A obtained through the DEMATEL
A 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 2857 2857 3429 3143 3286 2857 3000 2714 2571 2714 2143 3571 3571 3429 3000 2714 3000 2571 24291198622
2714 0000 3143 3857 2857 3429 3429 3429 2571 3286 2429 1857 2571 2857 3286 2714 2571 3000 2714 21431198623
2429 2000 0000 2143 2714 2286 2286 2571 2000 2571 2571 2429 2286 2571 2571 2143 2714 2857 2286 21431198624
3143 2286 2143 0000 2286 3429 3286 3429 3000 2571 2286 2143 2571 3000 3000 2857 3143 3286 2714 21431198625
2857 2286 2571 2429 0000 2429 1571 3000 2143 2857 3000 2143 2571 3286 3286 3000 2714 2857 3286 30001198626
3000 2429 2857 2571 2714 0000 3143 3143 2571 3429 3286 3000 3000 3429 3286 3143 3143 3000 2714 28571198627
2286 2286 2286 2714 2000 3143 0000 3286 2714 3000 2571 2571 2143 2429 2429 2143 2143 2000 2143 20001198628
2857 2429 2429 2714 2714 3429 3143 0000 2429 3000 3571 2714 3143 3143 3143 2857 2571 3000 3143 22861198629
2857 3286 3429 3429 2286 3571 3286 3571 0000 3571 2429 3143 2429 3000 3286 2714 2571 2286 2429 214311986210
2857 2429 2429 2714 2571 3286 3143 3143 2571 0000 2857 2000 2571 3429 2857 2714 2429 2571 2857 228611986211
3000 3286 2714 3143 2857 2857 3000 3286 2000 3286 0000 3000 2714 3571 3571 3000 3143 3143 3286 271411986212
2000 3143 2714 3000 2714 2429 2571 3143 2571 2857 3286 0000 2429 2857 3571 2714 2714 2714 2714 242911986213
2429 3143 2571 2714 2857 2714 2571 2571 2286 2714 2857 3286 0000 3571 2857 3571 3000 2857 3000 242911986214
2143 2286 3000 3143 2429 2857 2286 3000 2571 2571 2857 2429 2286 0000 3143 2143 2143 2286 2286 228611986215
3286 3429 3000 3286 2857 2571 2571 2857 2143 2857 3286 2714 2571 3429 0000 2714 2143 2857 2571 228611986216
3000 2571 2714 2571 3000 2714 2857 2571 2857 3000 3143 2571 2143 3143 3143 0000 3429 2714 3286 228611986217
3286 3000 2714 3000 2714 2714 2429 3286 2143 2714 2857 2714 2571 2857 3000 3286 0000 2857 2714 257111986218
3429 3286 3000 3571 3143 3000 2857 3143 2429 3000 3286 2571 2714 3143 3429 3000 3286 0000 3286 228611986219
3143 2571 3000 2857 3143 2429 2429 3286 1857 2714 3571 2286 3000 2714 3429 3000 3000 3714 0000 285711986220
2429 2857 3000 2571 2429 2143 2143 2429 1857 2429 2714 2286 2286 2571 2857 2429 2286 2571 3000 0000
Table 3 The initial-influence matrixD obtained through the DEMATEL
D 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0000 0048 0048 0058 0053 0055 0048 0050 0046 0043 0046 0036 0060 0060 0058 0050 0046 0050 0043 00411198622
0046 0000 0053 0065 0048 0058 0058 0058 0043 0055 0041 0031 0043 0048 0055 0046 0043 0050 0046 00361198623
0041 0034 0000 0036 0046 0038 0038 0043 0034 0043 0043 0041 0038 0043 0043 0036 0046 0048 0038 00361198624
0053 0038 0036 0000 0038 0058 0055 0058 0050 0043 0038 0036 0043 0050 0050 0048 0053 0055 0046 00361198625
0048 0038 0043 0041 0000 0041 0026 0050 0036 0048 0050 0036 0043 0055 0055 0050 0046 0048 0055 00501198626
0050 0041 0048 0043 0046 0000 0053 0053 0043 0058 0055 0050 0050 0058 0055 0053 0053 0050 0046 00481198627
0038 0038 0038 0046 0034 0053 0000 0055 0046 0050 0043 0043 0036 0041 0041 0036 0036 0034 0036 00341198628
0048 0041 0041 0046 0046 0058 0053 0000 0041 0050 0060 0046 0053 0053 0053 0048 0043 0050 0053 00381198629
0048 0055 0058 0058 0038 0060 0055 0060 0000 0060 0041 0053 0041 0050 0055 0046 0043 0038 0041 003611986210
0048 0041 0041 0046 0043 0055 0053 0053 0043 0000 0048 0034 0043 0058 0048 0046 0041 0043 0048 003811986211
0050 0055 0046 0053 0048 0048 0050 0055 0034 0055 0000 0050 0046 0060 0060 0050 0053 0053 0055 004611986212
0034 0053 0046 0050 0046 0041 0043 0053 0043 0048 0055 0000 0041 0048 0060 0046 0046 0046 0046 004111986213
0041 0053 0043 0046 0048 0046 0043 0043 0038 0046 0048 0055 0000 0060 0048 0060 0050 0048 0050 004111986214
0036 0038 0050 0053 0041 0048 0038 0050 0043 0043 0048 0041 0038 0000 0053 0036 0036 0038 0038 003811986215
0055 0058 0050 0055 0048 0043 0043 0048 0036 0048 0055 0046 0043 0058 0000 0046 0036 0048 0043 003811986216
0050 0043 0046 0043 0050 0046 0048 0043 0048 0050 0053 0043 0036 0053 0053 0000 0058 0046 0055 003811986217
0055 0050 0046 0050 0046 0046 0041 0055 0036 0046 0048 0046 0043 0048 0050 0055 0000 0048 0046 004311986218
0058 0055 0050 0060 0053 0050 0048 0053 0041 0050 0055 0043 0046 0053 0058 0050 0055 0000 0055 003811986219
0053 0043 0050 0048 0053 0041 0041 0055 0031 0046 0060 0038 0050 0046 0058 0050 0050 0062 0000 004811986220
0041 0048 0050 0043 0041 0036 0036 0041 0031 0041 0046 0038 0038 0043 0048 0041 0038 0043 0050 0000
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 9
Table 4 The total-influence matrix T for factors T119862and for dimensions T
119863obtained through DEMATEL
T(T119862) 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0379 0414 0419 0450 0416 0441 0415 0459 0369 0431 0438 0377 0411 0472 0475 0425 0412 0429 0418 03651198622
0416 0361 0416 0450 0405 0437 0418 0459 0361 0435 0427 0366 0389 0454 0465 0414 0403 0422 0413 03551198623
0351 0335 0307 0361 0345 0357 0341 0380 0300 0362 0367 0321 0328 0383 0388 0345 0347 0359 0347 03031198624
0410 0386 0388 0376 0384 0424 0403 0445 0357 0411 0412 0360 0377 0442 0447 0404 0400 0414 0401 03441198625
0395 0377 0386 0405 0338 0398 0367 0427 0335 0405 0413 0350 0368 0436 0441 0396 0384 0398 0400 03491198626
0432 0412 0424 0443 0415 0394 0424 0467 0371 0450 0453 0395 0407 0476 0479 0433 0424 0434 0425 03761198627
0354 0345 0349 0375 0339 0376 0309 0397 0316 0374 0372 0328 0331 0387 0391 0350 0343 0351 0350 03051198628
0418 0401 0405 0433 0403 0437 0413 0404 0359 0431 0445 0380 0398 0458 0464 0417 0404 0422 0420 03571198629
0423 0418 0426 0449 0401 0444 0421 0467 0324 0445 0432 0391 0392 0461 0471 0419 0408 0416 0414 035911986210
0398 0381 0386 0411 0382 0414 0393 0432 0344 0362 0413 0351 0370 0440 0437 0394 0382 0395 0395 034011986211
0438 0431 0427 0458 0423 0446 0428 0476 0367 0453 0407 0400 0408 0484 0490 0436 0429 0442 0440 037911986212
0390 0398 0396 0422 0389 0406 0390 0439 0348 0414 0425 0323 0373 0438 0454 0400 0392 0403 0399 034711986213
0406 0406 0402 0427 0400 0420 0399 0440 0352 0421 0428 0383 0342 0459 0453 0422 0405 0415 0413 035511986214
0363 0356 0371 0393 0357 0383 0357 0405 0323 0379 0388 0336 0344 0360 0415 0362 0354 0368 0363 031911986215
0415 0407 0405 0432 0397 0414 0396 0440 0347 0419 0431 0371 0381 0453 0404 0405 0388 0411 0402 034911986216
0413 0396 0403 0423 0401 0418 0402 0438 0359 0424 0431 0371 0376 0450 0456 0364 0410 0411 0415 035111986217
0416 0401 0401 0428 0395 0417 0394 0447 0347 0418 0425 0372 0381 0444 0452 0415 0354 0412 0405 035411986218
0447 0433 0434 0467 0430 0451 0428 0476 0376 0452 0461 0395 0410 0480 0491 0439 0434 0395 0442 037411986219
0424 0405 0416 0437 0412 0423 0404 0458 0351 0428 0447 0375 0398 0454 0470 0421 0412 0435 0372 036711986220
0362 0359 0366 0379 0351 0366 0349 0390 0307 0371 0380 0328 0339 0395 0404 0361 0351 0366 0369 0278T119863
1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
1198631
0387 0397 0404 03861198632
0401 0399 0413 03891198633
0404 0403 0406 03921198634
0408 0404 0415 0388Note where 119905119901
119894119895and 119905119901minus1119894119895
denote the average influence of factor 119894 on 119895 according to 119901 = 7 and 119901 minus 1 = 6 experts respectively and 119899 = 20 denotes the number offactors thus the results above are significant at a significant confidence level of 9730 in gaps which is greater than the 95 level used to test for significancethat is IR = (11198992)sum119899
119894=1sum119899
119895=1(|119905119901
119894119895minus 119905119901minus1
119894119895|119905119901
119894119895) times 100 = 27 (0027) and significant confidence level = 1 minus IR = 9730
where 119897 = 1 2 119898 V is presented as the weight of thestrategy of maximum group utility (priority improvement)and 1 minus V is the weight of individual regret
As shown in Table 8 the gap indices for alternatives 1198801
and1198802are 0520 and 0739 respectivelyThese values revealed
the gap size that each unit would need to be improvedto reach the aspiration level These values imply that theEVM application with required continuous improvementswould enhance performance of the acquisition projects in119880
1
however the EVM application may not help 1198802to enhance
the performance of projects unless the current operationalcapabilities of 119880
2are further improved
Additionally the ET developed the INRM with the useof the results of the DEMATEL and the modified VIKORmethod (Tables 4 and 8) During this process using Table 4the ET computed the degree of total influence that a factorexerted on the other factors (sum of each row) 119903
119894 and the
degree of total influence that a factor received from the otherfactors (sum of each column) 119888
119894 The ET also derived 119903
119894+
119888119894 indicating the degree of the central role that respective
dimensionfactor 119894 plays in the system and 119903119894minus 119888119894 indicating
the degree of net influence that respective dimensionfactor119894 contributes to the system If 119903
119894minus 119888119894is positive then the
dimensionfactor 119894 affects other dimensionsfactors and if119903119894minus 119888119894is negative then the dimensionfactor 119894 is influenced
by other dimensionsfactorsThe results were summarized asshown in Table 9
In Table 9 the degree of the central role (119903119894+ 119888119894) of the
EVM users (1198631) the EVM methodology (119863
2) the imple-
mentation process (1198633) and the project management envi-
ronment (1198634) are 3174 3201 3243 and 3171 respectively
These values indicate that all members of the ET generallyagreed that all 4 dimensions play a central role in achievingthe MNDrsquos EVM application at aspiration levels Howeveramong the 4 dimensions the degree of net influence (119903
119894minus 119888119894)
on the project management environment (1198634) is 0060 and
an emphasis on this dimension is the basic requirement forthe MND to apply EVM in managing projects effectivelyThis finding also implies that if the project managementenvironment is not well established EVM application wouldbe affected negatively Table 9 also contains the interinfluenceeffects on factors showing valuable indications for better
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
10 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 5 The weighted supermatrixW120572 derived from DANP
W120572 1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
1198621
0045 0050 0051 0052 0051 0051 0050 0051 0050 0051 0051 0049 0050 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0051 00501198622
0049 0043 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 00501198623
0049 0050 0044 0049 0050 0050 0050 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 00511198624
0053 0054 0052 0047 0052 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 00531198625
0049 0049 0050 0049 0044 0049 0048 0049 0047 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0050 0049 0049 0050 00491198626
0053 0052 0052 0052 0052 0047 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0052 0052 0051 00511198627
0050 0050 0049 0050 0048 0050 0043 0050 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 00491198628
0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0055 0056 0049 0055 0055 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0054 0055 0055 0055 00551198629
0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0044 0038 0044 0042 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0043 0043 0043 004311986210
0051 0052 0053 0051 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0046 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 0052 005211986211
0052 0052 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0052 0053 0047 0053 0052 0053 0053 0053 0053 0053 0054 005311986212
0045 0045 0046 0045 0045 0046 0047 0046 0047 0045 0046 0041 0047 0046 0046 0046 0046 0045 0045 004611986213
0049 0048 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0048 0047 0047 0047 0047 0042 0047 0047 0046 0047 0047 0048 004711986214
0056 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0055 0055 0055 0056 0056 0055 0056 0049 0056 0056 0055 0055 0054 005511986215
0056 0057 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0056 0057 0056 0057 0057 0056 0057 0050 0056 0056 0056 0056 005611986216
0051 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 0051 0051 0050 005011986217
0049 0049 0050 0050 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0049 0048 0050 0044 0050 0049 004911986218
0051 0052 0052 0052 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0051 0050 0051 0051 0051 0051 0046 0052 005111986219
0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0049 0050 0051 0050 0050 0051 0050 0050 0050 0050 0051 0050 0051 0045 005111986220
0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0044 0044 0043 0043 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0044 0043 0044 0043 0044 0039
understanding critical elements in EVM application in dif-ferent units within MND
Based on Tables 8 and 9 the INRM was developed asshown in Figure 3 Taking the dimensions as an example (onthe top center in Figure 3) the 119909-coordinate is the degree ofcentral role 119903
119894+ 119888119894 and the 119910-coordinate is the degree of net
influence 119903119894minus119888119894 First we marked the coordinates of the EVM
users (1198631) the EVMmethodology (119863
2) the implementation
process (1198633) and the projectmanagement environment (119863
4)
which are (3174 minus0025) (3204 minus0001) (3243 minus0034)and (3171 0060) respectively The process then referred toTable 4 to determine the arrow directions based on the degreeof total influence between each dimension For instanceaccording to Table 4 the degree of total influence of EVMusers (119863
1) on the project management environment (119863
4) is
0386 conversely the degree of total influence of the projectmanagement environment (119863
4) on EVM users (119863
1) is 0408
The arrow direction is then drawn from project managementenvironment (119863
4) to EVMusers (119863
1) because 0408 is greater
than 0386 Likewise the influential directions among allthe dimensions and factors are determined and depictedaccordingly Additionally the ET marked the gap indiceson the INRM for factorsdimensions with respect to eachalternative based on Table 8
As shown in Figure 3 the INRM quantified and sys-temized the gap indices and the degree and direction ofinterinfluence effects among 20 factors within 4 dimensionsassociated with the aspired EVM application in the MNDTherefore it helps managers easily analyze EVM applicationsituations that are essential to make better application deci-sions For example the visualized interinfluence effects at the
dimensional level on the INRM(on the top center in Figure 3)revealed that the project management environment (119863
4) and
the EVM methodology (1198632) were prerequisites for qualified
EVM users (1198631) to implement an effective process (119863
3) to
achieve the aspired application outcome When adoptingthe same approach systematic information associated withdecisions to accomplish the aspired EVM application can berealized comprehensively
424 Make Application Decisions and Determine Improve-ment Strategies In this stage the ET arranged a series ofmeetings chaired by the MNDrsquos top management includingrepresentatives from related functional divisions All of theparticipants reviewed Tables 1ndash9 and with reference tothe INRM discussed application situations for each unitand which factors or dimensions should be prioritized forimprovements The participants also discussed the afford-ability and availability of the resources required for potentialimprovements The eventual outcome of these meetings wasto apply EVM at 119880
1and to delay its application in 119880
2until
the dimensions factors andor overall gaps for that unitcould be improved to a level below 0500 Additionally theparticipants determined the improvement strategies to beadopted including allocation of the priority of and respon-sibility for a set of improvement activities For instanceaccording to the size of the gap to the aspiration on thedimensions in Table 8 the ET classified the respectivedimensional levels for 119880
1and 119880
2in descending order as
follows 1198801 1198634(0518) ≻ 119863
3(0488) ≻ 119863
1(0408) ≻
1198632(0395) and 119880
2 1198634(0753) ≻ 119863
1(0653) ≻
1198633(0633) ≻ 119863
2(0600) These values revealed that the
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 11
Table6Th
einfl
uentialw
eightsob
tained
throug
hDANP
Influ
entia
lweightsforfactors(119862119895)d
imensio
ns(119863119895)
Factors
1198621
1198622
1198623
1198624
1198625
1198626
1198627
1198628
1198629
11986210
11986211
11986212
11986213
11986214
11986215
11986216
11986217
11986218
11986219
11986220
0050
0049
0050
0053
0049
0052
0049
0055
0043
0052
0053
0045
0047
0055
0056
0050
0049
0051
0050
0043
Dim
ensio
ns1198631
1198632
1198633
1198634
0250
0251
0256
0243
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
12 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Table 7 Sample questionnaire responses
Factors States of outcome ScoresNA A AU AUP AUPS
Experience (1198621) x 1
Training (1198622) x 2
Administrative capabilities (1198623) x 3
Technical capabilities (1198624) x 4
Changes in work contents (1198625) x 5
Note ldquoNArdquo not available as score 1 ldquoArdquo accepted as score 2 ldquoAUrdquo accepted and used as score 3 ldquoAUPrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance as score 4ldquoAUPSrdquo accepted used and enhanced performance and satisfied all users as score 5
Table 8 Gaps indices obtained through the modified VIKOR method
Dimensionfactor Influential weights (IWs) Performance values The size of gap toaspiration level
Local Global 1198801
1198802
1198801
1198802
EVM users (1198631) 0250 0408 0653
Experience (1198621) 0201 0050 3350 1944 0413 0764
Training (1198622) 0196 0049 3750 2667 0313 0583
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 0198 0050 3550 2722 0363 0569
Technical capabilities (1198624) 0210 0053 3200 2778 0450 0556
Changes in work contents (1198625) 0195 0049 3000 1833 0500 0792
EVM methodology (1198632) 0251 0395 0600
WBS (1198626) 0206 0052 4000 2833 0250 0542
CPM (1198627) 0196 0049 3500 1722 0375 0819
IPT (1198628) 0218 0055 3300 2889 0425 0528
Computer system (1198629) 0173 0043 3100 3056 0475 0486
Integrated project management (11986210) 0207 0052 3200 2500 0450 0625
Implementation process (1198633) 0256 0488 0633
Open communication (11986211) 0205 0053 3000 3056 0500 0486
Sufficient resources (11986212) 0178 0045 2950 2056 0513 0736
Top-down approach (11986213) 0184 0047 3300 2444 0425 0639
Integrated change control system (11986214) 0215 0055 3350 2500 0413 0625
Continuous improvement (11986215) 0218 0056 2650 2278 0588 0681
Project management environment (1198634) 0243 0518 0753
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 0206 0050 3000 1722 0500 0819
Ownership of EVM to lower level projectmanagers (119862
17) 0201 0049 2900 2278 0525 0681
Risk free (11986218) 0208 0051 2800 1833 0550 0792
Culture (11986219) 0206 0050 2750 2389 0563 0653
Regulations (11986220) 0178 0043 3200 1722 0450 0819
Gap indices 0520 0739
project management environment (1198634) was a problem that
arose for both 1198801and 119880
2 In addition with reference to
the INRM 1198634(3171 0060) was located in the cause group
thus improvements in the project management environment(1198634) would have the greatest effects in terms of improving
the other dimensions and the selected application decisionsFurthermore the INRM (Figure 3) showed that all fivefactors under the project management environment (119863
4)
also belonged to the cause group the colleague-based workenvironment119862
16(16132 0091) ownership of EVMby lower
level project managers 11986217
(15913 0241) being risk free11986218
(16817 0616) culture 11986219
(16310 0305) and regula-tions 119862
20(14095 0245) These values suggested that all
factors under the project management environment (1198634)
should be accorded top priority for improvement and that theMND should be able to achieve the strongest improvementeffects Additionally with the cross-referencing of Table 8and the INRM the factors needing prior improvements inthe respective units were as follows 119880
1 sufficient resources
(11986212) and open communication (119862
11) in the dimension of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 13
Table 9 The total influence given and received on dimensions and factors obtained through DEMATEL
Dimensionfactor 119903119894
119888119894
119903119894+ 119888119894
119903119894minus 119888119894
EVM users (1198631) 1574 1600 3174 minus0025
Experience (1198621) 8416 8046 16463 0370
Training (1198622) 8265 7821 16086 0445
Administrative capabilities (1198623) 6928 7925 14853 minus0997
Technical capabilities (1198624) 7984 8418 16402 minus0434
Changes in work contents (1198625) 7768 7785 15552 minus0017
EVM methodology (1198632) 1602 1602 3204 minus0001
WBS (1198626) 8532 8265 16796 0267
CPM (1198627) 7040 7850 14890 minus0810
IPT (1198628) 8269 8745 17014 minus0476
Computer system (1198629) 8382 6914 15296 1467
Integrated project management (11986210) 7819 8287 16106 minus0467
Implementation process (1198633) 1605 1639 3243 minus0034
Open communication (11986211) 8660 8393 17053 0266
Sufficient resources (11986212) 7946 7272 15218 0674
Top-down procedure (11986213) 8148 7523 15671 0625
Integrated change control system (11986214) 7298 8826 16124 minus1528
Continuous improvement (11986215) 8067 8948 17015 minus0881
Project management environment (1198634) 1615 1555 3171 0060
Colleague-based work environment (11986216) 8111 8020 16132 0091
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (11986217) 8077 7836 15913 0241
Risk free (11986218) 8716 8101 16817 0616
Culture (11986219) 8308 8003 16310 0305
Regulations (11986220) 7170 6925 14095 0245
implementation process (1198633) and119880
2 experience (119862
1) in the
dimension of EVM use (1198631) sufficient resources (119862
12) in the
dimension of implementation process (1198633)These factors are
classified as part of the cause group and the size of their gapsis greater than that of the other factors In a similar fashionthe improvement strategies were determined accordingly
43 Discussions and Implications Several critical results werederived from the above-described numerical example andfrom the discussion with the ET members concerning theEVM application First according to the DEMATEL results(Tables 5 9 and Figure 3) the interdependent relationshipsamong 20 factors and 4 dimensions can influence the aspiredEVM application outcomes This finding is consistent withthe arguments made by many studies that a set of interin-fluenced criteria would significantly influence the effectiveEVM application and ultimately project performance [511] However using the DEMATEL technique can analyzesystemize and visualize these interdependencies in a singlepicture thus revealing the degree and direction of interinflu-ence effects that each dimension and factor would exert onone another and on the aspired EVM application outcomesConsequently for users to be satisfied with the use of EVM toenhance their project performance organizations require adeep understanding of these interrelationships when makingapplication decisions Additionally using the DEMATELtechnique can help managers to better analyze and under-stand interdependent application situations in detail
Second according to the results from the modifiedVIKOR method with the IWs of the DANP (Table 8)decisions regarding the MNDrsquos application of EVM maydiffer for different units in terms of their capabilities in themanagement of different projects The results confirm thatthe development of EVM elements and the wide acceptanceof EVM worldwide may not guarantee that EVM applicationwill be successful for all projects in all organizations In otherwords organizations will use a systematic procedure to thor-oughly analyze application situations at different levels whenmaking suitable application decisions for all units within anorganization The members of the ET emphasized the factthat the numerical results from the modified VIKORmethodand the DANP were essential for the MND which had noprior experience in applying the EVMand encounteredmanydifferent application situations in each subordinate unit Ifthe HMCDM procedure had not been used the applicationdecisions would have been identical for all units once topmanagement had made the decision to apply EVM
Third according to the DANP results (Table 7) amongthe 20 factors continuous improvement (119862
15) an integrated
change control system (11986214) and an integrated product
team (IPT) (1198628) are prioritized as the top three factors
with IWs of 0056 0055 and 0055 respectively This resultechoes the findings obtained from the previously reviewedstudies indicating that the EVM application is not merelythe delivery of a system in an organization [11] Rather thereis considerable potential for improvement which includes
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
14 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
EVM users (D1)EVM methodology (D2)
Implementation process (D3)Project management environment (D4)
D4 (3171 0060)Gaps
U1 0518U2 0753
minus004
minus002
000
002
004
006
316
INRM_dimensions
D1 (3174 minus0025)Gaps
U1 0408U2 0653
D2 (3204 minus0001)Gaps
U1 0395U2 0600
D3 (3243 minus0034)Gaps
U1 0488U2 0633
317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
riminusc i
ri + ci
(a)
INRM_factors in D1
Experience (C1)Training ( )C2
Administrative capabilities (C3)
Technical capabilities ( )C4
change work contents (C5)
minus104
minus074
minus044
minus014
016
046
1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700
C2 (16086 0445)Gaps
U1 0313U2 0583
C4 (16402 minus0434)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0556
C3 (14855 minus0997)Gaps
U1 0343U2 0569
C1 (16463 0370)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0764
C5 (15552 minus0017)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0792
riminusc i ri + ci
(b)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D2
WBS ( )C6
CPM ( )C7
IPT (C8)
)Computer system (C9Integrated project management (C10)
minus090
minus040
010
060
110
160
147 152 157 162 167 172
C9 (15296 1467)Gaps
U1 0475U2 0468
C6 (16796 0267)Gaps
U1 0250U2 0542
C10 (16106 minus0467)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0625
C7 (14890 minus0810)Gaps
U1 0374U2 0819
C8 (17014 minus0476)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0528
(c)
riminusc i ri + ci
070
1510 1560 1610 1660 1710
C14 (16124 minus1528)Gaps
U1 0413U2 0625
C12 (15218 0674)Gaps
U1 0513U2 0736
C15 (17015 minus0881)Gaps
U1 0588U2 0681
C13 (15671 0625)Gaps
U1 0425U2 0639
C11 (17503 0266)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0486
minus180
minus130
minus080
minus030
020
INRM_factors in D3
Sufficient resources (C12)
Integrated change control system (C14)Top-down approach (C13)
Open communication (C11)
Continuous improvement (C15)
(d)
riminusc i
ri + ci
INRM_factors in D4
Risk free (C18)
Regulations (C20)Culture (C19)
Ownership of EVM to lower level project managers (C17)Colleague-based work environment (C16 )
C18 (16817 0616)Gaps
U1 0550U2 0792
C19 (16310 0305)Gaps
U1 0563U2 0653
C15 (16132 0091)Gaps
U1 0500U2 0819
C17 (15913 0241)Gaps
U1 0525U2 0681
C20 (14095 0245)Gaps
U1 0450U2 0819
1390 1440 1490 1540 1590 1640 1690
000
030
060
(e)
Figure 3 The INRM
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Mathematical Problems in Engineering 15
continuing to identify weaknesses in EVM and regard themas opportunities for improvements [5] Additionally accord-ing to the results of the modified VIKOR method (Table 8)each dimensionfactor can create different sizes of gaps toimpact aspired EVM application in each acquisition unit(alternative) However the proposed procedure based on theHMCDM model combining the DEMATEL technique theDANP and the modified VIKOR method enables a cross-functional team to analyze capability gaps with respect todimensionsfactors of respective application units Analyzingthese gaps is useful in developing strategies to enable eachapplication unit to take the most influential improvementactions to facilitate the EVM application decisions and toensure the aspired results
Finally based on the above example we argue thatwithout the full support and participation of the variousunits within an organization the proposed approach couldnot have been applied in the pragmatic manner describedabove In particular in the MND case it is essential tohave a small ET (with five to seven members) that includesgenuine experts with full authorization from the topmanage-ment to handle the application project on a full-time basisldquoGenuine expertsrdquo refer to experts who are committed totaking the appropriate actions when rendering their opinionsand judgments regarding the EVM application In additionthe end users who apply the EVM must have progressiveintentions to pursue performance improvement in theirprojects Overall the EVM application is not an easy taskindeed it involves an array of interdependent variables thatinfluence the application processes and outcomesThis exam-ple however has demonstrated that the procedure based onthe HMCDM model combining the DEMATEL techniquethe DANP and the modified VIKOR method can not onlybetter address application problems but also easily identifycritical factors that are highly influential in solving EVMapplication problems to achieve the aspiration level
5 Conclusions
Although EVM has been widely accepted and applied tomanage project performance in different types of organiza-tions worldwide many studies have indicated that a set ofinterdependent application factors can influence the EVMapplication process and outcomes This study proposed anovel procedure based on the HMCDM method enablingorganizations to obtain aspired outcomes through betterdecision-making and continuous improvements over the lifeof the application process
A numerical example was used to demonstrate the appli-cability of the proposed procedure The results showed thefollowing merits of this study (1) it alone measures theinterinfluence effects and gap indices to support decision-making and continuous improvements in pursuing aspiredEVM application outcomes (2) the traditional concept ofldquoeffective EVM applicationrdquo is extended from ldquoillustrating ofsuccess factors and analysis framework for decision-makingrdquoto ldquoanalyzing selecting and improving selected decisionsover application life cyclerdquo and (3) managers obtain a visu-alized route showing decision information at different levels
within a decision framework allowing EVM application tobe adapted to different application situations existing withinthe organization These merits indicate that the proposedprocedure can provide a significant foundation for ensuringthat aspiration levels of EVM application are achieved atdifferent levels in an organization
This study has several limitations First the dimensionsand factors used to establish the decision framework for theproposed procedure were obtained from a limited reviewof the literature thus this study may have excluded otherpotential influences on the decision process associated withthe effective EVM application Further research could useother approaches such as interviews or case studies to selectadditional factors and explore the differences and similaritiesbetween these approaches Second the conclusions drawnare based on a case from a national defense organizationThus future research could apply our procedure to othercases such as organizations in the private sector to examineour procedure across a wider range of application situationsthus making comparisons to gain additional insights into theusefulness of the proposed procedure Finally the improve-ment strategies determined from our procedure are a set ofstrategic guidelines Future research can identify substantialimprovement activities This work can be characterized asan MODM problem and future research can adopt theDINOV method with a changeable objective and decisionspaces to obtain more valuable improvement outcomesThese limitations provide directions for future research tobroaden the applicability of the proposed procedure
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
References
[1] PMI A Guide to the Project Management Body of KnowledgeProject Management Institute Newtown Square Pa USA 5thedition 2013
[2] J R Meredith S M Shafer S J Mantel and M M SuttonProject Management in Practice John Wiley amp Sons HobokenNJ USA 5th edition 2013
[3] J K Pinto Project Management Achieving Competitive Advan-tage PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River NJ USA 2007
[4] J Batselier and M Vanhoucke ldquoEvaluation of deterministicstate-of-the-art forecasting approaches for project durationbased on earned value managementrdquo International Journal ofProject Management vol 33 no 7 pp 1588ndash1596 2015
[5] Y H Kwak and F T Anbari ldquoHistory practices and future ofearned value management in government perspectives fromNASArdquo Project Management Journal vol 43 no 1 pp 77ndash902012
[6] F T Anbari ldquoEarned value project management method andextensionsrdquo Project Management Journal vol 34 no 4 pp 12ndash23 2003
[7] Q W Fleming and J M Koppelman Earned Value ProjectManagement Project Management Institute Newtown SquarePa USA 2nd edition 2000
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
16 Mathematical Problems in Engineering
[8] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoSetting tolerance limits for statis-tical project control using earned value managementrdquo Omegavol 49 pp 107ndash122 2014
[9] J-S Lee ldquoCalculating cumulative inefficiency using earnedvalue management in construction projectsrdquo Canadian Journalof Civil Engineering vol 42 no 4 pp 222ndash232 2015
[10] W Lipke ldquoIs something missing from project managementrdquoCrosstalk The Journal of Defense Software Engineering pp 16ndash19 2013
[11] E Kim W G Wells Jr and M R Duffey ldquoA model for effectiveimplementation of Earned Value Management methodologyrdquoInternational Journal of Project Management vol 21 no 5 pp375ndash382 2003
[12] R W StrattonThe Earned Value Management Maturity ModelManagement Concepts Inc Vienna Austria 2006
[13] J Colin and M Vanhoucke ldquoA comparison of the performanceof various project control methods using earned value manage-ment systemsrdquo Expert Systems with Applications vol 42 no 6pp 3159ndash3175 2015
[14] P Rayner and G Reiss Portfolio and Programme ManagementDemystifiedManagingMultiple Projects Successfully RoutledgeNew York NY USA 2nd edition 2013
[15] K P Yoon and C L HwangMultiple-Criteria Decision MakingAn Introduction vol 104 Sage Thousand Oaks Calif USA1995
[16] R Ley-Borras ldquoDeciding on the decision situation to analyzethe critical first step of a decision analysisrdquo Decision Analysisvol 12 no 1 pp 46ndash58 2015
[17] J J H Liou ldquoNew concepts and trends of MCDM fortomorrowmdashin honor of Professor Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng on theoccasion of his 70th birthdayrdquo Technological and EconomicDevelopment of Economy vol 19 no 2 pp 367ndash375 2013
[18] J J H Liou and G H Tzeng ldquoComments on multiplecriteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics anoverviewrdquo Technological and Economic Development of Econ-omy vol 18 no 4 pp 672ndash695 2012
[19] F-K Wang C-H Hsu and G-H Tzeng ldquoApplying a hybridMCDM model for six sigma project selectionrdquo MathematicalProblems in Engineering vol 2014 Article ID 730934 13 pages2014
[20] S H Zanakis A Solomon N Wishart and S Dublish ldquoMulti-attribute decision making a simulation comparison of selectmethodsrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 107no 3 pp 507ndash529 1998
[21] C-W Hsu T-C Kuo S-H Chen and A H Hu ldquoUsingDEMATEL to develop a carbonmanagement model of supplierselection in green supply chainmanagementrdquo Journal of CleanerProduction vol 56 pp 164ndash172 2013
[22] K Govindan D Kannan and M Shankar ldquoEvaluation ofgreen manufacturing practices using a hybrid MCDM modelcombiningDANPwith PROMETHEErdquo International Journal ofProduction Research vol 53 no 21 pp 6344ndash6371 2015
[23] J J H Liou C-Y Tsai R-H Lin and G-H Tzeng ldquoA mod-ified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improvingdomestic airlines service qualityrdquo Journal of Air TransportManagement vol 17 no 2 pp 57ndash61 2011
[24] W-Y Chiu G-H Tzeng and H-L Li ldquoA new hybrid MCDMmodel combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-storebusinessrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 37 no 1 pp 48ndash612013
[25] Y-P Ou Yang H-M Shieh and G-H Tzeng ldquoA VIKORtechnique based on DEMATEL and ANP for informationsecurity risk control assessmentrdquo Information Sciences vol 232pp 482ndash500 2013
[26] G-H Tzeng and J-J Huang Multiple Attribute Decision Mak-ing CRC Press Boca Raton Fla USA 2011
[27] M-T Lu S-K Hu L-H Huang and G-H Tzeng ldquoEvaluatingthe implementation of business-to-business m-commerce bySMEs based on a new hybrid MADM modelrdquo ManagementDecision vol 53 no 2 pp 290ndash317 2015
[28] ANSI-EIA Earned Value Management Systems ANSI-EIA-748-98 A N S I E I Alliance American National StandardsInstitute Arlington Va USA 1998
[29] A Gabus and E Fontela World Problems an Invitation toAdditionally Thought within the Framework of DEMATELBattelle Geneva Research Center Geneva Switzerland 1972
[30] M-T Lu G-H Tzeng H Cheng and C-C Hsu ldquoExploringmobile banking services for user behavior in intention adop-tion using new hybrid MADMmodelrdquo Service Business vol 9no 3 pp 541ndash565 2015
[31] S Y Chou G H Tzeng and C C Yu ldquoA novel hybridmultiple attribute decision making procedure for aspired agileapplicationrdquo in Proceedings of the 22nd ISPE Inc InternationalConference on Concurrent Engineering Transdisciplinary Lifecy-cle Analysis of Systems vol 2 pp 152ndash161 July 2015
[32] T L Saaty Decision Making with Dependence and FeedbackTheAnalytic Network Process RWSPublications Pittsburgh PaUSA 1996
[33] H A Simon ldquoA behavioral model of rational choicerdquo TheQuarterly Journal of Economics vol 69 no 1 pp 99ndash118 1955
[34] S Opricovic and G-H Tzeng ldquoCompromise solution byMCDM methods a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOP-SISrdquo European Journal of Operational Research vol 156 no 2pp 445ndash455 2004
[35] S Opricovic Multicriteria Optimization of Civil EngineeringSystems vol 2 Faculty of Civil Engineering Belgrade Serbia1998
[36] F-H Chen and G-H Tzeng ldquoProbing organization perfor-mance using a new hybrid dynamic MCDM method basedon the balanced scorecard approachrdquo Journal of Testing andEvaluation vol 43 no 4 pp 924ndash937 2015
[37] K-Y Shen M-R Yan and G-H Tzeng ldquoCombining VIKOR-DANPmodel for glamor stock selection and stock performanceimprovementrdquo Knowledge-Based Systems vol 58 pp 86ndash972014
[38] K W Huang J H Huang and G H Tzeng ldquoNew hybridmultiple attribute decision-making model for improving com-petence sets enhancing a companyrsquos core competitivenessrdquoSustainability vol 8 no 2 p 175 2016
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of
Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Differential EquationsInternational Journal of
Volume 2014
Applied MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Probability and StatisticsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Mathematical PhysicsAdvances in
Complex AnalysisJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
OptimizationJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
CombinatoricsHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Operations ResearchAdvances in
Journal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Function Spaces
Abstract and Applied AnalysisHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Algebra
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Decision SciencesAdvances in
Discrete MathematicsJournal of
Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom
Volume 2014 Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014
Stochastic AnalysisInternational Journal of