Hierarchical Structuring of PPP Risks Using Interpretative Structural Modeling
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 136, Issue 2
Abstract
Project risk management emphasizes the need to rank and prioritize risks in a project to focus the risk management efforts. This risk prioritization is of special significance in public-private partnership (PPP) projects, since project success depends upon the efficient allocation of risks to the party who can best manage it. Previous studies on risk identification and assessment of PPP project risks have only produced an unstructured list of such risks and prioritizing them on the basis of probability and impact. This paper suggests the use of interpretative structural modeling (ISM) to prepare a hierarchical structure as well as the interrelationships of these risks that would enable decision makers to take appropriate steps. MICMAC (matrice d'impacts croises-multiplication appliqué a un classemen) analysis is also done to determine the dependency and driving power of the risks. ISM, along with MICMAC analysis, provides a useful hierarchy of risks whose individual relationships are unambiguous but whose group relationships are too complex to organize intuitively and can help practitioners better understand risk dependencies and prioritize risk-mitigation efforts. This study identified 17 risks encountered during the development phase of PPP projects in Indian road sector and found that fourteen risks were weak drivers and weak dependents. Delay in financial closure, cost overrun risk, and time overrun risk have been found to have the highest dependence on other risks. The analysis can be extended by practitioners for risk analysis in other infrastructures such as railways, seaports, airports etc.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Bolanos, R., Fontela, E., Nenclares, A., and Pastor, P. (2005). “Using interpretative structural modeling in strategic decision-making groups.” Manage. Decis., 43(6), 877–895.
Chapman, R. J. (2001). “The controlling influence on effective risk identification and assessment for construction design management.” Int. J. Proj. Manage., 19(3), 147–160.
Eldin, N. N. (1989). “Measurement of work progress: Quantitative technique.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 115(3), 462–474.
Faisal, M. N., Banwet, D. K., and Shankar, R. (2006). “Supply chain risk mitigation: Modeling the enablers.” Bus. Process. Manag. J., 12(4), 535–552.
Flood, R. L. (1989). “Six scenarios for the future of systems problem solving.” Syst. Pract. Action Res., 2(1), 75–99.
Hawthorne, R. W., and Sage, A. P. (1975). “On applications of interpretive structural modeling to higher education program planning.” Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci., 9(1), 31–43.
Hillson, D. (2002). “Use of risk breakdown structure (RBS) to understand your risks.” Proc., Project Management Institute Annual Seminars and Symp., San Antonio.
The Hindu. (2006). “BMIC: Supreme court rejects state’s petition.” ⟨http://www.thehindu.com/2006/11/03/stories/2006110317560100.htm⟩ (June 19, 2009).
Hsiao, S., and Liu, E. (2004). “A structural component-based approach for designing product family.” Comput. Ind. Eng., 56, 13–28.
Janes, F. R. (1988). “Interpretative structural modeling: A methodology for structuring complex issues.” Trans. Inst. Meas. Control (London), 10(3), 145–154.
Jha, K. N., and Devaya, M. N. (2008). “Modeling the risks faced by Indian construction companies assessing international projects.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 26(4), 337–348.
Jharkharia, S., and Shankar, R. (2004). “IT enablement of supply chains: Modeling the enablers.” Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manage., 53(8), 700–712.
Kanungo, S., Duda, S., and Srinivas, Y. (1999). “A structured model for evaluating information systems effectiveness.” Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 16, 495–518.
Lendaris, G. B. (1980). “Structural modeling a tutorial guide.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 10(12), 807–840.
Linstone, H. A., Lendaris, G. B., and Rogers, S. D. (1979). “The use of structural modeling in technology assessment.” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 14, 291–327.
Malone, D. W. (1975). “An introduction to the application of interpretative structural modeling.” Proc. IEEE, 63(3), 397–404.
Mandal, A., and Deshmukh, S. G. (1994). “Vendor selection using interpretative structural modeling.” Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manage., 14(6), 52–59.
Palanisami, R. (2003). “Evolving research design using flexible systems methodology: Expert systems approach.” Proc., 2nd National Conf. on Mathematical and Computational Models, PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, India.
Planning Commission. (2006). Public private partnership in national highways: Model concession agreement, Government of India, New Delhi, India, 89–90.
Planning Commission. (2007). Projections of investment in infrastructure during the eleventh plan, Government of India, New Delhi, India, 1–2.
PTI. (2008). “Ambanis out of bidding race for Mumbai trans-harbour link.” ⟨http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1521202⟩ (June 25, 2008).
Ravi, V., and Shankar, R. (2004). “Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics.” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 72(8), 1011–1029.
Ravi, V., Shankar, R., and Tiwari, M. K. (2005). “Productivity improvement of a computer hardware supply chain.” Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag., 54(4), 239–255.
Sage, A. P. (1977). Interpretive structural modeling: Methodology for large-scale systems, McGraw-Hill, New York, 91–164.
Saxena, J. P., Sushil, and Vrat, P. (1992). “Hierarchy and classification of program plan elements using interpretive structural modeling: A case study of energy conservation in the Indian cement industry.” Syst. Pract., 5(6), 651–670.
Sharma H. D., Gupta A. D. and Sushil. (1995). “The objectives of waste management in India: A futures inquiry.” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, 48, 285–309.
Sridharan, G. (1997). “Factors affecting the performance of international joint ventures—A research model.” Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on Construction Industry Development, Vol. 2, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore, 84–81.
Thakkar, J., Deshmukh, S. G., Gupta, A. D., and Shankar, R. (2007). “Development of a balanced scorecard: An integrated approach of interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and analytic network process (ANP).” Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag., 56(1), 25–69.
Thomas, A. V. (2003). “Identification, assessment and allocation of critical risks in Indian BOT road projects.” Ph.D. dissertation, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, India.
Warfield, J. (1976). “Implication structures for system interconnection matrices.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 6(1), 18–24.
World Bank. (2008). “Force majeure clauses.” ⟨http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINFANDLAW/Resources/Forcemajeure.doc⟩ (June 19, 2009).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 136 • Issue 2 • February 2010
Pages: 151 - 159
Copyright
© 2010 ASCE.
History
Received: Dec 2, 2008
Accepted: Aug 4, 2009
Published online: Aug 6, 2009
Published in print: Feb 2010
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.