PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS: AN AHP BASED APPROACH

Avinash Kumar Singh, Kampan Mukherjee

Abstract


Prioritization of project stakeholders is inevitable, as all competing demands of stakeholders cannot often be met. In this paper, an Analytic Hierarchic Process (AHP) based model is proposed for prioritization of the stakeholders. This model is based on critical stakeholder attributes and utilizes collective knowledge and wisdom of the project management team. The critical attributes of the stakeholders are identified and AHP is used to arrive at the stakeholder order of priority. How this priority information can improve the project management processes and how this can enable project teams to respond to stakeholders in a coherent manner, has also been explored.

Keywords: Group Decision, Project Management, Stakeholder, Prioritization, AHP.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Aragonés-Beltrán, P., Chaparro-González, F., Pastor-Ferrando, J., & Pla-Rubio, A. (2014). An AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)/ANP (Analytic Network Process)-based multi-criteria decision approach for the selection of solar-thermal power plant investment projects. Energy 66, 222–238.

Aragonés-Beltrán, P., García-Melón, M., & Montesinos-Valera, J. (2017). How to assess stakeholders' influence in project management? A proposal based on the Analytic Network Proces. International Journal of Project Management Vol-35, Issue-3, 451-462.

Baby, S. (2013). AHP Modeling for Multicriteria Decision-Making and to Optimise Strategies for Protecting Coastal Landscape Resources. S. Baby, "AHP Modeling for Multicriteria DecisInternational Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology vol. 4, 218-227.

Boesso, G., & Kumar, K. (2009). An investigation of stakeholder prioritization and engagement:who or what really counts. Giacomo Boesso, Kamalesh Kumar, (2009) "An investigatiJournal of Accounting & Organizational Change", Vol. 5 Issue: 1, 62-80.

Brice, H., & Wegner,T. (1989). A quantitative approach to corporate social responsibility program formulation. Brice, H. and Wegner, T. (1989), A quantitative approac Managerial and Decision Economics, Vol. 10, 163-71.

Bryson, J. (2004). What to do when Stakeholders matter. Public Management Review, 6:1, 21-53.

Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Cochran, W. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Cooper, D., & Kagel, J. (2005). Are Two Heads Better than One? Team Versus Individual Play in Signaling Games. American Economic Review, 95(33) , 477-509.

Curşeu, P., Jansen, R., & Chappin, M. (2013). Decision Rules and Group Rationality: Cognitive Gain or Standstill? Plos One, 8(2):7.

Forman, E., & Gass, S. (2001). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Exposition. Operations Research, 49:469-86.

Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

Hage, M., Leroy, P., & Petersen, A. (2010). Stakeholder participation in environmental knowledge production. Futures 42, 254–264.

Hecker, A. (2012). Knowledge Beyond the Individual?Making Sense of a Notion of Collective Knowledge in Organization Theory. Achim Hecker, Knowledge Beyond the Individual?Making SensOrganization Studies 33(3), 423–445.

Hosseini, J., & Brenner, S. (1992). The stakeholder theory of the firm: a methodology togenerate value matrix weights. Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 2 No. 2, 99-119.

Hujainah, F., Bakar, R.B., Al-haimi, B., & Abdulgabber, M. (2018). Stakeholder quantification and prioritisation research: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology 102, 85-99.

Jackson, J. (2001). Prioritising customers and other stakeholders using the AHP. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 Issue: 7/8, 858-873.

Kim, S., & Ahn, B. (1997). Group decision-making procedure considering preference strength under incomplete information. Computer & Operations Research 24, 1101–1112.

Lam, A. (2000). Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework. Organization Studies, 487–513.

Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & MárioRaposo. (2012). Emerson Wagner MainardesA model for stakeholder classificationand stakeholder relationships. Emerson Wagner Mainardes, Helena Alves, MárioRaposo, (2012) "A model for stakeholdeManagement Decision, Vol. 50 Issue: 10, 1861-1879.

Mu, E., & Pereyra-Rojas, M. (2017). Practical Decision Making. Springer Briefs in Operations Research.

Palamides, T., & Gray, D. (1993). The Selection of a Bridge. Pittsburgh: Joseph Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh.

Peniwati, K. (2007). Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 46, 935–947.

PMI. (2013). PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge) Fifth Edition. Philadelphia, USA: PMI.

Rao, R. V. ( 2007). Decision Making in Manufacturing Environment Using Graph Theory and Fuzzy Multi Attribute Decision Making Methods. London: Springer.

Saaty, T. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Services Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, 83-98.

Saaty, T. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol., vol. 15, no. 3, 234–281.

Saaty, T. (2012). Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, Third Revised Edition. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.

Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol., vol. 15, no. 3, 234–281.

Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Services Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, 83-98.

Saaty, T. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Network. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Segaran, T. (2007). Programming collective intelligence: building smart Web 2.0 applications. Online Book: O’Reilly.

Singh, A. K., & Mukherjee, K. (2021). PROJECT PORTFOLIO DECISION POLICY ALIGNED WITH ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES. International Journal of Business and Economics, 9-21.

Vaidya, O., & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 169:1-29.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


International Journal of Business and Economics is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Based on a work at http://ijbe.ielas.org

Copyright © 2016-2022 International Journal of Business and Economics (IJBE)

ISSN (online) 2545-4137

Disclaimer: Articles on International Journal of Business and Economics (IJBE) have been previewed and authenticated by the Authors before sending for the publication. The Journal, Chief Editor and the editorial board are not entitled or liable to either justify or responsible for inaccurate and misleading data if any. It is the sole responsibility of the Author concerned.