Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 30225
Risk Evaluation of Information Technology Projects Based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchal Process

Authors: H. Iranmanesh, S. Nazari Shirkouhi, M. R. Skandari

Abstract:

Information Technology (IT) projects are always accompanied by various risks and because of high rate of failure in such projects, managing risks in order to neutralize or at least decrease their effects on the success of the project is strongly essential. In this paper, fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) is exploited as a means of risk evaluation methodology to prioritize and organize risk factors faced in IT projects. A real case of IT projects, a project of design and implementation of an integrated information system in a vehicle producing company in Iran is studied. Related risk factors are identified and then expert qualitative judgments about these factors are acquired. Translating these judgments to fuzzy numbers and using them as an input to FAHP, risk factors are then ranked and prioritized by FAHP in order to make project managers aware of more important risks and enable them to adopt suitable measures to deal with these highly devastative risks.

Keywords: Fuzzy Logic, Risk Evaluation, Information technology projects, Analytic hierarchal process

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1334608

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1436

References:


[1] R. Gardner, CEO to IT: Teach us, computer world, October 19, 1998.
[2] Chapman, C.B. and Cooper, D.F. (1983), "Risk analysis: testing some prejudices", European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.14, pp.238- 47.
[3] PMI. A guide to the project management body of knowledge: PMBOK Guide. 3rd ed. USA: Project Management Institute Inc; 2004.
[4] B.W. Boehm, Software risk management: principles and practices, IEEE Software 8 (1) (1991).
[5] A. Lederer, J. Prasad, Information systems software cost estimate: a current assessment, Journal of Information Technology 8(1), 1993.
[6] M. Mehler, Reining in runaway systems, Information Week (1991) 20- 24.
[7] Standish Group International. 2002. Latest Standish Group CHAOS report shows project success rate has improved by 50%. Press release, 25 March 2002.
[online] URL: http://www.standishgroup.com/press/article.php?id=2. Accessed 8 April 2004.
[8] H. Barki, S. Rivard, J. Talbot. Toward an assessment of software development risk, Journal of Management Information Systems 10 (2) (1993).
[9] L. Wallace, M. Keil, A. Rai, How software project risk affects project performance: an investigation of the dimensions of risk and an exploratory model, Decision Sciences 35 (2) (2004).
[10] T├╝ys├╝z F., Kahraman C., Project risk evaluation using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: an application to information technology projects, international journal of intelligent systems (12), 2006. 559-84.
[11] R. Schmidt, K. Lyytinen, M. Keil, P. Cule, Identifying software project risks: an International Delphi Study, Journal of Management Information Systems 17 (4) (2001).
[12] McFarlan, F.W. 1981. Portfolio approach to information systems, Harvard Business Review, September-October: 142-150.
[13] Klein, R., Risk management for business process reengineering projects. Information Systems Management 17(4), 2001. 71-73.
[14] Addison, T., E-commerce project development risks: evidence from a Delphi survey, International Journal of Information Management 23(1), 2003. 25-40.
[15] Saaty, T.L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw Hill.
[16] Zadeh, L. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information Control, 8, 338-353.
[17] Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M. (1988). Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publisher.
[18] Buckley, J.J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchal Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17, 233- 247.
[19] Liou, T.S. and Wang, M.J.J. (1992). Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 50(3), 247-255.