IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v255y2016i1p259-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Allocation of tasks for reliability growth using multi-attribute utility

Author

Listed:
  • Wilson, Kevin J.
  • Quigley, John

Abstract

In reliability growth models in particular, and project risk management more generally, improving the reliability of a system or product is limited by constraints on cost and time. There are many possible tasks which can be carried out to identify and design out weaknesses in the system under development. This paper considers the allocation problem: which subset of tasks to undertake. While the method is applicable to project risk management generally, the work has been motivated by reliability growth programmes. We utilise a model for reliability growth, based on an efficacy matrix, developed with engineering experts in the aerospace industry. We develop a general multi-attribute utility function based on targets for cost, time on test and system reliability. The optimal subset is identified by maximising the prior expected utility. We derive conditions on the model parameters for risk aversion and loss aversion based on observed properties of preference. We give conditions for multivariate risk aversion under the general form of the utility function. The method is illustrated using an example informed by work with aerospace organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilson, Kevin J. & Quigley, John, 2016. "Allocation of tasks for reliability growth using multi-attribute utility," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(1), pages 259-271.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:255:y:2016:i:1:p:259-271
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.05.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221716303344
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.05.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2009. "Additive Utility in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 863-873, May.
    2. Hallerbach, Winfried & Ning, Haikun & Soppe, Aloy & Spronk, Jaap, 2004. "A framework for managing a portfolio of socially responsible investments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 517-529, March.
    3. Fishburn, Peter C, 1977. "Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 116-126, March.
    4. Gregory W. Fischer & Mark S. Kamlet & Stephen E. Fienberg & David Schkade, 1986. "Risk Preferences for Gains and Losses in Multiple Objective Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(9), pages 1065-1086, September.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Ian Bateman & Alistair Munro & Bruce Rhodes & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1997. "A Test of the Theory of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 479-505.
    7. Walls, Lesley & Quigley, John, 1999. "Learning to improve reliability during system development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 495-509, December.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Scott F. Richard, 1975. "Multivariate Risk Aversion, Utility Independence and Separable Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 12-21, September.
    10. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    11. John W. Payne & Dan J. Laughhunn & Roy Crum, 1984. "Multiattribute Risky Choice Behavior: The Editing of Complex Prospects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1350-1361, November.
    12. Aouni, Belaid & Colapinto, Cinzia & La Torre, Davide, 2014. "Financial portfolio management through the goal programming model: Current state-of-the-art," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 536-545.
    13. Hsieh, Chung-Chi, 2003. "Optimal task allocation and hardware redundancy policies in distributed computing systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 430-447, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qazi, Abroon & Dickson, Alex & Quigley, John & Gaudenzi, Barbara, 2018. "Supply chain risk network management: A Bayesian belief network and expected utility based approach for managing supply chain risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 24-42.
    2. Chan, Chi Kin & Zhou, Yan & Wong, Kar Hung, 2019. "An equilibrium model of the supply chain network under multi-attribute behaviors analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 514-535.
    3. Wei Wang & Yaofeng Xu & Liguo Hou, 2019. "Optimal allocation of test times for reliability growth testing with interval-valued model parameters," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(5), pages 791-802, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2009. "Additive Utility in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 863-873, May.
    2. Kuhberger, Anton, 1998. "The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 23-55, July.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar & Cañal-Fernández, Verónica, 2016. "A model based on Copula Theory for sustainable and social responsible investments," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 55-76.
    5. Sudeep Bhatia & Graham Loomes & Daniel Read, 2021. "Establishing the laws of preferential choice behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(6), pages 1324-1369, November.
    6. Han Bleichrodt & Jose Luis Pinto & Peter P. Wakker, 2001. "Making Descriptive Use of Prospect Theory to Improve the Prescriptive Use of Expected Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(11), pages 1498-1514, November.
    7. Peter Brooks & Horst Zank, 2005. "Loss Averse Behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 301-325, December.
    8. Uriel Procaccia & Uzi Segal, 2003. "Super Majoritarianism and the Endowment Effect," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 181-207, November.
    9. Veld, Chris & Veld-Merkoulova, Yulia V., 2008. "The risk perceptions of individual investors," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 226-252, April.
    10. Catarina Roseta‐Palma & Yiğit Sağlam, 2019. "Downside risk in reservoir management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), pages 328-353, April.
    11. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    12. Lei Wang & Qing Liu & Tongle Yin, 2018. "Decision-making of investment in navigation safety improving schemes with application of cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(6), pages 710-724, December.
    13. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2016. "An elicitation of utility for quality of life under prospect theory," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 121-134.
    14. Enrico G. De Giorgi & David B. Brown & Melvyn Sim, 2010. "Dual representation of choice and aspirational preferences," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-07, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    15. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    16. Lisheng He & Pantelis P. Analytis & Sudeep Bhatia, 2022. "The Wisdom of Model Crowds," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3635-3659, May.
    17. Peter P. Wakker, 2008. "Explaining the characteristics of the power (CRRA) utility family," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1329-1344.
    18. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    19. Ben Salah Mahdi, Ines & Boujelbène Abbes, Mouna, 2018. "Behavioral explanation for risk taking in Islamic and conventional banks," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 577-587.
    20. Gebhard Geiger, 2012. "Multi-attribute non-expected utility," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 263-292, July.
    21. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:255:y:2016:i:1:p:259-271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.