IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v94y2009i4p785-795.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk-based investment trade-off related to building facility management

Author

Listed:
  • Taillandier, F.
  • Sauce, G.
  • Bonetto, R.

Abstract

Due to his or her profession, any building facility manager has to face many decision-making situations. One of the most important to be mentioned is the arbitration of a multi-year maintenance plan for buildings. Deciding between proposed maintenance actions, according to several constraints, so as to aim at satisfying corporate strategy is a complex choice. Risk approaches can be particularly effective because of their ability to handle complexity and uncertainties. The problem is then to be able to propose a method considering risks, adapted to the specific context of building facility management. Our method, regarded as a traditional approach, includes needed resources (i.e. costs) according to constraints (i.e. budget), but it also considers several risk domains (safety, technical preservation, client satisfaction, etc.), through the consequences (gain and loss). It proposes an ergonomic arbitration system based on filters following two complementary approaches: a selection of the fundamental actions and then an optimization of the plan (in a global view). The aim, for decision-makers, is to build their own solution by testing multiple angles of vision in simulation logic.

Suggested Citation

  • Taillandier, F. & Sauce, G. & Bonetto, R., 2009. "Risk-based investment trade-off related to building facility management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(4), pages 785-795.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:94:y:2009:i:4:p:785-795
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2008.09.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832008002329
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2008.09.005?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. March, James G., 1988. "Variable risk preferences and adaptive aspirations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 5-24, January.
    2. Ralph L. Keeney, 1982. "Feature Article—Decision Analysis: An Overview," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 803-838, October.
    3. Willem Karel Brauers, 2007. "What is meant by normalisation in decision making?," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(5/6), pages 445-460.
    4. Karydas, D.M. & Gifun, J.F., 2006. "A method for the efficient prioritization of infrastructure renewal projects," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 84-99.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wang, Yonggui & Hong, Aoran & Li, Xia & Gao, Jia, 2020. "Marketing innovations during a global crisis: A study of China firms’ response to COVID-19," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 214-220.
    2. Volker Wiemann & Thomas Mellewigt, 1998. "Das Risiko-Rendite Paradoxon. Stand der Forschung und Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 551-572, June.
    3. Hans Bruining & Ernst Verwaal & Mike Wright, 2013. "Private equity and entrepreneurial management in management buy-outs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 591-605, April.
    4. Mario BENASSI & Matteo LANDONI & Francesco RENTOCCHINI, 2017. "University Management Practices and Academic Spin-offs," Departmental Working Papers 2017-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    5. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    6. Fernández, Eduardo & Figueira, José Rui & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2022. "Handling imperfect information in multiple criteria decision-making through a comprehensive interval outranking approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    7. Robert F. Bordley, 2023. "Lessons for Decision-Analysis Practice from the Automotive Industry," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 240-246, May.
    8. Sironen, Susanna & Primmer, Eeva & Leskinen, Pekka & Similä, Jukka & Punttila, Pekka, 2020. "Context sensitive policy instruments: A multi-criteria decision analysis for safeguarding forest habitats in Southwestern Finland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    9. Hua Li & George E. Apostolakis & Joseph Gifun & William VanSchalkwyk & Susan Leite & David Barber, 2009. "Ranking the Risks from Multiple Hazards in a Small Community," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 438-456, March.
    10. Benoy Jacob & Eric Welch & Terence Simms, 2009. "Emergent Management Strategies in a Public Agency: A Case Study of Alternative Fuel Vehicles," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 213-234, September.
    11. Emilio Cerdá & Sonia Quiroga Gómez, 2009. "Economic Value of Weather Forecasting Systems Information: A Risk Aversion Approach," Working Papers 2009-04, FEDEA.
    12. Patterson, S.A. & Apostolakis, G.E., 2007. "Identification of critical locations across multiple infrastructures for terrorist actions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(9), pages 1183-1203.
    13. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold & Pyka, Andreas & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2021. "On the performance and strategy of innovation systems: A multicriteria group decision analysis approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    14. Deborah de Lange, 2013. "How do Universities Make Progress? Stakeholder-Related Mechanisms Affecting Adoption of Sustainability in University Curricula," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 103-116, November.
    15. Tim H¨ofer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2020. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multicriteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 330-355, December.
    16. Rajshekhar G. Javalgi & Hemant K. Jain, 1988. "Integrating multiple criteria decision making models into the decision support system framework for marketing decisions," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(6), pages 575-596, December.
    17. van Rijnsoever & Marius Meeus & Roger Donders, 2012. "The effects of economic status and recent experience on innovative behavior under environmental variability: an experimental approach," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 12-01, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Jan 2012.
    18. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    19. Stephan Billinger & Kannan Srikanth & Nils Stieglitz & Terry R. Schumacher, 2021. "Exploration and exploitation in complex search tasks: How feedback influences whether and where human agents search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 361-385, February.
    20. Höfer, Tim & Madlener, Reinhard, 2020. "A participatory stakeholder process for evaluating sustainable energy transition scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).

    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:reensy:v:94:y:2009:i:4:p:785-795. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    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.