IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5578-d1104141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic Review of the Time-Cost Optimization Models in Construction Management

Author

Listed:
  • Osama Mohamed ElSahly

    (College of Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Salma Ahmed

    (College of Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Akmal Abdelfatah

    (College of Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah P.O. Box 26666, United Arab Emirates)

Abstract

The construction sector is a crucial contributor to the national and global economy. Therefore, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of construction projects can have a significant impact on gross domestic product (GDP). However, managing construction projects can be challenging due to the uncertainties and complexities involved. The three primary interrelated constraints of construction projects, namely, time, scope, and cost, require effective management to ensure successful completion. To optimize the time and cost of construction projects, various optimization models and techniques have been proposed in the literature. This paper presents a systematic review of the time-cost optimization models in construction management and proposes some future work to improve the solution of the considered problem. The review categorizes the existing models into three categories: exact models, approximate models, and hybrid algorithm models. The exact models provide optimal solutions but require a lot of computational time and may not be efficient in solving multi-objective and large-scale problems. The approximate models provide near-optimal solutions and reduce computational effort but may not be efficient in solving large-scale projects. The hybrid algorithm models combine the good properties of different algorithms to provide high-quality and efficient solutions. The purpose of this paper is accomplished through a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The paper analyzes the contribution, advantages, and limitations of each category and provides recommendations for future work. Based on the review, several recommendations for future work are provided, including the development of hybrid models that combine different optimization techniques, the incorporation of risk management into optimization models, and the use of advanced data analytics techniques to improve the accuracy of optimization models. Overall, this paper provides an up-to-date comprehensive review of the time-cost optimization models used in construction management and offers valuable insights for researchers and practitioners in this field. The findings of this review can be used to guide future research and improve the effectiveness of optimization models for construction projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Osama Mohamed ElSahly & Salma Ahmed & Akmal Abdelfatah, 2023. "Systematic Review of the Time-Cost Optimization Models in Construction Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5578-:d:1104141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5578/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5578/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leviäkangas, Pekka & Mok Paik, Seong & Moon, Sungkon, 2017. "Keeping up with the pace of digitization: The case of the Australian construction industry," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 33-43.
    2. D. G. Malcolm & J. H. Roseboom & C. E. Clark & W. Fazar, 1959. "Application of a Technique for Research and Development Program Evaluation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 646-669, October.
    3. F. Brian Talbot, 1982. "Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling with Time-Resource Tradeoffs: The Nonpreemptive Case," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(10), pages 1197-1210, October.
    4. Ehsan Eshtehardian & Abbas Afshar & Reza Abbasnia, 2008. "Time-cost optimization: using GA and fuzzy sets theory for uncertainties in cost," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(7), pages 679-691.
    5. Moustapha Diaby & Jose M. Cruz & Aaron L. Nsakanda, 2011. "Project crashing in the presence of general non-linear activity time reduction costs," International Journal of Operational Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(3), pages 318-332.
    6. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    7. Joel Goh & Nicholas G. Hall, 2013. "Total Cost Control in Project Management via Satisficing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(6), pages 1354-1372, June.
    8. Akkan, Can & Drexl, Andreas & Kimms, Alf, 2005. "Network decomposition-based benchmark results for the discrete time-cost tradeoff problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(2), pages 339-358, September.
    9. Hong Zhang & Heng Li, 2010. "Multi-objective particle swarm optimization for construction time-cost tradeoff problems," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 75-88.
    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. Weglarz, Jan & Józefowska, Joanna & Mika, Marek & Waligóra, Grzegorz, 2011. "Project scheduling with finite or infinite number of activity processing modes - A survey," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 208(3), pages 177-205, February.
    2. Manuel A. Nunez & Lynn Kuo & I. Robert Chiang, 2022. "Managing risk-adjusted resource allocation for project time-cost tradeoffs," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 317(2), pages 717-735, October.
    3. Xiong, Jian & Leus, Roel & Yang, Zhenyu & Abbass, Hussein A., 2016. "Evolutionary multi-objective resource allocation and scheduling in the Chinese navigation satellite system project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 662-675.
    4. Nima Zoraghi & Aria Shahsavar & Babak Abbasi & Vincent Peteghem, 2017. "Multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem with material ordering under bonus–penalty policies," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 49-79, April.
    5. Chen, Shih-Pin & Tsai, Ming-Jiun, 2011. "Time-cost trade-off analysis of project networks in fuzzy environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 386-397, July.
    6. Savindi Caldera & Sherif Mostafa & Cheryl Desha & Sherif Mohamed, 2021. "Exploring the Role of Digital Infrastructure Asset Management Tools for Resilient Linear Infrastructure Outcomes in Cities and Towns: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-25, October.
    7. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    8. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    9. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    11. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    12. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    13. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    15. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    17. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    18. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    19. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    20. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5578-:d:1104141. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.