IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v38y2008i4p251-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company Optimizes Infrastructure Project-Portfolio Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Cigdem Z. Gurgur

    (Division of Business and Economics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado 80401)

  • Charles T. Morley

    (Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, Denver, Colorado 80201)

Abstract

Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company spends millions of dollars on the maintenance and modernization of its infrastructure each year. Projects often involve investments that cannot be justified purely in terms of net present value or other classical investment-evaluation methods. The options are also restricted because funds that are not spent within a given time frame must be relinquished. Furthermore, some projects may be delayed and the unplanned carryover of their costs moved into the next fiscal year; this causes the postponement or cancellation of other unrelated projects because of in-budget transfers. In this paper, we used multiattribute utility theory and chance-constrained programming to optimize the selection of infrastructure projects. Our solution ensured the selection of high-value projects to maximize the company's performance. These selections were subject to the constraints that a portfolio did not exceed the available budget and that the carryover of the unspent funds to the next fiscal year did not exceed predetermined limits. We used Microsoft Excel to ensure broad accessibility, transparency, user interaction, improved data collection and asset management, and ease-of-use by managers.

Suggested Citation

  • Cigdem Z. Gurgur & Charles T. Morley, 2008. "Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company Optimizes Infrastructure Project-Portfolio Selection," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 251-262, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:38:y:2008:i:4:p:251-262
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.1080.0378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1080.0378
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.1080.0378?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. A. Quaddus & D. J. Atkinson & M. Levy, 1992. "An Application of Decision Conferencing to strategic Planning for a Voluntary Organization," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 61-71, December.
    2. A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1963. "Deterministic Equivalents for Optimizing and Satisficing under Chance Constraints," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 18-39, February.
    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. Stephen P. Chambal & Jeffery D. Weir & Yucel R. Kahraman & Alex J. Gutman, 2011. "A Practical Procedure for Customizable One-Way Sensitivity Analysis in Additive Value Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 303-321, December.
    2. Zhang, Xinwei & Yan, Yong & Wang, Lilin & Wang, Yang, 2024. "A ranking approach for robust portfolio decision analysis based on multilinear portfolio utility functions and incomplete preference information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    3. Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti & Keisler, Jeffrey M. & Morton, Alec, 2021. "Portfolio decision analysis: Recent developments and future prospects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(3), pages 811-825.

    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. C Gurgur, 2009. "Optimal project portfolio selection with carryover constraint," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1649-1657, December.
    2. Hang Li & Zhe Zhang & Xianggen Yin & Buhan Zhang, 2020. "Preventive Security-Constrained Optimal Power Flow with Probabilistic Guarantees," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Bilsel, R. Ufuk & Ravindran, A., 2011. "A multiobjective chance constrained programming model for supplier selection under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1284-1300, September.
    4. Glover, Fred & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2009. "Contributions of Professor William W. Cooper in Operations Research and Management Science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Zervopoulos, Panagiotis & Emrouznejad, Ali & Sklavos, Sokratis, 2019. "A Bayesian approach for correcting bias of data envelopment analysis estimators," MPRA Paper 91886, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. R. Caballero & E. Cerda & M. Muñoz & L. Rey, 2002. "Analysis and comparisons of some solution concepts for stochastic programming problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 10(1), pages 101-123, June.
    7. Hongmin Li & Stephen C. Graves & Woonghee Tim Huh, 2014. "Optimal Capacity Conversion for Product Transitions Under High Service Requirements," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 46-60, February.
    8. Wenqing Chen & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "Goal-Driven Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 342-357, April.
    9. Ann M. Campbell & Barrett W. Thomas, 2008. "Probabilistic Traveling Salesman Problem with Deadlines," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 1-21, February.
    10. O. Olesen, 2006. "Comparing and Combining Two Approaches for Chance Constrained DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 103-119, October.
    11. Gong, Jiangyue & Gujjula, Krishna Reddy & Ntaimo, Lewis, 2023. "An integrated chance constraints approach for optimal vaccination strategies under uncertainty for COVID-19," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    12. Taylan G. Topcu & Konstantinos Triantis, 2022. "An ex-ante DEA method for representing contextual uncertainties and stakeholder risk preferences," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 309(1), pages 395-423, February.
    13. Maji, Chandi Charan, 1975. "Intertemporal allocation of irrigation water in the Mayurakshi Project (India): an application of deterministic and chance-constrained linear programming," ISU General Staff Papers 197501010800006381, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Kou, Peng & Gao, Feng & Guan, Xiaohong, 2015. "Stochastic predictive control of battery energy storage for wind farm dispatching: Using probabilistic wind power forecasts," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 286-300.
    15. Engau, Alexander & Sigler, Devon, 2020. "Pareto solutions in multicriteria optimization under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 357-368.
    16. Yongjia Song & Minjiao Zhang, 2015. "Chance‐constrained multi‐terminal network design problems," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(4), pages 321-334, June.
    17. Bora Tarhan & Ignacio Grossmann & Vikas Goel, 2013. "Computational strategies for non-convex multistage MINLP models with decision-dependent uncertainty and gradual uncertainty resolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 203(1), pages 141-166, March.
    18. C. Lovell & Shawna Grosskopf & Eduardo Ley & Jesús Pastor & Diego Prior & Philippe Eeckaut, 1994. "Linear programming approaches to the measurement and analysis of productive efficiency," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 2(2), pages 175-248, December.
    19. Yongjia Song & James R. Luedtke & Simge Küçükyavuz, 2014. "Chance-Constrained Binary Packing Problems," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 735-747, November.
    20. Arjang Assad & Weixuan Xu, 1992. "The quadratic minimum spanning tree problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 399-417, 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:inm:orinte:v:38:y:2008:i:4:p:251-262. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.