IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgm/resrep/v2i21y2016p71-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Project Risk Assessment in Enterprises with the Use of TOPSIS Method in the 2014–2020 Perspective(Zarzadzanie ryzykiem projektu w przedsiebiorstwie w ramach perspektywy 2014–2020 z wykorzystaniem metody TOPSIS)

Author

Listed:
  • Ludmila Walaszczyk

    (The Institute for Sustainable Technologies – National Research Institute.)

Abstract

Nowadays the homogeneous market with 500 billion consumers, 220 billion employees and 20 billion employers is the main instrument enabling the development of competitive and innovative Europe.One of the ways for companies to design innovative products is to participate in the execution of different projects. Each country offers many initiatives, mainly financed by the European Union (it is currently the 2014–2020 perspective). Thanks to participation in them, employers have the possibility to improve their business and develop products they need. In order to achieve a product of a good quality, it must be managed correctly. There are a lot of methods which can be used in the project management process; however, the chosen methods should be clear and give proper results. One of the crucial aspects of the evaluation process is risk assessment as it enables one to find any abnormalities in the project. Employers do not use any specialised tools enabling them to evaluate the risk during the project development. That is why many companies make products that are very difficult to sell on the market or even to use due to many defects. The risk can be evaluated with different methods, both qualitative and quantitative. The main objective of the article is to present the values for the company when using the semi-quantitative TOPSIS method (Hwang and Yoon, 1981) to measure risk in the projects executed in the 2014–2020 perspective. Therefore, the author indicates the advantages of TOPSIS method and presents how it can be used in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludmila Walaszczyk, 2016. "Project Risk Assessment in Enterprises with the Use of TOPSIS Method in the 2014–2020 Perspective(Zarzadzanie ryzykiem projektu w przedsiebiorstwie w ramach perspektywy 2014–2020 z wykorzystaniem meto," Research Reports, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(21), pages 71-79.
    • Handle: RePEc:sgm:resrep:v:2:i:21:y:2016:p:71-79
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sim.wz.uw.edu.pl/sites/default/files/artykuly/walszczyk.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2013. "Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process with ELECTRE and PROMETHEE," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 820-846.
    2. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    3. Juselius, Katarina, 2006. "The Cointegrated VAR Model: Methodology and Applications," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199285679.
    4. Saaty, Thomas L., 1994. "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 426-447, May.
    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. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    2. Fernández, Eduardo & Figueira, José Rui & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2023. "A generalized approach to ordinal classification based on the comparison of actions with either limiting or characteristic profiles," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(3), pages 1309-1322.
    3. Fernández, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2022. "A hierarchical interval outranking approach with interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 293-307.
    4. Rocha, António & Costa, Ana Sara & Figueira, José Rui & Ferreira, Diogo Cunha & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2021. "Quality assessment of the Portuguese public hospitals: A multiple criteria approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Dias, Luis C. & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Dantas, Guilherme & de Castro, Nivalde & Zamboni, Lucca, 2018. "A multi-criteria approach to sort and rank policies based on Delphi qualitative assessments and ELECTRE TRI: The case of smart grids in Brazil," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 100-111.
    6. Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Roy, Bernard, 2022. "Electre-Score: A first outranking based method for scoring actions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 986-1005.
    7. Francesca Abastante & Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Isabella M. Lami & Beatrice Mecca, 2022. "The introduction of the SRF-II method to compare hypothesis of adaptive reuse for an iconic historical building," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2397-2436, July.
    8. Govindan, Kannan & Kadziński, Miłosz & Ehling, Ronja & Miebs, Grzegorz, 2019. "Selection of a sustainable third-party reverse logistics provider based on the robustness analysis of an outranking graph kernel conducted with ELECTRE I and SMAA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-15.
    9. Santos, João & Domingos, Tiago & Sousa, Tânia & St. Aubyn, Miguel, 2016. "Does a small cost share reflect a negligible role for energy in economic production? Testing for aggregate production functions including capital, labor, and useful exergy through a cointegration-base," MPRA Paper 70850, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Koivu, Tuuli, 2008. "Has the Chinese economy become more sensitive to interest rates? : Studying credit demand in China," BOFIT Discussion Papers 1/2008, Bank of Finland, Institute for Economies in Transition.
    11. Christian Schoder, 2012. "Effective demand, exogenous normal utilization and endogenous capacity in the long run. Evidence from a CVAR analysis for the US," IMK Working Paper 103-2012, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    12. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    13. Li, Shunxi & Su, Bowen & St-Pierre, David L. & Sui, Pang-Chieh & Zhang, Guofang & Xiao, Jinsheng, 2017. "Decision-making of compressed natural gas station siting for public transportation: Integration of multi-objective optimization, fuzzy evaluating, and radar charting," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 11-17.
    14. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    15. Murach, Michael & Wagner, Helmut & Kim, Jungsuk & Park, Donghyun, 2022. "Trajectories to high income: Comparing the growth dynamics in China, South Korea, and Japan with cointegrated VAR models," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 492-511.
    16. Robert Kelm, 2017. "The Purchasing Power Parity Puzzle and Imperfect Knowledge: The Case of the Polish Zloty," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-27, March.
    17. Belke, Ansgar & Gros, Daniel & Osowski, Thomas, 2016. "Did quantitative easing affect interest rates outside the US? New evidence based on interest rate differentials," CEPS Papers 11266, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    18. Pablo de la Vega & Guido Zack & Jimena Calvo & Emiliano Libman, 2024. "Inflation Determinants in Argentina (2004-2022)," Papers 2405.20822, arXiv.org.
    19. Katarina Juselius, 2017. "Using a Theory-Consistent CVAR Scenario to Test an Exchange Rate Model Based on Imperfect Knowledge," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Neil R. Ericsson, 2021. "Dynamic Econometrics in Action: A Biography of David F. Hendry," International Finance Discussion Papers 1311, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    TOPSIS method; risk assessment; the 2014–2020 perspective; project management.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • O2 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sgm:resrep:v:2:i:21:y:2016:p:71-79. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/somuwpl.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.