IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/navres/v56y2009i2p93-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Client‐contractor bargaining on net present value in project scheduling with limited resources

Author

Listed:
  • Nursel Kavlak
  • Gündüz Ulusoy
  • Funda Sivrikaya Şerifoğlu
  • Ş. İlker Birbil

Abstract

The client‐contractor bargaining problem addressed here is in the context of a multi‐mode resource constrained project scheduling problem with discounted cash flows, which is formulated as a progress payments model. In this model, the contractor receives payments from the client at predetermined regular time intervals. The last payment is paid at the first predetermined payment point right after project completion. The second payment model considered in this paper is the one with payments at activity completions. The project is represented on an Activity‐on‐Node (AON) project network. Activity durations are assumed to be deterministic. The project duration is bounded from above by a deadline imposed by the client, which constitutes a hard constraint. The bargaining objective is to maximize the bargaining objective function comprised of the objectives of both the client and the contractor. The bargaining objective function is expected to reflect the two‐party nature of the problem environment and seeks a compromise between the client and the contractor. The bargaining power concept is introduced into the problem by the bargaining power weights used in the bargaining objective function. Simulated annealing algorithm and genetic algorithm approaches are proposed as solution procedures. The proposed solution methods are tested with respect to solution quality and solution times. Sensitivity analyses are conducted among different parameters used in the model, namely the profit margin, the discount rate, and the bargaining power weights. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Nursel Kavlak & Gündüz Ulusoy & Funda Sivrikaya Şerifoğlu & Ş. İlker Birbil, 2009. "Client‐contractor bargaining on net present value in project scheduling with limited resources," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 93-112, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:navres:v:56:y:2009:i:2:p:93-112
    DOI: 10.1002/nav.20331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.20331
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/nav.20331?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. Rainer Kolisch & Arno Sprecher & Andreas Drexl, 1995. "Characterization and Generation of a General Class of Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(10), pages 1693-1703, October.
    2. A. H. Russell, 1970. "Cash Flows in Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 357-373, January.
    3. Robert A. Russell, 1986. "A Comparison of Heuristics for Scheduling Projects with Cash Flows and Resource Restrictions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1291-1300, October.
    4. Joseph G. Szmerekovsky, 2005. "The Impact of Contractor Behavior on the Client's Payment-Scheduling Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 629-640, April.
    5. Kolisch, R. & Padman, R., 2001. "An integrated survey of deterministic project scheduling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 249-272, June.
    6. Rema Padman & Dwight E. Smith‐Daniels & Vicki L. Smith‐Daniels, 1997. "Heuristic scheduling of resource‐constrained projects with cash flows," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 365-381, June.
    7. Kobberling, Veronika & Peters, Hans, 2003. "The effect of decision weights in bargaining problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 154-175, May.
    8. Richard C. Grinold, 1972. "The payment scheduling problem," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 123-136, March.
    9. Ervig, U. & Haake, C.-J., 2005. "Trading bargaining weights," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 983-993, December.
    10. Kolisch, Rainer & Sprecher, Arno, 1996. "PSPLIB - a project scheduling problem library," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 396, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    11. Mika, Marek & Waligora, Grzegorz & Weglarz, Jan, 2005. "Simulated annealing and tabu search for multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling with positive discounted cash flows and different payment models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 639-668, August.
    12. Padman, Rema & Smith-Daniels, Dwight E., 1993. "Early-tardy cost trade-offs in resource constrained projects with cash flows: An optimization-guided heuristic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 295-311, January.
    13. A. Kimms, 2001. "Maximizing the Net Present Value of a Project Under Resource Constraints Using a Lagrangian Relaxation Based Heuristic with Tight Upper Bounds," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 221-236, February.
    14. Herroelen, Willy S. & Van Dommelen, Patrick & Demeulemeester, Erik L., 1997. "Project network models with discounted cash flows a guided tour through recent developments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 97-121, July.
    15. Gündüz Ulusoy & Funda Sivrikaya-Şerifoğlu & Şule Şahin, 2001. "Four Payment Models for the Multi-Mode Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem with Discounted Cash Flows," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 237-261, February.
    16. Ulusoy, Gunduz & Cebelli, Serkan, 2000. "An equitable approach to the payment scheduling problem in project management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(2), pages 262-278, December.
    17. Mario Vanhoucke & Erik Demeulemeester & Willy Herroelen, 2001. "On Maximizing the Net Present Value of a Project Under Renewable Resource Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(8), pages 1113-1121, August.
    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. Yukang He & Tao Jia & Weibo Zheng, 2024. "Simulated annealing for centralised resource-constrained multiproject scheduling to minimise the maximal cash flow gap under different payment patterns," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 338(1), pages 115-149, July.
    2. Zhengwen He & Nengmin Wang & Pengxiang Li, 2014. "Simulated annealing for financing cost distribution based project payment scheduling from a joint perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 203-220, February.

    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. He, Zhengwen & Wang, Nengmin & Jia, Tao & Xu, Yu, 2009. "Simulated annealing and tabu search for multi-mode project payment scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(3), pages 688-696, November.
    2. Mika, Marek & Waligora, Grzegorz & Weglarz, Jan, 2005. "Simulated annealing and tabu search for multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling with positive discounted cash flows and different payment models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 639-668, August.
    3. Hartmann, Sönke & Briskorn, Dirk, 2010. "A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Hartmann, Sönke & Briskorn, Dirk, 2008. "A survey of variants and extensions of the resource-constrained project scheduling problem," Working Paper Series 02/2008, Hamburg School of Business Administration (HSBA).
    5. Zhengwen He & Nengmin Wang & Pengxiang Li, 2014. "Simulated annealing for financing cost distribution based project payment scheduling from a joint perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 203-220, February.
    6. 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.
    7. He, Zhengwen & Liu, Renjing & Jia, Tao, 2012. "Metaheuristics for multi-mode capital-constrained project payment scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 605-613.
    8. He, Zhengwen & Xu, Yu, 2008. "Multi-mode project payment scheduling problems with bonus-penalty structure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(3), pages 1191-1207, September.
    9. Thomas Selle & Jürgen Zimmermann, 2003. "A bidirectional heuristic for maximizing the net present value of large‐scale projects subject to limited resources," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 130-148, March.
    10. Kolisch, R. & Padman, R., 2001. "An integrated survey of deterministic project scheduling," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 249-272, June.
    11. Kimms, Alf, 1999. "Lagrangean relaxation for scheduling projects under resource constraints to maximize the net present value," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 504, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    12. Vanhoucke, M., 2006. "A scatter search procedure for maximizing the net present value of a project under renewable resource constraints," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2006-40, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.
    13. Wenhui Zhao & Nicholas G. Hall & Zhixin Liu, 2020. "Project Evaluation and Selection with Task Failures," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 428-446, February.
    14. Luis F. Machado-Domínguez & Carlos D. Paternina-Arboleda & Jorge I. Vélez & Agustín Barrios-Sarmiento, 2022. "An adaptative bacterial foraging optimization algorithm for solving the MRCPSP with discounted cash flows," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 30(2), pages 221-248, July.
    15. Yukang He & Tao Jia & Weibo Zheng, 2024. "Simulated annealing for centralised resource-constrained multiproject scheduling to minimise the maximal cash flow gap under different payment patterns," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 338(1), pages 115-149, July.
    16. Herroelen, Willy S. & Van Dommelen, Patrick & Demeulemeester, Erik L., 1997. "Project network models with discounted cash flows a guided tour through recent developments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 97-121, July.
    17. Sepehr Proon & Mingzhou Jin, 2011. "A genetic algorithm with neighborhood search for the resource‐constrained project scheduling problem," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(2), pages 73-82, March.
    18. Grzegorz Waligóra, 2014. "Discrete-continuous project scheduling with discounted cash inflows and various payment models—a review of recent results," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 213(1), pages 319-340, February.
    19. Brucker, Peter & Drexl, Andreas & Mohring, Rolf & Neumann, Klaus & Pesch, Erwin, 1999. "Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation, classification, models, and methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 3-41, January.
    20. Homberger, Jörg & Fink, Andreas, 2017. "Generic negotiation mechanisms with side payments – Design, analysis and application for decentralized resource-constrained multi-project scheduling problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(3), pages 1001-1012.

    More about this item

    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:wly:navres:v:56:y:2009:i:2:p:93-112. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6750 .

    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.