Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

A Fuzzy-based Decision-Support System for the Analysis of Suitability of Megaproject Delivery Methods

Moza Tahnoon Al Nahyan, Yaser Elsayed Hawas, Mohammad Sherif, Basil Basheerudeen


This article describes the Decision Support System (DSS) for identifying the best delivery methods for megaprojects, based on risk factors, opportunities for investments, and project constraints. In addition, the system accounts for the relative importance of various stakeholders’ roles at different stages of a mega infrastructure project. A fuzzy-based multi-criterion decision-making technique used to develop the DSS assists the client to depict his/her best choices of contractual delivery methods. Further, the system provides the best mix of stakeholder entities that would likely provide the best environment for the project success. A two-step system calibration procedure was considered, including the expert judgment of 192 key stakeholder professionals worldwide. The fuzzy model performance was illustrated using default factor sets and sample inputs of differing weights for project risks, constraints, opportunities and the other critical categories affecting the decision-making process. Based on model results, the conventional delivery method (e.g., Design Bid Build) is least recommended if the project risk weighs more than 30%, as provided by the user.  With such an intricate system, the client can investigate the specifics of various project stages and study the effects of enhancements or deficiencies of the stakeholder entities’ capabilities.


Fuzzy logic model, Project delivery methods, Megaprojects, Project risk


Alhazmi, T., & McCaffer, R. (2000). Project procurement system selection model. Journal of Construction Engineering and management, 126, 176-184.

Al Nahyan, M.T., Hawas, Y.E., Raza, M., Aljassmi, H., Maraqa, M.A., Basheerudeen, B. and Mohammad, M.S.(2018a). A Fuzzy-based Decision Support System for Ranking the Delivery Methods of Mega Projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(1), 122-143.

Al Nahyan, M., Hawas, Y., Raza, M. (2018b). Understanding the Impact of Stakeholders’ Experience and Roles on Risk Perceptions of Construction Megaprojects. EURAM 2018, University of Iceland Reykjavik - Iceland.

Brookes, N. J. (2015). Mankind and Mega-projects. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 1(3), 241-245.

Chan, C. T. (2007). Fuzzy procurement selection model for construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 25, 611-618.

Chen, Y. Q., Liu, J. Y., Li, B., & Lin, B. (2011). Project delivery system selection of construction projects in China. Expert Systems with Applications. 38, 5456–5462.

El-Sayegh, S. M. (2008). Evaluating the effectiveness of project delivery methods. Journal of Construction Management and Economics, 23, 457-465.

Faridi, A. S. & El-Sayegh, S. M. (2006). Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction industry. Construction Management and Economics. 24, 1167–1176.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project Management Journal, 45(2), 6–19.

Gransberg, Douglas D., Badillo-Kwiatkowski, Gayla M. and Molenaar,

Keith R. (2003). Project Delivery Comparison Using Performance Metrics. AACE International Transactions, CSC 2.1 – 2.5

Gordon, C. M. (1994). Choosing appropriate construction contracting method. Journal of construction engineering and management. 120, 196-210.

Hawas, Y.E. and Al-Nahyan, M.T. (2017). A Fuzzy-Based Approach to Estimate Management Processes Risks. In The Application of Fuzzy Logic for Managerial Decision Making Processes, Springer, Cham, 73-84.

Jato-Espino, D., Castillo-Lopez, E., Rodriguez-Hernandez, J., & Canteras-Jordana, J. C. (2014). A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction. Automation in Construction. 45. 151-162.

Khalil, M. I. Al. (2002). Selecting the appropriate project delivery method using AHP. International Journal of Project Management. 20, 464-469.

Konchar, M., & Sanvido, V. (1998). Comparison of U. S. Project Delivery Systems. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 124. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1998)124:6(435).

Kordi, M., & Brandt, S. A. (2012). Effects of increasing fuzziness on analytic hierarchy process for spatial multicriteria decision analysis. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 36, 43–53.

Kumaraswamy, M. M. & Dissanayaka, S. M. (2001). Developing a decision support system for building project procurement. Building and Environment. 36, 337-349.

Love, P. E., Skitmore, M., & Earl, G. (1998). Selecting an appropriate procurement method for the construction process: an empirical study. Construction Management and Economics, 16, 221-233.

Luu, D. T., Ng, S. T., Chen, S. E., & Jefferies, M. (2006). A strategy for evaluating a fuzzy case-based construction procurement selection system. Advances in Engineering Software. 37, 159-171.

Mafakheri, F., Dai, L., Slezak, D. & Nasiri, F. (2007). Project delivery system selection under uncertainty: Multicriteria multilevel decision aid model. Journal of Management in Engineering. 23, 200-206.

Mahdi, I. M. & Alreshaid, K. (2005). Decision support system for selecting the proper project delivery method using analytical hierarchy process (AHP). International Journal of Project Management. 23, 564–572.

Miller, J. B., Garvin, M. J., Ibbs, C. W., & Mahoney, S. E. (2000). Toward a new paradigm: Simultaneous use of multiple project delivery methods. Journal of Management in Engineering. 16, 58-67.

Mostafavi, A., and Karamouz, M. (2010). Selecting appropriate project delivery system: Fuzzy approach with risk analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 136, 923-930.

Nahyan, M., Hawas, Y., Mohammad, M. and Basheerudeen, B. A Decision-Support System for Identifying the Best Contractual Delivery Methods of Mega Infrastructure Developments. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2018) - 1, 407-414.

Oyetunji, A. A., & Anderson, S. D. (2006). Relative effectiveness of project delivery and contract strategies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 132, 3-13.

Pan, N. F. (2008). Fuzzy AHP approach for selecting the suitable bridge construction method. Automation in construction, 17, 958-965.

Project Delivery Systems for Construction. Associated General Contractors of America, Arlington. (2004). Accessed from: https://www.agc.org/industry-priorities/project-delivery.

Qiang, M., Wen, Q., Jiang, H., Yuan, S. (2015). Factors governing construction project delivery selection: A content analysis. International Journal of Project Management. Elsevier Ltd and Association for Project Management and the International Project Management Association, 33, 1780–1794.

Ratnasabapathy, S., & Rameezdeen, R. (2010). A decision support system for the selection of best procurement system in construction. Built-Environment Sri Lanka, 7, 43-53.

Ribeiro, F. L. (2001). Project delivery system selection: a case-based reasoning framework. Logistics Information Management, 14, 367-376.

Rose, K. H. (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) Fifth Edition. Project Management Journal, 44(3).

Salet, W., Bertolini, L., & Giezen, M. (2013). Complexity and uncertainty: Problem or asset in decision making of mega infrastructure projects? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37, 1984-2000.

Thanh Luu, D., Ng, S. T., & Eng Chen, S. (2003). Parameters governing the selection of procurement system–an empirical survey. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10, 209-218.

Touran, A., Molenaar, K. R., Gransberg D. D. (2009). Decision Support System for Selection of Project Delivery Method in Transit. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2111, 148–157.

Yoon, Y., Jung, J. & Hyun, C. (2016). Decision-making Support Systems Using Case-based Reasoning for Construction Project Delivery Method Selection: Focused on the Road Construction Projects in Korea. The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 10, 500-512.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.


The Journal of Modern PM (ISSN: 2317-3963) | info@journalmodernpm.com