Abtahi, S., Mohammadi, Z. (2021). Selecting the Optimal Portfolio in agricultural Research and Development Projects with Grey Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. , 29(1), 177-207. doi: 10.30490/aead.2021.352112.1273
S. M. Abtahi; Z. Mohammadi. "Selecting the Optimal Portfolio in agricultural Research and Development Projects with Grey Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach". , 29, 1, 2021, 177-207. doi: 10.30490/aead.2021.352112.1273
Abtahi, S., Mohammadi, Z. (2021). 'Selecting the Optimal Portfolio in agricultural Research and Development Projects with Grey Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach', , 29(1), pp. 177-207. doi: 10.30490/aead.2021.352112.1273
Abtahi, S., Mohammadi, Z. Selecting the Optimal Portfolio in agricultural Research and Development Projects with Grey Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. , 2021; 29(1): 177-207. doi: 10.30490/aead.2021.352112.1273

Selecting the Optimal Portfolio in agricultural Research and Development Projects with Grey Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach

اقتصاد کشاورزی و توسعه
Article 7, Volume 29, Issue 1 - Serial Number 113, June 2021, Pages 177-207    PDF (484.12 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.30490/aead.2021.352112.1273
Authors
S. M. Abtahi* 1; Z. Mohammadi2
1Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Marvdasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht, Iran
2Master student, Department of Industrial Engineering, Zand Institute of Higher Education, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract
Some organizations due to the challenges of the present age and the impact of Research and Development projects on the continuity of them, invest in these projects. The purpose of this study is selecting the optimal portfolio of agricultural Research and Development projects in Fars Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center. The research is applicable from the purpose aspect and is descriptive-survey method based on essence. By studying the literature and interviewing with experts, project evaluation attributes were identified and 16 projects were evaluated by experts. The attributes weight was calculated by the grey Shannon entropy method that "time risk", "technical backup existence" and "risk execution" are the most important attributes. Then projects were prioritized with the grey theory approach. In order to validate the model results, the projects were evaluated with COPRAS-G method which was seen by comparing results, the rank of projects is not identical in all cases. Therefore, by using the Copeland method, the ranks were combined and the final rank of each project was calculated. According to the results, the total budget was allocated to higher priority projects and the optimal project portfolio was determined. The results of this study can be used to prioritize the projects and to form optimal portfolio in project-oriented organizations such as scientific and research centers.
Keywords
Project portfolio; Agricultural Research and Development project; Multi criteria decision making; Grey theory; COPRAS-G
References
  1. , Kheirkhah, A.S., Bonyad, H. and Ghorbanzadeh Karimi, H.R. (2013). Selection of research and development projects portfolio using a combination of data envelopment analysis model-balanced scorecard. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 5(3): 67-82. (Persian)
  2. Alinejad, A.R. and Ghorbanian Farahabadi, I. (2015). Providing a combination of fuzzy TOPSIS and data envelopment analysis and integer programming for selecting a portfolio of projects. Journal of Industrial Management Studies, 13(73): 187-219. (Persian)
  3. A.R. and Simiari, K. (2013). Selecting the optimal project portfolio using the DEA/DEMATEL compilation approach. Journal of Industrial Management Studies, 11(28): 41-60. (Persian)
  4. Anyaeche, C.O., Ighravwe, D.E. and Asokeji, T.A. (2017). Project portfolio selection of banking services using COPRAS and Fuzzy-TOPSIS. Journal of Project Management, 2(2): 51-62.
  5. Bhattacharyya, R. (2015). A grey based multiple attribute approach for R&D project portfolio selection .Fuzzy International and Engineering, 7(2): 211-225.
  6. Caballero, H. (2014). Project portfolio evaluation and selection using mathematical programming and optimization methods. PhD Thesis, Purdue University.
  7. Chatterjee, K., Hossain, Sh.A. and Kar, S. (2018). Prioritization of project proposals in portfolio management using Fuzzy AHP. OPSEARCH, 55(2): 478-501.
  8. Eilat, H., Golany, B. and Shtub, A. (2006). Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolio of R&D projects with interactions: a DEA based methodology. European Journal of Operational Research, 172(3): 1018-1039.
  9. Eshtaiwi, M.I., Badi, I.A., Abdulshahed, A.M. and Erkan, T.E. (2017). Assessment of airport performance using the grey theory method: a case study in Libya. Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 7(3): 426-436.
  10. Fallah, H. and Jahanbaz, A. (2011). Providimg a method for prioritizing and budgeting research topics aimed at developing economic activities. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 3(3): 72-92. (Persian)
  11. Hamidi, N. and Valafar, M. A. (2015). Use of grey possibility degree method to rank strategic projects in organization (case study: Mapna Group). Journal of Industrial Management, 7(2): 259-284. (Persian)
  12. Hashemi Majomard, S.M. and Kasaei, M. (2017). Providing a new method for evaluation and selection of a basis for new product development projects (case study: a medical devices manufacturer). Journal of Industrial Management Studies, 15(47): 23-43. (Persian)
  13. Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Rezaeinia, N., Aghdaei, M.H. and Zavadskas, E.K. (2012). Quality control manager selection based on AHP- COPRAS-G methods: a case in Iran. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 25(1): 72-86.
  14. Hosseinalipour, M. and Mohammadi, S. (2014). Explanation of an integrated and coherent framework for selecting portfolio management with a strategic approach in project-based organizations (case study: Building Investment Complex of Iran). Soffeh, 24(3): 57-74. (Persian)
  15. Hossein, F., Parvaneh, A. and El-Sayegh, S.M. (2016). Project selection using the combined approach of AHP and LP. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 21(1): 39-53.
  16. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. and Fallahnejad, R. (2010). Imprecise Shannon’s entropy and multi attribute decision making. Entropy, 12(1): 53-62.
  17. Kabli, M.R. (2009). A multi-attribute decision making methodology for selecting new R&D projects portfolio with a case study of Saudi oil refining industry. PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham.
  18. Maity, S.R., Chatterjee, P. and Chakraborty, Sh. (2012). Cutting tool material selection using grey complex proportional assessment method. Materials and Design, 36: 372-378.
  19. Meade, L.M. and Pressly, A. (2002). R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(1): 59-66.
  20. Mohammadi, A. and Molaei, N. (2010). Application of grey multi-criteria decision making to evaluate performance of companies. Journal of Industrial Management, 2(4): 142-125. (Persian)
  21. Salati, F. and Makoui, A. (2012). Presenting value function (utility) prioritizing research projects in R&D centers using UTA method (case study of Iran Water Resources Company). 9th International Conference on Industrial Engineering.
  22. Soltan-Hosseini, M., Razavi, S.M.J. and Salimi, M. (2017). Recognizing and prioritizing the barriers to privatization of football industry in Iran with multi-criteria analysis and Copeland approach. Sport Management Studies, 9(41): 17-36. (Persian)
  23. Tavana, M., Keramatpour, M., Santos-Arteaga, F.J. and Ghorbaniane, E. (2015). A fuzzy hybrid project portfolio selection method using data envelopment analysis, topsis and integer programming. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(22): 8432–8444.
  24. Voskoglou, M.Gr. and Theodorou, Y.A. (2017). Application of grey numbers to assessment processes. International Journal of Applications of Fuzzy Sets and Artificial Intelligence, 7: 273-280.
  25. Yamakawa, E.K., Sousa-Zomer, T.T., Cauchick-Miguel, P.A. and Killen, C.P. (2018). R&D portfolio management practices in Brazilian electric power utilities. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(6): 1641-1655.
  26. Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z. and Tamošaitiene, J. (2010). Risk assessment of construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering And Management, 10(1): 33-46.
Statistics
Article View: 748
PDF Download: 458


counter
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb