A new interval type-2 fuzzy approach for analyzing and monitoring the performance of megaprojects based on earned value analysis (with a case study)

  • Amin EshghiEmail author
  • S. Meysam Mousavi
  • Vahid Mohagheghi
Original Article


Major factors of project success include using tools of performance measurements and feedbacks. Earned value management (EVM) is a unique issue within megaprojects due to their inevitable external risks and variations. In order to improve the effectiveness and accuracy of future status estimation of megaprojects, in this paper a novel evaluation model is proposed which takes account of interval type-2 fuzzy sets (IT2FSs) to cope with uncertainty. In the proposed approach, in addition to cost and time criteria, a great deal of attention is paid for other important factors affecting project success, including quality, stakeholder satisfaction, safety and risk, which is computed from different perspectives. Moreover, to make informed decisions and to reduce uncertainty in assessment of megaprojects, key performance indicators (KPIs) are provided. Also, a new extension of multi-criteria decision-making method is introduced to weigh KPIs in future performance equations. Finally, the proposed IT2F-EVM approach is applied to control and estimate the future status of a real case study in a petro-refinery company. The results show that the approach can successfully address highly uncertain environments.


Earned value management Key performance indicators Megaprojects Interval type-2 fuzzy sets Case study of petro-refinery 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Abdi A, Taghipour S, Khamooshi H (2018) A model to control environmental performance of project execution process based on greenhouse gas emissions using earned value management. Int J Proj Manag 36(3):397–413Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Acebes F, Pajares J, Galán JM, López-Paredes A (2014) A new approach for project control under uncertainty. Going back to the basics. Int J Proj Manag 32(3):423–434Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anbari FT (2003) Earned value project management method and extensions. Proj Manag J 34(4):12–23Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Babar S, Thaheem MJ, Ayub B (2016) Estimated cost at completion: integrating risk into earned value management. J Constr Eng Manag 143(3):04016104Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bagherpour M, Zareei A, Noori S, Heydari M (2010) Designing a control mechanism using earned value analysis: an application to production environment. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 49(5–8):419–429Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Batselier J, Vanhoucke M (2017) Improving project forecast accuracy by integrating earned value management with exponential smoothing and reference class forecasting. Int J Proj Manag 35(1):28–43Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bryde D, Unterhitzenberger C, Joby R (2018) Conditions of success for earned value analysis in projects. Int J Proj Manag 36(3):474–484Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Castillo O, Amador-Angulo L, Castro JR, Garcia-Valdez M (2016) A comparative study of type-1 fuzzy logic systems, interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems and generalized type-2 fuzzy logic systems in control problems. Inf Sci 354:257–274Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Castillo O, Cervantes L, Soria J, Sanchez M, Castro JR (2016) A generalized type-2 fuzzy granular approach with applications to aerospace. Inf Sci 354:165–177Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Celik E, Gumus AT (2015) An assessment approach for non-governmental organizations in humanitarian relief logistics and an application in Turkey. Technol Econ Dev Econ. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang CJ, Yu SW (2018) Three-variance approach for updating earned value management. J Constr Eng Manag 144(6):04018045Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen SM, Lee LW (2010) Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the ranking values and the arithmetic operations of interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Expert Syst Appl 37(1):824–833Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen SM, Lee LW (2010) Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the ranking values and the arithmetic operations of interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Expert Syst Appl 37(1):824–833Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choi YI, Ahn J (2018) Earned value management considering technical readiness level and its application to new space launcher program. Int J Aeronaut Space Sci 19(1):227–237Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Coban R (2010) Computational intelligence-based trajectory scheduling for control of nuclear research reactors. Prog Nucl Energy 52(4):415–424Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Coban R (2011) A fuzzy controller design for nuclear research reactors using the particle swarm optimization algorithm. Nucl Eng Des 241(5):1899–1908Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coban R, Aksu IO (2018) Neuro-controller design by using the multifeedback layer neural network and the particle swarm optimization. Tehnički vjesnik 25(2):437–444Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Coban R, Can B (2009) An expert trajectory design for control of nuclear research reactors. Expert Syst Appl 36(9):11502–11508Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Collin J (2002) Measuring the success of building projects–improved project delivery initiatives. Int J 11(2):203–221Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dorfeshan Y, Mousavi SM (2019) A new interval type-2 fuzzy decision method with an extended relative preference relation and entropy to project critical path selection. Int J Fuzzy Syst Appl 8(1):19–47Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dorfeshan Y, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2018) A multi-criteria analysis model under an interval type-2 fuzzy environment with an application to production project decision problems. J Qual Eng Prod Optim 3(1):43–66Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dorfeshan Y, Mousavi SM, Mohagheghi V, Vahdani B (2018) Selecting project-critical path by a new interval type-2 fuzzy decision methodology based on MULTIMOORA, MOOSRA and TPOP methods. Comput Ind Eng 120:160–178Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ghorabaee MK, Amiri M, Sadaghiani JS, Zavadskas EK (2015) Multi-criteria project selection using an extended VIKOR method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 14(5):993–1016Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gomes LFAM, Lima MMPP (1992) From modeling individual preferences to multicriteria ranking of discrete alternatives: a look at prospect theory and the additive difference model. Found Comput Decis Sci 17(3):171–184zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hashemi ST, Kaur H (2017) A hybrid conceptual cost estimating model using ANN and GA for power plant projects. Neural Comput Appl 28(11):1–12Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Henderson K (2004) Further developments in earned schedule. Meas News 1(1):15–22Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hu J, Zhang Y, Chen X, Liu Y (2013) Multi-criteria decision making method based on possibility degree of interval type-2 fuzzy number. Knowl Based Syst 43:21–29Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jacob DS, Kane M (2004) Forecasting schedule completion using earned value metrics revisited. Meas News 1(11):7Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kerzner H (2011) Project management metrics, KPIs, and dashboards: a guide to measuring and monitoring project performance. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kerzner H (2017) Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim E, Wells WG Jr, Duffey MR (2003) A model for effective implementation of earned value management methodology. Int J Proj Manag 21(5):375–382Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lester A (2017) Project management, planning and control: managing engineering, construction and manufacturing projects to PMI, APM and BSI standards. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lipke W (2003) Schedule is different. Meas News 31(4):31–34Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu HT, Cheng HS (2016) An improved grey quality function deployment approach using the grey TRIZ technique. Comput Ind Eng 92:57–71Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu S, Lin Y (2006) Grey information: theory and practical applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mavrotas G, Caloghirou Y, Koune J (2005) A model on cash flow forecasting and early warning for multi-project programmes: application to the Operational Programme for the Information Society in Greece. Int J Proj Manag 23(2):121–133Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mendel JM (2003) “Type-2 fuzzy sets: some questions and answers”, IEEE connections, newsletter of the IEEE. Neural Netw Soc 1:10–13Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mendel JM, John RI, Liu F (2006) Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems made simple. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 14(6):808–821Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2017) Analyzing project cash flow by a new interval type-2 fuzzy model with an application to construction industry. Neural Comput Appl 28(11):3393–3411Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B, Shahriari MR (2017) R&D project evaluation and project portfolio selection by a new interval type-2 fuzzy optimization approach. Neural Comput Appl 28(12):3869–3888Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B, Siadat A (2017) A mathematical modeling approach for high and new technology-project portfolio selection under uncertain environments. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(6):4069–4079zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Moradi N, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2017) An earned value model with risk analysis for project management under uncertain conditions. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(1):97–113zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mortaji STH, Bagherpour M, Noori S (2013) Fuzzy earned value management using LR fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 24(2):323–332Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Muhwezi L, Acai J, Otim G (2014) An assessment of the factors causing delays on building construction projects in Uganda. Int J Constr Eng Manag 3(1):13–23Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Naeni LM, Salehipour A (2011) Evaluating fuzzy earned value indices and estimates by applying alpha cuts. Expert Syst Appl 38(7):8193–8198Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Naeni LM, Shadrokh S, Salehipour A (2014) A fuzzy approach for the earned value management. Int J Proj Manag 32(4):709–716Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Najafi A, Azimi F (2016) An extension of the earned value management to improve the accuracy of schedule analysis results. Iran J Manag Stud 9(1):63–85Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ong HY, Wang C, Zainon N (2016) Integrated earned value Gantt chart (EV-Gantt) tool for project portfolio planning and monitoring optimization. Eng Manag J 28(1):39–53Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ontiveros-Robles E, Melin P, Castillo O (2018) Comparative analysis of noise robustness of type 2 fuzzy logic controllers. Kybernetika 54(1):175–201MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Oztaysi B (2015) A group decision making approach using interval type-2 fuzzy AHP for enterprise information systems project selection. J Mult Valued Logic Soft Comput 24(5):1–15MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Picornell M, Pellicer E, Torres-Machí C, Sutrisna M (2016) Implementation of earned value management in unit-price payment contracts. J Manag Eng 33(3):06016001Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ponz-Tienda JL, Pellicer E, Yepes V (2012) Complete fuzzy scheduling and fuzzy earned value management in construction projects. J Zhejiang Univ Sci A 13(1):56–68Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Project Management Institute (2013) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 5h edn. Project Management Institute, Newtown SquareGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Project Management Institute (2011) Practice standard for earned value management. Project Management Institute, IncorporatedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Qin J, Liu X, Pedrycz W (2015) An extended VIKOR method based on prospect theory for multiple attribute decision making under interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Knowl Based Syst 86:116–130Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Qin J, Liu X, Pedrycz W (2017) An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Eur J Oper Res 258(2):626–638MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Radujković M, Sjekavica M (2017) Project management success factors. Proc Eng 196:607–615Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sari IU, Kahraman C (2015) Interval type-2 fuzzy capital budgeting. Int J Fuzzy Syst 17(4):635–646MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sogandi F, Mousavi SM, Amiri A (2018) Self-starting control chart and post signal diagnostics for monitoring project earned value management indices. J Ind Syst Eng 11(2):85–100Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sutrisna M, Pellicer E, Torres-Machi C, Picornell M (2018) Exploring earned value management in the Spanish construction industry as a pathway to competitive advantage. Int J Constr Manag 18(6):1–12Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Turner R (2016) Gower handbook of project management. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Vandevoorde S, Vanhoucke M (2006) A comparison of different project duration forecasting methods using earned value metrics. Int J Proj Manag 24(4):289–302Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Vanhoucke M (2009) Measuring time: improving project performance using earned value management, vol 136. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Vanhoucke M (2010) Using activity sensitivity and network topology information to monitor project time performance. Omega 38(5):359–370Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vanhoucke M (2016) Integrated project management sourcebook. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Zadeh LA (1974) Fuzzy logic and its application to approximate reasoning. In IFIP congress, vol 591Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Zareei S (2018) Project scheduling for constructing biogas plant using critical path method. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 81(1):756–759Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zolfaghari S, Mousavi SM (2018) Construction-project risk assessment by a new decision model based on De-Novo multi-approaches analysis and hesitant fuzzy sets under uncertainty. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 35:639–649Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amin Eshghi
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. Meysam Mousavi
    • 1
  • Vahid Mohagheghi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringShahed UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations