Advertisement

Risk reduction in a project portfolio

  • Dujuan Guan
  • Peng Guo
  • Keith W. Hipel
  • Liping Fang
Article

Abstract

The positive impacts of managing projects as a portfolio are quantified by comparing the value of the integrated risk of a project portfolio and the aggregation of single project risks implemented separately. Firstly, the integrated risk is defined by proposing risky events based on set theory. Secondly, as projects interact with each other in a project portfolio, the integrated risk is evaluated by using a Bayesian network structure learning algorithm to construct an interdependent network of risks. Finally, the integrated risk of a practical case is assessed using this method, and the results show that the proposed method is an effective tool for calculating the extent of risk reduction of implementing a project portfolio and identifying the most risky project, so as to assist companies in making comprehensive decisions in the phase of portfolio selection and portfolio controlling.

Keywords

Project portfolio integrated risk set theory Bayesian network risk assessment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees who provided thoughtful comments and suggestions which improved the quality of their paper. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71272049 & No. 71402142), Ph.D. Programs Foundation of the Ministry of Education of China (Grant No. 20126102110052), and Humanities, Social Science and Management Research Fund of Northwestern Polytechnical University (Grant No. 2014RW0008).

References

  1. [1]
    Baker, N. & Freeland, J. (1975). Recent advances in R&D benefit measurement and project selection methods. Management Science, 21 (10): 1164–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Beringer, C., Jonas, D. & Gemünden, H.N. (2012). Establishing project portfolio management: an exploratory analysis of the influence of internal stakeholders’ interactions. Project Management Journal, 43 (6): 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Beringer, C., Jonas, D. & Kock, A. (2013). Behavior of internal stakeholders in project portfolio management and its impact on success. International Journal of Project Management, 31 (6): 830–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Bhattacharyya, R., Kumar, P. & Kar, S. (2011). Fuzzy R&D portfolio selection of interdependent projects. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 62 (10): 3857–3870.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Campos, L.M. (2006). A scoring function for learning Bayesian networks based on mutual information and conditional independence tests. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7: 2149–2187.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Chen, X.W., Anantha, G. & Lin, X. (2008). Improving Bayesian network structure learning with mutual information-based node ordering in the K2 algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 20 (5): 628–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cooper, G.F. & Herskovits, E. (1992). A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data. Machine Learning, 9 (4): 309–347.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Costa, H.R., de O Barros, M. & Travassos, G.H. (2005). A risk based economical approach for evaluating software project portfolios. In ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 30 (4): 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Cover, T.M. & Thomas, J.A. (2012). Elements of Information Theory (2nd ed.). Wiley, Hoboken, N.J.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Dickinson, M.W., Thornton, A.C. & Graves, S. (2001). Technology portfolio management: optimizing interdependent projects over multiple time periods. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48 (4): 518–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Eilat, H., Golany, P.B. & Shtub, A. (2006). Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolios of R&D projects with interactions: a DEA based methodology. European Journal of Operational Research, 172 (3): 1018–1039.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Gallati, R. (2003). Risk Management and Capital Adequacy. McGraw Hill Professional, New York.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Ghapanchi, A.H., Tavana, M., Khakbaz, M.H. & Low, G. (2012). A methodology for selecting portfolios of projects with interactions and under uncertainty. International Journal of Project Management, 30 (7): 791–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Guan, D.J. & Guo, P. (2014). Relationship classification of project portfolio based on the measurement of interaction effects and their influences. Soft Science, 28 (10): 125–129.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Guan, D.J., Hipel, K.W., Fang, L. & Guo, P. (2014). Assessing project portfolio risk based on Bayesian network. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: 1546-1551, San Diego, California, USA, October 5-8, 2014, IEEE.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Guo, N. & Yu, S. (2013). Risk and uncertainty in project portfolio management. International Conference on Information Engineering and Applications, 3: 815–822, 2012. Springer, London.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Heckerman, D., Geiger, D. & Chickering, D.M. (1995). Learning Bayesian networks: the combination of knowledge and statistical data. Machine Learning, 20 (3): 197–243.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Jaafari, A. (2001). Management of risks, uncertainties and opportunities on projects: time for a fundamental shift. International Journal of Project Management, 19 (2): 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Jensen, F.V. (1996). An Introduction to Bayesian Networks. UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Ji, J., Hu, R., Zhang H. & Liu, C. (2011). A hybrid method for learning Bayesian networks based on ant colony optimization. Applied Soft Computing, 11 (4): 3373–3384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Jonas, D. (2010). Empowering project portfolio managers: how management involvement impacts project portfolio management performance. International Journal of Project Management, 28 (8): 818–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Kiiveri, H., Speed, T.P. & Carlin, J.B. (1984). Recursive causal models. Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society, 36 (1): 30–52.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Kolmogorov, A. (1968). Logical basis for information theory and probability theory. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 14 (5): 662–664.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7 (1): 77–91.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Martinsuo, M. (2013). Project portfolio management in practice and in context. International Journal of Project Management, 31 (6): 794–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Martinsuo, M. & Lehtonen, P. (2007). Role of single-project management in achieving portfolio management efficiency. International Journal of Project Management, 25 (1): 56–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Marwell, G., Oliver, P.E. & Prahl, R. (1988). Social networks and collective action: a theory of the critical mass, III. American Journal of Sociology, 94 (3): 502–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    McFarlan, F.W. (1981). Portfolio approach to information systems. Harvard Business Review, 59 (5): 142–150.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Nielsen, T.D. & Jensen, F.V. (2009). Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs. Springer, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Olsson, R. (2008). Risk management in a multi-project environment: an approach to manage portfolio risks. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 25 (1): 60–71.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Pennypacker, J.S. & Dye L.D. (2002). Project portfolio management and managing multiple projects: two sides of the same coin. Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium: 1-10, Houston, Texas, USA, September 7-16, 2000, Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Petit, Y. (2012). Project portfolios in dynamic environments: organizing for uncertainty. International Journal of Project Management, 30 (5): 539–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    PMI (Project Management Institute) (2008). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (4th ed.). Newtown Square, PA.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Proakis, J.G. (1995). Digital Communications. McGraw-Hill, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    Sanchez, H., Robert, B. & Pellerin, R. (2008). A project portfolio risk-opportunity identification framework. Project Management Journal, 39 (3): 97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    Schmidt, R.L. (1993). A model for R&D project selection with combined benefit, outcome and resource interactions. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 40 (4): 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27 (10): 623–656.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    Stamelos, I., Angelis, L., Dimou, P. & Sakellaris, E. (2003). On the use of Bayesian belief networks for the prediction of software productivity. Information and Software Technology, 45 (1): 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    Teller, J. (2013). Portfolio risk management and its contribution to project portfolio success: an investigation of organization, process, and culture. Project Management Journal. 44 (2): 36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    Wang, M., Chen, Z. & Cloutier, S. (2007). A hybrid Bayesian network learning method for constructing gene networks. Computational Biology and Chemistry, 31 (5): 361–372.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Wang, S.Y. (1997). The development of microelectronics technology: the concept of “critical mass” and reform competition. China High Technology Enterprises, 1: 5–9.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    Zhao, J., Guo, P. & Pan, N.Z. (2011). Risk measurement and selection optimization of project portfolio based on the interaction effect. Operations Research and Management Science, 20 (6): 120–126.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Systems Engineering Society of China and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dujuan Guan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Peng Guo
    • 1
  • Keith W. Hipel
    • 3
    • 4
  • Liping Fang
    • 5
  1. 1.School of ManagementNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.Department of ManagementHefei UniversityHefeiChina
  3. 3.Department of Systems Design EngineeringUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Centre for International Governance InnovationWaterlooCanada
  5. 5.Department of Mechanical and Industrial EngineeringRyerson UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations