Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma / International Journal of Engineering

Research and Applications (IJERA)

ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp.1377-1381

Cultural Risk Assessmentin Construction Projects Using Analytic Network Process

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma

Departmentof civil Engg. Madhav Institute of Technology, Gwalior

Abstract:

The aim of this paper is determining the cultural risk factor of construction projects. The
The aim of this paper is determining the
cultural risk factor of construction projects. The
risk involved in construction projects has been
identified and arranged in a systematic
hierarchical structure. This paper is to define
cultural risk, identify its sources and build a
model for the assessment of cultural risk related
CULTURE AND CULTURAL RISK –
to construction projects. An analytic network
process (ANP) MODEL, Which may be used as
a decision support tool for cultural risk
assessment will be developed.
Key words:AnalyticNetwork process, Cultural
risk, Multi-Cultural Environment, Construction
project
Introduction–
According to the definition of Edward B
Taylor, “ Cultural taken in its wide ethnographic
sense is that complex whole which includes
knowledge , belief ,art ,morals ,law , custom and
any other capabilities and habits acquired by man
as a member of society.” The UNESCO defines
cultural as the “ set of distinctive spiritual , material
, intellectual and emotional feature of society or a
social group and that it encompass , in addition to
art and literature , lifestyle , ways of living together
, value systems and beliefs “.Kroeber and
Kluckhohn (1952). Compiled a list of more than
200 differentdefinitions of culture in their book. In
this study , the term culture is used to reflect the
beliefs , customs ,habits and ways of conducting
business in a society that will have an impact on
hone a construction project is conducted and
manages risk is defined as any event factor that
involves either uncertainty or vagueness that may
have an impact on project objectives.The risk
culture in construction project represents the sum
of spiritual cultural, system culture, behavior
culture and material culture formed in project
management gradually, which should be accepted
and followed by all members. Risk culture will
bring new ideas, new thinking ways, and form an
open, flexible method of risk of risk management
to drive the members to participate in risk
management. Risk culture is an invisible hand
which can improve the cohesion and
competitiveness.
Methodology -

To analyze risk from a project point of view, it is essential to identify how the project is likely to be impacted by the country factor and the specific market condition ( Hastak and Shaked, 2000 ). The studies focus on the political risk assessment on the expense of the cultural risk coupled with working in a multi-cultural environment. The first approach considers the overall effect of socialcultural, and religious difference as part of the country risk, while the other takes into account the effect of cultural differences on the working environment. One of the comprehensive models is ICRAM I (International construction risk assessment model I)which was developed by Hastak&Shaked (2000). The model analyzes risk of working in international markets in three levels: Macro level, market level, project level. The study also uses AHP and considers cultural differences as a risk factor without elaborating the sources of cultural differences. There are some studies which analyzed cultural Conflicts in some detail, an e.g. of which is Baba (1996) .The conducted studies mainly analyze cultural risk at the country level and do not consider the impact of cultural risk on either market or project level indicators (Hastak&Shaked, 2000) therefore the aim of the study is to develop a comprehensive model for the assessment of cultural risk related to construction project which are performed in multi-cultural environmental. Cultural risk will be define and sources of cultural risk will be identified will be developed using analytic network process (ANP).

The study was carried on through the following main steps. (1) Risk identification of cultural risk factor associated with international construction through literature review and experience. (2) Developing a network structure that intender the risk factors and international between them. (3) Conducting brain storming sessions and using ANP to calculate the contributions of each risk factor to the overall cultural risk. (A) Identification of cultural risk factors Risk may be seen as source, consequence or probability of occurrence of a negative event . In consistency results from mixing the different perspectives of risk (Dikmen and

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma / International Journal of Engineering

Research and Applications (IJERA)

ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp.1377-1381

Birgonul, 2006). The literature related to international construction was reviewed to identify the potential source of cultural risk, Individual sources of cultural risk cited in different research studies ( Pheng and Yuquan 2002 , Han and Diekmann 2001 , Hastak and

Development of the conceptual model:

Shaked, 2000 ) were tried to be integrated into a comprehensive model. Identified risk factor were the first category included the risk factors associated with host country and the other one with the project environment

Project Cultural Risk Project & Construction Environment Country Risk Specific Risk Cultural Risk Cultural Risk
Project Cultural Risk
Project & Construction Environment
Country Risk
Specific Risk
Cultural Risk
Cultural Risk Related to Project
Related to Social
Cultural Risk
and Construction Environment
Environment
Related to Cultural
Distance

The term “ cultural Distance” adopts the national cultural framework proposed by Hofstede who specifically examined the role of national culture in work-related values and information system design.Hofstede constructed his frame work on a review of sociological and anthropological,theories and work (Harvey and Francis, 1997).These are risk factors related specifically to the project in a specific country (Hastak and Shaked, 2000).The influence of the country risk (Cultural Distance and Social Environment) on the identified project risk factors is also included in the model.

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma / International Journal of Engineering

Research and Applications (IJERA)

ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp.1377-1381

Cultural Risk Factors

Criteria Sub-Criteria Risk Factors Description Cultural Risk Power Distance Related To The nature of human
Criteria
Sub-Criteria
Risk Factors
Description
Cultural
Risk
Power Distance
Related
To
The nature of human relationships in term of
hierarchy.
Cultural
Uncertainty
Distance
Avoidance
It is concerned with how cultures adopts to
changes and cope with uncertainty.
Tradition
This factor considers the risk of working where
different traditions may exist
Country Risk
Cultural
Risk
Language
Related
to
Language barrier is the risk related to the
languages of the host country
socio
Legislation
Environment
factors
This factor is related to the risk associated with
the traditional methods used for solving dispute
and the ruling law in case of conflicts.
Religion
Risks due to religious between the contract and
the host country.
Construction
Project
&
Cultural
Risk
Method
and
construction
Related
to
Resources
environment
project
and
Working in different cultures may lead to
inability to make use of the previous experience
of the contractor which is risk related to
construction methods and resources.
specific risk
construction
Requirements
environment
This may be due to the adoption of different
standards or un specify regulation
ANALYATIC NETWORK PROCESS
MODEL :
importancewhere a score of 9 indicates dominance of
the component under consideration over the
comparison component
Once the pairwise
In this study based on the conceptual model, an ANP
model is developed as a decision support tool for
cultural risk assessment. ANP is a general theory of
relative measurement used to derive composite
priority ratio scales from individual ratio scales that
represent relative measurements of the influences of
elements that interact with respect to control criteria.
This step aim to perform pair-wise comparison
among the risk factors. In ANP, pair wise comparison
of the element in each level is conducted with respect
to their relative importance towards their control
criterion.ANP has been adopted to facilitate several
multi-criteria decision-making problems such as
project selection ( Lee and Kim 2000, Meade and
Presley 2002, Cheng and Li 2005, Dikmen
et.al.2007) Satty (2005) has suggested a scale of 1 to
9 while comparing two components. A score of 1
indicates that the two options have equal
comparison is completed for the whole network, the
vector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue of
the constructed matrices is computed and a priority
vector is obtained. The priority value of the
concerned element is found by normalizing this
vector. In this assessment process, a problem may
occur in the consistency of the pair-wise
comparisons. The consistency ratio provides a
numerical assessment, If the calculated ratio is less
than 0.10, consistency is considered to be
satisfactory. The conceptual model is imported to the
ANP software, Super Decision (developed by
Adams, W.J. and Satty, R.W.),and the pairwise
comparison matrices have been prepared and solved
using this software. The aim of constructing pairwise
matrices is to find out the relative weight of the
identified risk factors.
The fundamental scale for making judgments (Saaty,2005).
Intensity of important
Definition
Explanation
1 Equal importance
Two activities contribute equally to the objective
2 Weak importance
3 Moderate importance
Experience and judgment slightly favor one activity over another
4 Between moderate and
strong
5 Strong importance
Experience and judgment strongly favor one activity over
another
6 Between strong and
very strong
7 Very strong importance
An activity is favored one activity over another is of the highest
possible order of affirmation
8 Very, very strong
9 Extreme importance
The evidence favoring one activity over another is of the highest
possible order of affirmation

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma / International Journal of Engineering

Research and Applications (IJERA)

ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp.1377-1381

In the assessment process, a problem may occur regarding the consistency of the pairwise comparisons. The consistency ratio (CR) provides a numerical assessment of how inconsistent these evaluations might be (BU-Qammaz et al.,2006).

Several authors have suggested the required algorithms to calculate CR (Cheng and Li, 2005). It is assumed that if the calculated consistency ratio is less than 0 .10, consistency is considered to be satisfactory (Saaty, 2003).

Comparisons with respect to country risk node in sub-criteria social environment factors.

Language Legislation Religion Tradition 1/5 1/7 4 Language 1/2 5 Legislation 8 There are three
Language
Legislation
Religion
Tradition
1/5
1/7
4
Language
1/2
5
Legislation
8
There are three super- matrices un-weighted super
matrix, weighted super- matrix and the limit super
matrix associated with the network. The un
weighted super matrix contains the local priorities
derived from the pair-wise comparison throughout
the network. The weighted super matrix is obtained
by multiplying all the elements in a component of
the un weighted super matrix by the corresponding
weight. The limit super matrix is derived by raising
the weighted super matrix to its powers and
multiplication process is discontinued when the
number becomes the same for all columns.
Development of the Analytic Network Process
Model with the Super DecisionSoftware:
The ANP is implemented in the software super
decision. It was demonstrated that the ANP is a
of a control hierarchy or network of criteria and sub-
criteria that control the interactions in the considered
system. The second component of the ANP is a
network of influences among the elements and
clusters. The network is dependent on the criterion,
as for each criterion the network of influence is
different, and a super matrix of limiting influence is
computed for each control criterion. Then, each of
these super matrices is weighted by the priority of
its control criterion and the results are synthesized
through addition of all the control criteria (Saaty,
2003).In this study, all calculation were performed
by Super Decisions software. Computations
priorities Command was used to determine the
priorities of all the nodes in the network. The final
weights obtained as a result of these calculations.
compound of two essential parts. The first consists
Important weights of cultural risk factors as obtained from ANP
Risk Factor
Weights
Traditions
0.1138
Language
0.0755
Religion
0.0630
Uncertainty Avoidance
0.0507
Requirements
0.0770
Legislation
0.0872
Power Distance
0.0770
Construction Methods and Resources
0.0668

The obtained weight indicates that the most critical risk factor related to cultural differences. Traditions are risk factor related to the behavior of people and legal practices in the host country. These results represent that the factor which are directly related to the working environment are considered more important than the other factors that do not have a direct influence on the project specific environment. The social environment factors have slightly more influences on the working environment than the cultural distance factors.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this study, a comprehensive conceptual model was developed to identify the cultural risk sources and an application of ANP was demonstrated as a cultural risk assessment tool in construction projects. The aim of this paper is not

to report universally accepted views on major reasons of cultural risk but to propose a framework for cultural risk assessment. The proposed model can be used by professionals as a decision-support tool, where we can utilize the suggested weights for the specified risk factors.Risk culture has a direct impact on the effectiveness of risk management; even the success or failure of project management. Risk culture can change the member’s inherent concept and guide them to enhance the risk resistance of the project. Risk culture construction must not ignore team member’s body role in the project.

Dr. M.K.Trivedi, Dr. R.K.Kansal, Manoj Sharma / International Journal of Engineering

Research and Applications (IJERA)

ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.com

Vol. 2, Issue 4, July-August 2012, pp.1377-1381

References-

ZuShijie, ZhuangWeimin. The Enterprise

Culture in the Project Management”. Journal of Industrial Engineering and

EngineeringManagement.2005,Volume19,

Issue 10. pp. 270-272. [2] Zeng Wei. Study on Enterprise Integration risk culture based on Project Management” [D], Xi’an: Northwestern PolytechnicalUniversity. 2007. [3] Chen Jinsheng.“Culture and Management of Construction Enterprise[M]. Beijing:

[1]

China Construction Industry Press,Volume 28, Issue 2,February 2006.pp.178-194. [4] Wang Dihua. “Constructing
China Construction Industry
Press,Volume 28, Issue 2,February
2006.pp.178-194.
[4]
Wang Dihua. “Constructing enterprise risk
culture conformed to our country”
[J].China Audit, 2006 Issue 15. pp.60-61.
[5] Baba, K., 1996. Development of
[6]
construction management based on
regional culture.
Dikmen, I., Birgonal, T., 2006. “An
Analytic Hierarchy Process based model
for risk and opportunity assessment of
international construction projects”.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,
Volume33, Issue1, pp. 58 -68.
[7] Gunman, S., Arditi, D., 2005 .“Factor
affecting International construction”.
ASCE Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, Volume
131, Issue 3 (March 2005) , pp. 273-282.
[8]
Harvey and Francis 1997. “National
cultural differences in theory and practice
Evaluating Hofstede’s cultural
framework”. Information Technology &
people.West Linn. Volume 10, issue 2.pp.
132.
[9]
Hastak, M., Shaked, A.,2000. ICRAM-1:
“Model for international construction risk
assessment”. ASCE Journal of
Management in Engineering. Volume16,
issue1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2000pp.
59-69.