W3_AsmaF_Decision Making Compensatory Models


1. Problem Definition

In IT maintenance and services operations are always performed because of the needed patches installation, security enhancements and new deployments for updated applications.

Nowadays no one can afford to lose 1 minute of work with systems and networks and the IT maintenance operations can cause interruptions (downtime) or slowdown for end users. IT should be careful to decide how to maintain the systems and networks in order not to stop the work and business.

2. Identify the Feasible Alternative

A correct decision making is properly required to choose maintenance method to be executed, installation Methods which has to be implemented on onshore platform are:

1. Live Platform Method Installation as Option 1

  • High costly
  • Maintenance during non-shutdown duration
  • Less-business losses impact
  • High obtain risk

2. Shutdown Method Installation as Option 2

  • High costly
  • Maintenance during shutdown duration
  • Business losses impact
  • Less obtain risk

3. Continuous Repair as Option 3

  • High costly
  • Install during shutdown or non-shutdown duration

4. Temporary Repair as Option 4

  • Low costly
  • Install during shutdown or non-shutdown duration

3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative

Parameters which are trying to be analysis are:

  1. Cost: Define as cost which is required to perform the installation
  2. Duration: Duration is how long time which are taken while execution is running
  3. Business Loss: The data and application which are lost during platform Shutdown for installation periods
  4. Quality: The Quality which is resulted from certain installation method
  5. Recovery time: Recovery time after installation / system startup time

4. Selection Criteria

The criteria will be compensatory models with non-dimensional scaling. As compensatory models allow positive attributes to compensate for negative ones, all the units for the values should be unified. Note that the attributes have been already set in previous post.

Image

Figure 1. Non-Dimensional Scaling

The summary for the scaling will be as the figure below

Image

Figure 2. Result of Non-Dimensional Scaling

Using Additive Weighting Techniques and the attributes ordinal ranking (form previous week post W2) we can have an overall score for the alternatives by normalizing the ranks and then multiply it with the non-dimensional value as shown in the below figure

Image

Figure 3. Additive Weighting Techniques

 

5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative

Figure 2 shows that option 1 and 4 have the best values, and they are the dominance factors. However figure 3 shows that option 3 is the dominance factors. (Ignore excel rounding here; option 2 = 0.525 & option 3 = 0.5333).

 

I would go for option 1 as the best method from the two 2 comparison models because it has very almost similar score to option 3 (0.50) if using the additive weighting method. Moreover, using the non-dimensional scaling it scored the best with 2.5

 

6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

From W2 post the non-compensatory models conclude that Option 4 (Temporary Repair) is the best method however when we use compensatory models here we conclude that Option 1 is the best method.   

 

7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

In this use case (which is REAL), the compensatory model is the best for decision making. Performance, analyzing and decision model selection used can again be done once in 2 years against the data and experience gathered during that period (costs, duration, etc…).

Reference:

  1. UK North Sea oil production decline. Retrieved from (http://www.oilvoice.com/n/UK_North_Sea_oil_production_decline/5e0b0a2ab66b.aspx#gsc.tab=0)
  2. Giammalvo, P. D. (2012). AACE Certification Preparation Course Handouts.
  3. Sullivan Wicks Koelling, Engineering Economy (fifteenth Edition). Prentice Hall
  4. Taylor, A. (n.d.). DECISION MAKING. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from http://home.sandiego.edu/~taylor/decisionmaking.html
  5. Richarme, M. (n.d.). Consumer Decision Making Models Article by Michael Richarme. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from http://www.decisionanalyst.com/publ_art/decisionmaking.dai
  6. TRIANUGROHO, A. (2014, March 27). W5_Andi_Decision Making Compensatory Models | Kristal AACE 2014. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from http://kristalaace2014.wordpress.com/2014/03/27/w5_andi_decision-making-compensatory-models/
  7. AlFadha, A. (2014, June 15). W2_AAlfadha_Multi attributes decision making | PMI-Oman 2014. Retrieved June 16, 2014, from https://pmioman14.wordpress.com/2014/06/15/w2_aalfadha_multi-attributes-decision-making/
Advertisements

3 thoughts on “W3_AsmaF_Decision Making Compensatory Models

  1. Hi,

    It’s very nice to see a PMI team in Oman!

    My question, which option would you choose for your project? Or would you push for the client?

    Personally, I would go for option #2 during off-peak days and off-peak hours (ideally Saturday evening until Sunday morning). It is costly, but it is the best solution if you can live with shutdown.

  2. AWESOME case study Asma and you did a really great job with your step by step analysis!!!

    Your citations were perfect as well!!!

    This is the qualify of posting I am looking for over the remaining 9 weeks or so!!!

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, AACE Symposium, New Orleans, LA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s