Differences in Supply Chain Material Risk Weight Using the Severity Index Method and Monte Carlo Simulation

Authors

  • Lisherly Reginancy Debataraja Politeknik Negeri Medan
  • Marsedes Purba Politeknik Negeri Medan
  • Amrizal Politeknik Negeri Medan
  • Gallio Budianto Politeknik Negeri Medan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37253/jcep.v5i2.9951

Keywords:

Supply Chain Material in COnstruction, risk analysis, material construction delays, severity index

Abstract

Material delays are a significant challenge in completing construction projects, closely tied to the understanding of material supply flow. As a result, a risk weight analysis is essential, considering both internal factors (such as supply, control, processes, and demand) and external factors (such as disasters). This study began with a literature review to compile a list of potential risks, followed by data collection through a questionnaire administered to 50 experts in construction material procurement. The risk analysis was then conducted using both the Severity Index and Monte Carlo methods. The results showed average risk differences between the two methods: supply side (16.40% vs. 16.76%), control risk (16.28% vs. 11.53%), process risk (11% vs. 11.20%), demand risk (16.10% vs. 13.87%), and disaster risk (13.78% vs. 13.41%). The highest risk identified was in the supply side, specifically the extended waiting times due to staggered material deliveries, while the lowest risk was related to the process of ordering materials, where issues arise from the need for reordering based on inaccurate quantity information.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

C. Kaliba, M. Muya, and K. Mumba, “Cost escalation and schedule delays in road construction projects in Zambia,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 522–531, 2009, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.07.003.

K. Alrasheed, E. Soliman, and H. Albader, “Systematic review of construction project delays in Kuwait,” Journal of Engineering Research, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 347–355, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jer.2023.08.009.

N. Viswanadham and R. S. Gaonkar, “Risk Management in Global Supply Chain Networks,” in Supply Chain Analysis: A Handbook on the Interaction of Information, System and Optimization, C. S. Tang, C.-P. Teo, and K.-K. Wei, Eds., Boston, MA: Springer US, 2008, pp. 201–222. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-75240-2_8.

P. Behera, R. P. Mohanty, and A. Prakash, “Understanding Construction Supply Chain Management,” Production Planning & Control, vol. 26, no. 16, pp. 1332–1350, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1080/09537287.2015.1045953.

M. Baghalzadeh Shishehgarkhaneh, R. C. Moehler, Y. Fang, H. Aboutorab, and A. A. Hijazi, “Construction supply chain risk management,” Autom Constr, vol. 162, p. 105396, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105396.

L. J. Susilo and V. R. Kaho, Manajemen Risiko Berbasis ISO 31000:2018 ; Panduan untuk Risk Leaders dan Risk Practitioners. PT. Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia: PT. Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia, 2018.

F. Ghasemi, M. H. M. Sari, V. Yousefi, R. Falsafi, and J. Tamošaitiene, “Project portfolio risk identification and analysis, considering project risk interactions and using Bayesian Networks,” 2018. doi: 10.3390/su10051609.

L. R. Debataraja, “Analysis of Human Factors that Influence Contractors’ Risk Management Attitudes in Sumatra Island in Construction Projects,” Journal of Civil Engineering and Planning, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 162–172, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.37253/jcep.v4i2.8575.

A. Amri, “No Title,” Analisis Risiko Pelaksanaan Pembangunan Padang Bypass Capacity Expansion Project, 2017.

L. R. Debataraja, A. Suraji, and T. Ophiyandri, “Analisis Risiko Investasi Infrastruktur Berbasis Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (F-AHP) Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (F-AHP) For Risk Assesment In Infrastructure Investment,” 2020.

A. Peña, I. Bonet, C. Lochmuller, F. Chiclana, and M. Góngora, “An integrated inverse adaptive neural fuzzy system with Monte-Carlo sampling method for operational risk management,” Expert Syst Appl, vol. 98, pp. 11–26, 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.01.001.

Z. He, “Sensitivity estimation of conditional value at risk using randomized quasi-Monte Carlo,” Eur J Oper Res, vol. 298, no. 1, pp. 229–242, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.11.013.

S. M. Carlo, B. Wijaya, and I. Jacob, MONTE CARLO SIMULATION. CRMS Indonesia (Center For Risk Management Sustainability). [Online]. Available: www.lspmks.co.id

Downloads

Published

2024-12-09

Issue

Section

Articles