Project evaluation and prioritization

This is not the place to go into a detailed expose of the extremely complex theory of project evaluation and prioritization. The interested reader may find it useful to consult Senn (1996) for an introduction and also Burman et al. (2007), Burman and Senn (2003), Senn (1998a) and Senn and Rosati (2002). A good discussion of various approaches which have been used is given by Bergman and Gittins (1985) in chapter 4 of their book. An expert and important account of approaches to real investment under certainty is given in the book by Dixit and Pyndick (1994). Some relevant issues are picked up in due course below. 

Project evaluation and prioritization. The business of valuing potential additions to the portfolio, to select a portfolio which will be an addition to the potential value of the business. 

SCOR-project is to identify, evaluate and prioritize actions using shortcut methods. SCOR-projects are usually executed by teams made up of members of different departments including customer service, sales, controlling, operations, procurement and logistics. The teams are supported by internal consultants, who provide knowledge about the SCOR-model and preside over the team meetings. 

In order to evaluate and prioritize the mitigation actions, the project team must specify a set of criteria. Different decision-makers may have different objectives. In this paper, the criteria for risk mitigation strategy selection are determined based on the review of literature and semi-structured interviews undertaken with key managers. The criteria considered can be divided into four categories as follows. 

A list of the greenhouse gas reduction strategies selected by the user for a facility or project after evaluation and prioritization... 

The prioritization of the improvement actions is the final results of the SCOR-projects which is not aiming at a detailed project description including cost effectiveness studies and project plans but at short cut evaluations and project proposals. 

The third step is to establish a framework to evaluate the question. When establishing the framework, pharmacists need to know some basic facts about the programs and diseases they are studying. Pharmacists undertaking these projects first should prioritize their objectives by determining what interventions and outcomes most need to be evaluated. For example, Cynthia Marshall may wish to determine the effect of her monitoring program on cost of care (an economic outcome), blood pressure (a clinical outcome), and quality of life (a humanistic outcome). 

However, due to the fact that SCD-Phase 4 of the guideline covers the selection and prioritization of corrective actions, certain decisions regarding the project conception phase of the implementation are already considered. The suggested analytical hierarchy process method to select corrective actions implies the consideration of criteria such as time, usability, risk, utility, and feasibility of implementation. Hence, the content of the project conception phase is already covered in this section and therefore, only the effort estimation, the profitability analysis, and the risk analysis are evaluated on a superficial level. 

When looking at a supply chain, each process and project inside it seems to be demand-driven. This means that all supply chain members should share a focus on end customers in order to achieve the best customer service, and consequently customer loyally and profitability (see Proposition no. 4). For this reason, supply chain risk assessment should be linked to specific objectives of the supply ch such as service quality, timeliness, flexibility and efficiency (see Proposition no. 1). Risks can be considered as a threat or obstacle to achieving the supply chain goal. Risk evaluators should prioritize objectives, assessing the impact of potentially negative events and cause-effect relationships along the supply chain. 

Fiksel, J. et al., 1982, Development, Application and Evaluation of a Value-Impact Methodology for Prioritization of Reactor Safety R D Projects, EPRI NP-2530, August. 

Engineering evaluation has become extremely important to the SNG from Coal subprogram because of the need to critically assess the technical and/or economic impacts of the research projects being funded. In order to select processes having a greater potential for technical and/or economic advantages over other processes at the earliest possible time and to maximize prioritization within the SNG from Coal subprogram, increased efforts in... 

The goals of this VIP are to document which technology evaluation criteria are applicable and then to conduct a formal technology screening and evaluation assessment. The result is a prioritized listing of technology options for each selected application for the project. The preferred time to execute this VIP is the midpoint in the conceptual phase (FEL-1). 

The evaluation of computer systems performing regulated operations is the first phase to achieving an organized, prioritized, and balanced Part 11 Remediation Project approach. The objective of the evaluation is to identity the system s functional and/or procedural gaps results of the evaluation will determine whether the operational, maintenance, or security procedures specific to the system will provide a controlled environment, which ensures the integrity of the electronic records and/or signatures as stated in the Part 11 requirements. 

Users from all application segments are interviewed by team members to discover their needs. Finally, a list with all proposed functional requirements is drawn up and evaluated by the project team. Usually the list is too long for all requirements to be implemented within a reasonable time-frame, so the requirements are prioritized into three categories, Musts , Wants and Nice to haves . Must requirements are considered to be those that are a prerequisite to the success of the software and are always included in the final specifications. Wants and Nice to haves are of lesser importance and are included only if their implementation does not appreciably delay the project. 

One of the major tasks of any systems safety effort is to communicate risk information to management accurately and effectively. Because a number of hazards may be associated with a given project, there must be a way to evaluate these hazards, prioritize them, or quantify them and communicate the risk associated with each to management. 

---