Today’s construction industry requires more dynamic and obscure planning than ever before. In order to address complex construction management problems, managers must follow a systematic and professional approach to risk management. This study explores the application of the database bases and systems and excessive clusters in managing risk management. There is an integrated information system. Identifying risks is the basic step in the risk management process. Competitiveness, risk and uncertainty are factors and uncertainties that determine potential sources of liability risk for events.
Project risks can be divided into three groups:
- -Folding;
- -project;
- Drink.
The risks that are beyond the control of the project management team are external risks. Partners that may potentially overcome internal risks, as stakeholders, designers. High-specialized methodologies in various areas of risk assessment and that are why risk assessments
Comparing and hardening the application areas is difficult to integrate. There are a number of decision-making procedures based on a risk assessment-based approach, but they focus primarily on the project risk assessment flows within the risk assessment framework. In addition, one of the key capacities of the framework available for risk assessment is one of the key factors. The ability to facilitate and improve evidence and/or use of evidence risk assessment. For this reason, the full risk assessment framework is illustrated. This structure facilitates the Bayesian approach to risk assessment and the comprehensive use of risk indicators. The period of time mentioned above is not mentioned risks and, therefore, the risks must also be linked. A clear reference to these, Of course, a risk assessment is required because it affects this decision-making process general modeling and estimation of uncertainties, as well as acceptance opportunity. The system has a major responsibility for determining definition, impact, security, and reliability.
However, in practical technical risk assessments, however, there is simple differentiation. Ex. including structures, exposures, burdens and an aggressive chemical environment, structural elements and joints will be included in the structural elements, directly related to the margins. The consequences of damage or failure of all structural elements and joint consequences and, ultimately, indirectly, malfunctioning, as well as a deterioration of the structure. In more general terms, it is useful to think about a system that includes components supports some functions. The performance loss is the main source of indirect results in most cases. Finally, it should be shown that the risks, including the distribution of the results, can be presented in different forms and that a different range of the likelihood of the results may appear. Other presentations include functions to accelerate risk assessments that show uncertainty due to epistemic uncertainties. Best interpretation the objective of risk assessment. If the risks are combined with the risks evaluated in previous assessments, it is important that the risks are presented consistently and, more importantly, the collective recognition of potential dependencies between risks that are independently assessed.
Indicators of risk
The risk assessment framework can use any measurable indicator of the impact, vulnerability and integrity of the system being considered. Due to the hierarchical nature of risk assessment, in terms of conditional events, structure, probability of beech networks and effective diagrams. Risk indicators can be understood as sensible or measurable properties of systems or components that contain risk information. In general, the system’s impact will indicate the risk of system vulnerability and fault tolerance on the system, if the system’s performance is properly implemented. In the Bayesian framework, these indicators play an important role in risk-based decision-making. Considering the assessment of the risk structure of the behavior of goods, the hazards, cause any possible amount to be attributed to the accumulation (exposed), the power structure of the components (weakness), and activity, plasticity, excessive state control and maintenance (reliability).
Decisions analysis can be formal or informal. In principle, an informal analysis of the solutions can be understood as analysis, simplification or probabilistic model, or representation, although in principle it is necessary to take into account each of the branches that can be determined by the decision tree, and – all of the information available on the account.
crane / event casting. In general, the precondition is very difficult to be considered as impossible. The validity of decisions based on informal analysis of decisions and analysis of formal decisions for this reason, you have a common goal. The above solutions, theoretical foundations, can be easily implemented to achieve the best possible solutions to risk management. In line with the framework, as defined in the determination of decisions to reduce or prevent the effects of reducing vulnerability and improving integrity. In addition, possible and problem-solving problems may be formulated as express information functions admissibility, vulnerability, and reliability (risk indicators). It will be available in the future. Therefore, the risk management process. At any given time, information is available and maximized accordingly.
Risk statement
Depending on the situation, decision makers may feel uncomfortable with the direct implementation of the expected services as the basis for decision-making, mainly for two reasons: it is not clear whether the likelihood occurs either in the person, making decisions, assessing the benefits/results, or to analyze the effectiveness of the system and in which. This response to an ignorance of the rules of the game and can be considered as the primary cause of promoting the precautionary principle and the final implementation of the social decision-making process. about new technologies. In principle, an incorrect evaluation result meets the utility of a particular product with distortion of the likelihood of the occurrence of the result, that is, incorrect representation of the potential results of marginal amenity. The prospects could be reassessed and evaluated, and this may result in different solutions. However, there are conservative decisions, decision makers are in danger – in other words, there are more weights of decisions or uncommon events that do not reach at least high results (usually with limited knowledge and experience). lower results (for information and experience) Broad; This could, in fact, be a prejudice to actions that may be beneficial. From a personal perspective, risks and, on the other hand, risk behavior is, of course, totally misleading, insofar as they should reflect the manufacturer’s choices.
However, the risk of problematic problems, including the preservation of human life and the quality of the environment, could not cause problems with the problem, depending on the different types of hazards and sectors. machine construction in terms of society, and assuming all the relevant results and uncertainties included in compiling the utility function, this is irrational and, at the same time, uncomfortable behavior. However, the public and social consequences of adverse events, as explained, will be crucial to the wording of the utility function. Ideally, risk-based public decisions will be discouraged until everyone works as reasonable decision makers, that is, they will not overwhelm the adverse events. This ideal situation could be unrealistic, but it should be seen as a potential risk management tool for risk-based decision-making. Political responsibility is to establish public decisions on an integrated assessment of risks and benefits, including all the uncertainties that interfere with the solution of the problem. However, in some cases due to different modeling assumptions, different experts can solve the best solution solutions for the same problem solution. Then the problem continues to use information in support of making social decisions.
In addition to the uncertainty of reduced risk, an understanding of the effect of the system, a variety of opportunities to change additional information the system’s characteristics can be considered to include the whole set of options for collecting risk treatment. Risk management options can be seen as existing alternatives to solutions in the context of risk-based decision-making. In order to achieve the expected results in making decisions, the risk is determined. Risk management can be applied at different levels in terms of vulnerability, vulnerability, and reliability of the system in the system’s presence following a previously recommended risk assessment. Due to the risk assessment freight structure, through the development of risk management information, it can be done by collecting the statistical characteristics of the load characteristics (impact) of the strength of the individual components of the structures (security vulnerabilities) and information systems. reliability of the structural system. Enhanced information facilitates the optimization of solutions using general “initial” analysis. Changes in the system’s characteristics can be achieved by strengthening the structured components (lack of supply safety) and an increase in the structural system (reliability) through the restriction of risk exposure (exposure).
Acceptance of risk
It is generally accepted that decisions on the planning, design, implementation, operation and disabling of social infrastructure are based on optimizing the best possible life cycle of the principles of risk assessment mentioned above. However, coupled with the risks of economic losses, the decision maker must bring risks to people and potential damage to the quality of the environment. Whenever based on risk assessments, other solutions are determined and valued by evaluating the expected value of the gain or loss, and the risks should be taken into account in terms of admissibility. It is proposed to distinguish tangible and intangible risks, that is, risks and risks that cannot be easily communicated in monetary terms. In particular, intangible assets are related to loss of life and property. At the same time, however, it includes the characteristics of the environment. These attributes, for example. anxiety about biodiversity. It is necessary to define a systematic definition of the tangible values that should be taken into account in this case. As a general principle; It should be demonstrated that the rules related to different applications are being met and that the risks are acceptable according to them. Many of the existing mechanisms define the requirements of specific risks and collective risks. The requirements for the maximum individual risks in the principal professional dangers.
References
El-Sayegh, S. M. 2008. Risk assessment and allocation in the UAE construction industry, International Journal of Project Management 26(4): 431–438. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.07.004
Figueira, J.; Greco, S.; Ehrgott, M. (Eds.). 2005. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. Springer, Berlin.
Fisk, E. R. 2003. Construction Project Administration. Seventh Edition. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, New Jersey Columbus, Ohio.
Gao, P.-W. 2009. Options strategies with the risk adjustment, European Journal of Operational Research 192(3): 975– 980. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.10.010
Ginevičius, R. 2008. Normalization of quantities of various dimensions, Journal of Business Economics and Management 9(1): 79–86. doi:10.3846/1611-1699.2008.9.79-86.
