The main activities in project portfolio allocation management are selecting the right project components given a strategy. It is crucial to establish a scientific system of evaluation indexes to guarantee the closeness between strategy and project portfolio allocation optimally. With organizations growing in sizes, the functions and objectives of project components are becoming more and more different. It is necessary to set evaluation indexes of the degree of closeness from the perspectives of financial, market share, social effects, and so on according to the strategy-oriented process of project portfolio allocation. This paper proposes a project portfolio allocation process under strategic orientation and evaluation indexes of the degree of closeness between strategy and project portfolio allocation. This will help projects managers make portfolio allocation decisions.
Bertsimas, D., Gupta, S. and Lulli, G. (2014) Dynamic Resource Allocation: A Flexible and Tractable Modeling Framework. European Journal of Operational Research, 236, 14-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.10.063
Fatemi Ghomi, S.M.T. and Ashjari, B. (2002) A Simulation Model for Multi-Project Resource Allocation. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 127-130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(00)00038-7
Laslo, Z. and Goldberg, A.I. (2008) Resource Allocation under Uncertainty in a Multi-Project Matrix Environment: Is Organizational Conflict Inevitable? International Journal of Project Management, 26, 773-788.
Gonçalves, J.F., Mendes, J.J.M. and Resende, M.G.C. (2008) A Genetic Algorithm for the Resource Constrained Multi-Project Scheduling Problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 189, 1171-1190.
Wang, W., Wang, X., Ge, X., et al. (2014) Multi-Objective Optimization Model for Multi-Project Scheduling on Critical Chain. Advances in Engineering Software, 68, 33-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.11.004
Afshar-Nadjafi, B. and Majlesi, M. (2014) Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem with Setup Times after Preemptive Processes. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 69, 16-25.