KR101856550B1 - Host country evaluation method and system for international construction enterprises - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to an evaluation method and an evaluation system for an overseas construction company decision support system, and more particularly, to a method and an evaluation system for an overseas construction company, Selecting a project performance factor of the project; (b) weighting determining a weight between the factors of the selected country attractiveness factors of each country and a weight between the project performance factors using a fuzzy technique; (c) Evaluating the factor value Using the national data of the construction industry, calculating the standardization score of the country attractiveness factor and the project performance factor for each country; (d) calculating the national attractiveness and the project performance score for each country through the factor value evaluating unit and the standardized score calculated for each country; And (e) generating the evaluation information on the ordering country of the overseas construction business through the national attractiveness and the project performance score of each country calculated by the evaluation information generating unit.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD [0001] The present invention relates to a method and system for evaluating an overseas construction company,

The present invention relates to a method and system for evaluating an ordering country of an overseas construction company, more specifically, evaluating a country in two aspects (national attractiveness, project performance) and classifying it into a plurality of types, And a system for evaluating an ordering country of an overseas construction company that supports a construction company.

Since the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, the overseas construction market has provided more opportunities for foreign companies to enter overseas markets. Each company is expanding its overseas business to overcome the limitations of competition and saturation in domestic construction market and secure financial stability. However, overseas business is more uncertain than domestic business, and it is difficult to consider various factors such as politics, institution, economy, society, culture.

Moreover, entry into the overseas market is accompanied by large-scale investments, so selection of an entry country is one of the main factors in corporate decision-making.

Uncertainties such as the recent unexpected economic downturn have had a huge impact on the overseas construction market. Generally, the traditional project-based risk management system is limited to secure stable sales and profits of companies in the overseas construction market due to uncertainties in the country or a wider range of units. One of the strategic decisions that engineering and construction companies must make in order to effectively respond to rapidly changing markets and uncertain environments in this situation is the assessment and choice of the state.

 Because strategic choices are determined by internal and external circumstances, individual companies typically have different business goals and strategies and thus achieve different results. From this point of view, there is a need for a decision support model that considers the uncertainties of the countries of entry and the business goals of individual companies in order to make strategic decisions in the process of national evaluation and selection.

Korean Patent Laid-Open Publication No. 10-2015-0080110 (public date: July 09, 2015) Korean Patent Publication No. 10-2003-0047279 (Published Date: June 18, 2003)

The evaluation system and the evaluation system of the ordering country for supporting the decision making of the overseas construction company according to the present invention have the following problems.

First, the present invention is to provide a method and an evaluation system for analyzing and evaluating a business environment at a national level in an overseas construction project.

Second, the present invention provides information for supporting strategic decision-making regarding the selection of a country to enter an overseas construction business by evaluating a candidate country for overseas construction project and classifying the country according to the country's attractiveness and project performance level.

The present invention has been made in view of the above problems, and it is an object of the present invention to provide an apparatus and method for controlling the same.

The evaluation system and the evaluation system of the ordering country for supporting the decision making of the overseas construction company according to the present invention have the following effects.

First, it evaluates and classifies the country in two aspects (objective attractiveness and project performance) through objective market information and decision-makers' subjective judgment. to provide.

Second, the present invention provides an evaluation method and system for an ordering country that evaluates candidate countries according to the business purpose of companies and classifies countries from the perspective of countries and projects to support decision making of overseas construction companies.

Third, the present invention not only provides priorities by country but also provides effective information to diagnose the present state of the company through evaluation results and establish a differentiation strategy for each country.

The effects of the present invention are not limited to those mentioned above, and other solutions not mentioned can be clearly understood by those skilled in the art from the following description.

FIG. 1 is a flowchart illustrating a method of evaluating an ordering country for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention.
FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an ordering system evaluation system 100 for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company.
3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a pairwise comparison matrix in the fuzzy decision matrix determination step of the embodiment of the present invention.
4 is a graph showing an example of a fuzzy judgment matrix applied to an embodiment of the present invention.
5 is a result of the matrix transformation step applied to the embodiment of the present invention.
FIG. 6 is a result of calculating weighting factors applied to the embodiment of the present invention.

Before describing the present invention in detail, it is to be understood that the present invention is capable of various modifications and various embodiments, and the examples described below and illustrated in the drawings are intended to limit the invention to specific embodiments It is to be understood that the invention includes all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the invention.

It is to be understood that when an element is referred to as being "connected" or "connected" to another element, it may be directly connected or connected to the other element, . On the other hand, when an element is referred to as being "directly connected" or "directly connected" to another element, it should be understood that there are no other elements in between.

The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention. The singular expressions include plural expressions unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. In this specification, the terms "comprises" or "having" and the like refer to the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, or combinations thereof, But do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, or combinations thereof.

Further, terms such as " part, "" unit," " module, "and the like described in the specification may mean a unit for processing at least one function or operation.

In the following description of the present invention with reference to the accompanying drawings, the same components are denoted by the same reference numerals regardless of the reference numerals, and redundant explanations thereof will be omitted. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, exemplary embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. In the following description, well-known functions or constructions are not described in detail since they would obscure the invention in unnecessary detail.

Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 is a view showing a flow of an ordering country evaluation method for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an ordering country evaluation system 100 for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company Fig.

As shown in FIG. 1, the method for evaluating an ordering country for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention includes: (a) a factor selection unit 110 selects a plurality of Selecting a country attractiveness factor and a number of project performance factors; (b) determining a weight between the selected country attractiveness factors of each country and a weight between project performance factors using a fuzzy technique, and generating the weight factors; (c) calculating a standardization score of the country attractiveness factor and the project performance factor for each country using the construction industry country data; (d) calculating a national attractiveness and a project performance score for each country through the weighting value generated by each country and the standardized score calculated by the factor value evaluating unit 130; And (e) generating evaluation information on the ordering country of the overseas construction business through the calculated national attractiveness and project performance score calculated by the evaluation information generating unit 140.

2, the ordering system evaluation system 100 for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention includes a plurality of country attractiveness factors and a factor for selecting a plurality of project performance factors (110), a weight determination unit (120) for determining a weight between the national attractiveness factors and a weight between the project performance factors, a score calculator (120) for calculating a national attraction factor and a standardized score of the project performance factor, An evaluation value generating unit 130 for calculating the national attractiveness of each country and the project performance score through the calculated standardization score and an evaluation information generating unit 130 for generating the ordering country evaluation information through the national attractiveness and the project performance score, (140).

As described above, the embodiment of the present invention proposes a model for supporting decision-making in selecting an entry country by evaluating and classifying the country in two aspects (national attractiveness, project performance) through objective market information and subjective judgment of decision makers. In addition to providing national priorities on the basis of the quantitative evaluation of the candidates for entry into the country, it is also possible to assess the current state of the company through the evaluation results and to support the establishment of differentiation strategy by country. And an evaluation system (100) for evaluating the ordering country for decision support.

Here, the factor selecting unit 110, the weight determining unit 120, the factor value evaluating unit 130, and the evaluation information generating unit 140 calculate the order for supporting the decision making of the overseas construction company according to the embodiment of the present invention And is a component of a computer or a computing device that executes a program for performing a process of a country evaluation method. Each component is not classified by physical elements but is a component according to a function of executing a computer program. And may be configured by a combination of devices that make up the various computing devices.

In addition, the apparatus or system according to the embodiment of the present invention can be embodied as computer-readable code on a computer-readable recording medium. A computer-readable recording medium includes all kinds of recording apparatuses in which data that can be read by a computer system is stored. Examples of the recording medium include ROM, RAM, optical disk, magnetic tape, floppy disk, hard disk, nonvolatile memory and the like. The computer-readable recording medium may also be distributed over a networked computer system so that computer readable code can be stored and executed in a distributed manner.

The model frame work (Model framework)

As shown in Figures 1 and 2, embodiments of the present invention propose a total of five rating systems for country classification.

In the first step, the factor selection unit 110 selects a country attractiveness factor and a project performance factor by a decision maker. The factor is divided into 8 categories (national attractiveness) and 6 factors (project performance) (step (a)).

The second step is to determine the weight between the selected country attractiveness factors and the weight between the project performance factors using the fuzzy fuzzy LinPreRa based AHP technique (step (b)).

In the third step, the factor value evaluating unit 130 calculates each country's attractiveness factor and project performance factor using actual objective data such as the construction industry country data. In order to derive the relative differences between the candidate countries, the standard deviation method is used to indicate the standardization score (step (c)).

In the fourth step, the factor value evaluating unit 130 evaluates the national attractiveness and the project performance for each entry candidate country through the derived weight and the standardized score (step (d)).

In the final fifth step, the evaluation information generating unit 140 classifies the countries into a plurality of types by using the national attractiveness and the project performance score, and generates the evaluation information on the ordering country of the overseas construction project (step (e)).

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

Selective variables of country attractiveness and project performance (step (a))

As shown in the following table 1, the variables for national selection were composed of 14 factors (8 factors of country attractiveness, 6 factors of project performance factor) through literature survey and interview with practitioners. In step (a) of the ordering country evaluation method for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention, the factor selection unit 110 selects a country charm factor (V ₁ ^C , V ₂ ^C , ... V _M ^C ) and project performance factors (V ₁ ^P , V ₂ ^P , ... V _N ^P ). The choice of factor is determined by the business purpose of the company, the subjective significance of the decision maker, and the judgment.

The country attractiveness factor can be divided into two categories: 1) market trends and forecasts, and 2) institutional systems. Market trends and forecasts reflect the characteristics of the construction industry in the country (V1 ~ V4), and institutional systems represent the project execution environment as well as politics, economy, society and culture (V5 ~ V8).

Project performance factors can be divided into two categories: 1) project execution experience and 2) business success probability. Business experience is focused on quantitative aspects of overseas construction contracts (V9 ~ V10), and the possibility of business success is analyzed focusing on qualitative aspects of overseas construction projects (V11 ~ V14).

The following explains the individual factors (varible: V1 to V14) included in the country attractiveness factor and the project performance factor, and gives an example of how to calculate the evaluation value.

[V1] It refers to the size of the current construction project in each country. It is calculated as the natural log value of the US dollar using the past and forecast data of IHS Global Insight (GI).

[V2] This is a predicted value of the scale change rate of the future construction market, and calculates the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of the construction market based on the analysis of experts in each country's construction market.

)을 1에서 뺀 값으로 계산한다. (i.e.,

)[V3] It evaluates how stable the construction market is and contrasts with the volatility. Variability of past construction market data (

) Is subtracted from 1. (ie,

)

[V4] This means the intensity of competition within the construction market, and from the perspective of domestic companies, it calculates the number of competitors based on the data from the Engineering News Record (ENR) and the Overseas Construction Association.

[V5] Assess the stability of political systems in each country and use the World Bank's World Government Index (WGI) data. The World Governance Index (WGI) is a system of governance, governance, legislative and regulatory quality, democracy and democracy, Information that gives scores between -2.5 (weak) and +2.5 (excellent) in the items of the rule of law and control of corruption, obtained from the World Bank's homepage as a spreadsheet file can do.

, i는 1≤i≤6인 정수)을 [-2.5, +2.5]에서 [0, +100] 구간으로 변환한 다음 산술 평균하여 산출할 수 있다.Each of the six evaluation items of the global governance index

, i is an integer satisfying 1? i? 6) from [-2.5, +2.5] to [0, +100] and then arithmetically averaged.

[V6] Evaluate the stability in carrying out business in each country, and utilize World Bank's business environment index (DBI) data. The Business Environment Index (DBI) is a joint statement of the World Bank and International Finance Corporation annually published on the ease of business of 185 countries, using the provided stance to frontier (DF) values. do.

The DBI is useful for assessing the relative status of the host country and the current business environment of the host country based on the evaluation of laws and regulations related to business activities in each country. Dealing with construction permits, getting electricity, registering property, getting credit, protecting investors, paying taxes, trade across borders, , Enforcing contracts, and resolving insolvency, as well as a comprehensive ranking of the ten items.

Since these evaluation values or their rankings are different in the evaluation criteria of each item, it is possible to make relative comparisons between countries but it is difficult to judge the absolute level. To solve this problem, Provide a gap value (DF) relative to the leading country in which the score gap between a country and a particular country is between 0 and 100. The overall business performance stability index can be calculated by arithmetically averaging the gap values (DF) relative to the leading countries of each of the evaluation items presented together with the 10 evaluation items of the business environment index (DBI) without any conversion.

[V7] Evaluate the ease of movement of products, services, capital, people, and information in each country and utilize the Institutional Profiles Database (IPD) data from CEPII. The IPD is a system of public institutions and civil society, the market for goods and services, the capital market, and the labor market and social relations. A total of 4 items are evaluated in a range of 0 (closed) to 4 (open).

)를 뺀 값으로(i.e., 1-

), 0(낮은 보상) ~ 100(큰 보상)으로 평가한다. [V8] Refers to compensation derived from the characteristics of the construction industry and utilizes IHS Global Insight (GI) data. GI provides a risk score in consideration of risks (political, economic, legal, tax, operational, security) from the perspective of the construction industry. do. V8 has a risk score of 100 (

) (Ie, 1-

), 0 (low compensation) to 100 (large compensation).

[V9] This refers to the cumulative number of contracts for overseas construction projects of Korean companies over the 25 years from 1990 to 2014 in each country.

[V10] This is the cumulative amount of overseas construction projects of Korean companies for 25 years from 1990 to 2014 in each country. It is calculated as the natural log value of US dollar using the data of overseas construction association.

[V11] This refers to the percentage of contracts that succeeded in winning orders for Korean companies' overseas construction projects from 1990 to 2014 for 25 years.

[V12] This means the average of Korean companies' returns over 25 years from 1990 to 2014 in each country.

)를 1에서 뺀 값으로 계산한다. (i.e., 1-

) 수익의 불확실성은 수익률의 표준편차로 계산한다.[V13] To assess how stable income can be obtained by each country, and to estimate the uncertainty of Korean companies' profits for 25 years from 1990 to 2014 in each country

) Is subtracted from 1. (ie, 1-

) The uncertainty of profit is calculated as the standard deviation of the return.

[V14] means the frequency of business success in each country, and calculates the percentage of completed surplus projects in each country from 1990 to 2014 for 25 years.

Determine the weights (step (b))

In step (b), the weight determining unit 120 determines whether the fuzzy LinPreRa-based AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) is used in the ordering country evaluation method for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention. (W ₁ ^C , W ₂ ^C , ... W _M ^C ) and the project performance factors (W ₁ ^P , W ₂ ^P , ... W _N ^P ) . That is, the significance evaluation between the factors is performed according to the subjective judgment of the decision-maker about the factor selected in the first step, and the weight is calculated based on this.

In particular, in the step (b) described above, unlike the simple AHP method, by using the fuzzy AHP technique, the 'ambiguity' of the linguistic variable is mathematically expressed to more accurately reflect the subjective judgment of the decision maker. (Fuzzy LinPreRa based AHP) is used to evaluate only n-1 variables, the rest of the values are automatically calculated by the formula, so that the user's convenience .

(b), the weight setting step has the following three steps in total.

Step 1: Determine the fuzzy judgment matrices

As a first step, the fuzzy decision matrix determination step constitutes a pairwise comparison matrix based on the parameters selected by the decision maker, and the relative importance between the selected factors (n) And generates a fuzzy judgment matrix. At this time, only n-1 variables are evaluated, and the remaining matrices are automatically calculated according to the following equation (1) to fill the comparison matrix.

Step 2: Transform the obtained matrices for the variables

Step 2 is a step of normalizing the fuzzy number of the fuzzy judgment matrix to a range of [0, 1] through a transformation function of Equation (2). (i.e., f: [-c, 1 + c] - > [0, 1]

Step 3: Calculate the weights of the variables

As step 3, the weight calculation step is a step of calculating a weight based on the evaluation result. The weight calculation equation is expressed by the following equation (3).

= 각 인자들의 가중치(fuzzy weight) 값으로 수학식 1의 삼각퍼지 값(

)들을 통해 계산되기 때문에

총 3개의 값을 가진다.

='인자i'에 대한 퍼지 값

(fuzzy comparison value)들의 평균값이고,

='인자i'에 대한 가중치(fuzzy weight)의 평균값으로 최종 가중치(defuzzified weights)이다. 또

은 수학식 1의 퍼지 판단 매트릭스의 퍼지 수이다.
여기서, 퍼지 숫자에 대한 기호의 계산 방식은 아래와 같이 계산한다.

here,

= The trigonometric fuzzy value of the equation (1) as the fuzzy weight value of each factor

)

There are three values in total.

= Fuzzy value for 'argument i'

(fuzzy comparison values)

= The mean of the fuzzy weights for 'factor i', which is the final weight (defuzzified weights). In addition

Is the fuzzy number of the fuzzy determination matrix of Equation (1).
Here, the calculation method of the symbol with respect to the fuzzy number is calculated as follows.

FIG. 3 shows an example of a pairwise comparison matrix in the fuzzy decision matrix determination step of the embodiment of the present invention, and FIG. 4 shows an example of a fuzzy decision matrix.

Figure 3 (a) shows the results of pairwise comparisons of national attractiveness factors, and Figure 3 (b) shows the results of pairwise comparisons of project performance factors. 4 (a) shows an example of a fuzzy judgment matrix of a country attractiveness factor, and Fig. 4 (b) shows an example of a fuzzy judgment matrix of a project performance factor.

5 shows the result of the matrix transformation step applied to the embodiment of the present invention. Fig. 5A shows the result of conversion of the fuzzy judgment matrix of Fig. 3B, and Fig. 5B shows the result of the conversion of the fuzzy judgment matrix of Fig. 4A.

FIG. 6 shows the results of calculating the weights of factors applied to the embodiment of the present invention.

Assign standardized score (step (c))

In step (c) of the method of evaluating an ordering country for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention, the factor value evaluating unit 130 uses the objective actual data such as the construction industry country data, It is also a step of calculating a parameter ^(C Z _i1, Z _i2 ^C, ··· Z _iM ^C) and project performance factor ^(P Z _i1, Z _i2 ^P, ··· Z _iN ^P) score.

Here, national data for the construction industry includes data reflecting national characteristics and data reflecting the construction industry. In order to collect such actual data, a number of construction industry information DBs, in which external construction industry information is stored, are used to collect information such as the World Bank, IHS Global Insight (GI) and Engineering News Record (ENR) It is possible to utilize the data of the international organization of the overseas construction project of the design and construction company provided by the overseas construction association as well as the data of the international organization. By using vast amounts of data in comparison with the data used in the evaluation of the conventional overseas construction industry, there is a great advantage in terms of quality and quantity of data.

And, Z _im ^C means the score of the mth national attractiveness factor of 'country i', and Z _in ^P means the score of the n th project performance factor of 'country i'. M and N are the number of national attractiveness factors and project performance factors selected by the decision maker, respectively.

Since the scale of the factors is different, a comparable standard scale should be used to compute the final total score in the fourth step. In this model, the standard deviation method is used to measure the relative difference between the ordering countries, and the standardized score is evaluated. The standardized score of the factor j for the country i is calculated as follows.

= '국가 i'에 대한 '인자 j'의 원래(Original) 점수이고,

= 후보 국가들의 '인자 j'의 평균 점수이고,

= 후보 국가들의 '인자 j'의 표준편차이다.here,

= Original score of 'factor j' for 'country i'

= The average score of the 'factor j' of the candidate countries,

= The standard deviation of the factor 'j' in the candidate countries.

Calculate the final aggregated score (step (d))

In step (d), the factor value evaluation unit 130 calculates the weight values W _i ^C and W _i ^P calculated in step (b) (S _i ^C ) and project performance (S _i ^P ) scores for each candidate country through the standardized scores (Z _i ^C , Z _i ^P ) calculated in the third step.

The national attractiveness (S _i ^C ) score and the project performance (S _i ^P ) score are calculated as follows:

여기서,

='국가i'에 대한 국가 매력도 점수이며,

='국가i'에 대한 프로젝트 성과 점수이고, M=인자 선택 단계에서 선택된 국가 매력도 인자의 총 개수이고, N=인자 선택 단계에서 선택된 프로젝트 성과 인자의 총 개수이고,

,

는 상기 (b) 단계에서 계산한 가중치로

='m번째 국가 매력도 인자'에 대한 가중치이며,

='n번째 프로젝트 성과 인자'에 대한 가중치이고,

,

는 (c) 단계에서 계산한 표준화 점수로

='국가i' 및 'm번째 국가 매력도 인자'에 대한 표준화 점수이며,

='국가i' 및 'n번째 프로젝트 성과 인자'에 대한 표준화 점수이다.

here,

= National attractiveness score for 'country i'

= The project performance score for country i, M = the total number of country attractiveness factors selected at the factor selection stage, N = the total number of project performance factors selected at the factor selection stage,

,

Is a weight value calculated in the step (b)

= 'weight for the m-th country charm factor'

= 'weight for' nth project performance factor '

,

Is the standardized score calculated in step (c)

= Standardized score for 'country i' and 'm-th country attractiveness factor'

= Standardization score for 'Country i' and 'nth project performance factor'.

delete

Classify the countries (step (d))

Examples overseas construction business decision ordering stations in the evaluation step (e) for decision support of the present invention is evaluation information generating unit 140 country charm that represents the (S _i ^C) and Project Performance (S _i ^P) It is a step of classifying the candidate countries into a plurality of types by utilizing the two-dimensional plane. FIG. 7 shows evaluation information of an overseas construction business ordering country generated by an ordering country evaluation method for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company according to an embodiment of the present invention.

As shown in Fig. 7, the country classification type is as follows.

[Type 1] High Risk, Low Reward (S _i ^C <α and S _i ^P < beta)

[Type 2] High Risk, High Reward (S _i ^C <α and S _i ^P ≥ β)

[Type 3] Low Risk, Low Reward (S _i ^C ≥ α and S _i ^P < beta)

[Type 4] Low Risk, High Reward (S _i ^C ≥ α and S _i ^P ≥ β)

In this case, α and β are the cut-off points that distinguish national attractiveness from project performance. Α = 0 and β = 0 mean the country attractiveness (S _i ^C ), project performance S _i ^P ). This is because the final score of national attractiveness and project performance is a standardized score that assesses the relative position of each country. (see step (d)).

According to the preference of decision maker-cut it can be adjusted off point (α, β), and further 2 × 2 classification as well as the 2 × 3 classification _{(α, β 1, β 2} ), 3 × 3 classification (α ₁ , α ₂ , β ₁ , β ₂ ), and so on.

The embodiments and the accompanying drawings described in the present specification are merely illustrative of some of the technical ideas included in the present invention. Accordingly, the embodiments disclosed herein are for the purpose of describing rather than limiting the technical spirit of the present invention, and it is apparent that the scope of the technical idea of the present invention is not limited by these embodiments. It will be understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.

100: Evaluation system 110:
120: weight determining unit 120:
140: Evaluation information generating unit

Claims (15)

(a) selecting a plurality of country attractiveness factors and a plurality of project performance factors for each of the candidate countries for entering the overseas construction business by the user of the factor selection unit;
(b) weighting determining a weight between the factors of the selected country attractiveness factors of each country and a weight between the project performance factors using a fuzzy technique;
(c) Evaluating the factor value Using the national data of the construction industry, calculating the standardization score of the country attractiveness factor and the project performance factor for each country;
(d) calculating the national attractiveness and project performance score of each country through the factor value evaluating unit and the standardized score calculated for each country; And
(e) generating evaluation information on the overseas construction business owner's country through the national attractiveness and the project performance score of each country calculated by the evaluation information generating unit;
The step (b)
(b1) generating a fuzzy judgment matrix between selected factors based on the selected factors;
(b2) converting and standardizing the fuzzy number of the fuzzy determination matrix; And
(b3) calculating a weight between the selected factors based on the normalized fuzzy number;
In the step (d), the formula for calculating the national attractiveness and project performance score for each country is:

(here,

= National attractiveness score for 'country i'

= The project performance score for country i, M = the total number of country attractiveness factors selected at the factor selection stage, N = the total number of project performance factors selected at the factor selection stage,

,

Is a weight value calculated in the step (b)

= 'weight for the m-th country charm factor'

= 'weight for' nth project performance factor '

,

Is the standardized score calculated in the step (c)

= Standardized score for 'country i' and 'm-th country attractiveness factor'

= Standardized score for 'country i' and 'n th project performance factor')
The method of evaluating the ordering country for the decision support of the overseas construction company. The method according to claim 1,
In the step (a)
The national attractiveness factor,
Information on market trends and forecasts of construction projects, including information on construction market size (V1), construction market growth rate (V2), construction market stability (V3), and construction market competition (V4); And
It is related to institutional system information and includes information on the stability of the political system (V5), stability of business performance (V6), market opening degree (V7), and construction market compensation (V8) Evaluation method of ordering country for. The method according to claim 1,
The project performance factors are:
Information on business performance experience information, cumulative number of bids (V9), cumulative contract amount (V10) information; And
And information on the business success probability information includes information on the bid hit ratio (V11), the average rate of return (V12), the stability of the profit (V13), and the surplus ratio of the completed project (V14) Evaluation method of ordering country for. The method according to claim 1,
In the step (b), the fuzzy technique may include:
Fuzzy LinPreRa based AHP based on Fuzzy LinPreRa based AHP method. delete The method according to claim 1,
The step (c)
In order to derive the relative differences between candidate countries and the evaluation values of the project performance factors using the country data of the construction industry, the factor evaluation unit is standardized using the standard deviation method Wherein the step of calculating the score includes calculating the score of the client. The method according to claim 1,
The step (b1)
Constructing a pairwise comparison matrix based on the selected factors; And
And evaluating the relative importance of the selected factors with a linguistic expression to generate a fuzzy judgment matrix. &Lt; Desc / Clms Page number 19 &gt; The method according to claim 1,
In the step (b3), the weighting-

(here,

= The value of the fuzzy weight of each factor,

= Fuzzy value for 'argument i'

(fuzzy comparison values)

= The average of the fuzzy weights for 'factor i', which is the final weight (defuzzified weights)

Is the fuzzy number of the fuzzy decision matrix.
The method of evaluating the ordering country for the decision support of the overseas construction company. The method of claim 6,
In the step (c), the equation for calculating the standardization score may include:

(here,

= Original score of 'factor j' for 'country i'

= The average score of the 'factor j' of the candidate countries,

= Standard deviation of 'factor j' for candidate countries.)
The method of evaluating the ordering country for the decision support of the overseas construction company. delete The method according to claim 1,
In the step (e)
The evaluation information of the candidate for overseas construction business,
Wherein the information is generated by classifying each of the candidate countries into a plurality of types based on the information represented by the national attractiveness score and the project performance score of each country. A factor selection section for selecting a plurality of country attractiveness factors and a plurality of project performance factors for each candidate country to enter the overseas construction business by the user;
A weight determining unit for determining a weight between the factors selected by the country attracting factors of the respective countries using a fuzzy technique and a weight between the project performance factors and generating the weight;
The national attractiveness factor and the project performance factor of each country are calculated by using the national data of the construction industry, and the national attractiveness and project performance score of each country are calculated through the weight value generated by each country and the standardized score thus calculated A parameter value evaluating unit for calculating a parameter value; And
And an evaluation information generation unit for generating the evaluation information of the overseas construction business owner through the calculated national attractiveness and project performance score of each country,
The weight determining unit generates a fuzzy judgment matrix between selected factors based on the selected factors, transforms and standardizes the fuzzy number of the fuzzy determination matrix, and calculates a weight value between the selected factors based on the normalized fuzzy number Calculate a weight;
Wherein the factor value evaluation unit comprises:

(here,

= National attractiveness score for 'country i'

= The project performance score for country i, M = the total number of country attractiveness factors selected at the factor selection stage, N = the total number of project performance factors selected at the factor selection stage,

,

Is a weight determined by the weight calculating unit

= 'weight for the m-th country charm factor'

= 'weight for' nth project performance factor '

,

Is a standardized score calculated by the factor evaluation unit

= Standardized score for 'country i' and 'm-th country attractiveness factor'

= Standardized score for 'country i' and 'n th project performance factor')
The system evaluating system of the ordering country for the decision support of the overseas construction company is characterized by calculating the national attractiveness and project performance score of each country by using the above equation. delete The method of claim 12,
Wherein the evaluation information generation unit
And generating the evaluation information of the overseas construction construction company which is generated by classifying a plurality of candidate countries into the plurality of the candidate countries based on the information of the project performance score according to the national attractiveness score of each country Evaluation system for the ordering country. Combined with hardware,
A computer program stored on a computer-readable medium for implementing an ordering country evaluation method for supporting decision making of an overseas construction company of claim 1.

Images