RADIOELECTRONIC AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS

The evaluation of risk and uncertainty in the context of software project management is the subject of this paper. This paper discusses the difficulties faced by project managers in handling uncertainty brought on by the complex nature of software projects and the ever evolving requirements of technology. A review of the literature, data production, visualization, statistical analysis, and mathematical modeling are included in this study. The goal of this study is to create a methodical approach to assist project managers in making decisions by considering the inherent uncertainty in software development and to find approaches and procedures that may successfully reduce risks, improve decision-making, and eventually result in the implementation of successful projects. The following tasks were carried out: to evaluate risk and uncertainty by examining the state-of-the-art in decision theory and its applications in software project management; to develop an integrated strategy that blends Monte Carlo Simulation with Decision Trees to assess risk and uncertainty in software project management; to generate data, visualize it, and perform statistical analysis to comprehend how project outcomes, costs, and time are affected; to identify important variables affecting project results and decision-making using decision trees; to use Monte Carlo simulation to create project scenarios and weigh the likelihood of each; and to supply project managers with knowledge and suggestions to help them make informed decisions and successfully manage risks. Methods. To evaluate risk and uncertainty in software project management, this paper analyzes the decision theory approaches currently used as well as Decision Trees and Monte Carlo Simulation techniques. Results. This study offers thorough insights into how project results, costs, and duration vary among various techniques. The critical factors that have a substantial influence on project success are shown through decision trees. According to the study’s findings, combining decision theory and statistical analysis equips project managers to make wise decisions despite uncertainty. Conclusions. Project managers may improve decision making, risk reduction, and overall project success by applying these cutting-edge approaches. To adapt these techniques to unique software project management contexts and real-world situations, further study and implementation in practice are necessary. With the use of such techniques, the software development sector would be better able to manage the complexity of projects and provide good results within set financial and time parameters.

software project management; risk assessment; uncertainty; decision theory; Decision Trees; Monte Carlo Simulation; project outcomes; decision-making; statistical analysis; resource allocation; project success

Badings, T., Simão, T. D., Suilen, M., & Jansen, N. Decision-making under uncertainty: beyond probabilities. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 2023, vol. 25, pp. 375-391. DOI: 10.1007/s10009-023-00704-3.

Burns, B. L., Barney, J. B., Angus, R. W., & Herrick, H. N. Enrolling stakeholders under conditions of risk and uncertainty. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2016, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 97-106. DOI: 10.1002/sej.1209.

Strielkina, A., & Tetskyi, A. Methodology for assessing satisfaction with requirements at the early stages of the software development process. Radioelektronni i komp'uterni sistemi – Radioelectronic and computer systems, 2023, no. 1, pp. 197-206. DOI: 10.32620/reks.2023.1.16.

Digital technologies for a new future (LC/TS.2021/43), Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Santiago, 2021. 95 p. Available at: https://www.cepal.org/sites/default/files/publication/files/46817/S2000960_en.pdf (accessed 20.06.2023).

Mentis, M. Managing project risks and uncer¬tainties. Forest ecosystems, 2015, vol. 2, no. 1, article no. 2, pp. 1-14. DOI: 10.1186/s40663-014-0026-z.

Dabo, T. Nailing the Decision-Making Process: A Project Manager's Guide. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353934618_Nailing_the_Decision-Making_Process_A_Project_Manager%27s_Guide (accessed 20.06.2023).

Shad, F., Gul, M., & Zahid, M. Leadership And Decision Making In The Project Management Life Cycle: A Knowledge Management Perspective. Journal of Business & Tourism, 2019, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 89-97. DOI: 10.34260/jbt.v5i2.142.

Mousavi, S. A., Seiti, H., Hafezalkotob, A., Asian, S., & Mobarra, R. Application of risk-based fuzzy decision support systems in new product development: An R-VIKOR approach. Applied Soft Computing, 2021, vol. 109, article no. 107456, pp. 1-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107456.

Leong, J., Yee, K. M., Baitsegi, O., Palanisamy, L., & Ramasamy, R. K. Hybrid project management between traditional software development lifecycle and agile based product development for future sustainability. Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, no. 2, article no. 1121. DOI: 10.3390/su15021121.

Alves, L. M., Souza, G., Ribeiro, P., & Machado, R. J. Longevity of risks in software development projects: a comparative analysis with an academic environment. Procedia Computer Science, 2021, vol. 181, pp. 827-834. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.236.

Merigó, J. M. Decision-making under risk and uncertainty and its application in strategic management. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 2015, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 93-116. DOI: 10.3846/16111699.2012.661758.

Bélyácz, I., & Daubner, K. Uncertainity of risk and increasing risk of uncertainty in business decisions. Economy and Finance: English Language Edition of Gazdaság és Pénzügy, 2021, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 264-312. DOI: 10.33908/EF.2021.3.2.

Edwards, J. A., Snyder, F. J., Allen, P. M., Makinson, K. A., & Hamby, D. M. Decision making for risk management: a comparison of graphical methods for presenting quantitative uncertainty. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 2012, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 2055-2070. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01839.x.

Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation research part E: logistics and transportation review, 2019, vol. 125, pp. 285-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.001.

Zakaria, A., Ismail, F. B., Lipu, M. H., & Hannan, M. A. Uncertainty models for stochastic optimization in renewable energy applications. Renewable Energy, 2020, vol. 145, pp. 1543-1571. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.07.081.

Abdel-Basset, M., Gunasekaran, M., Mohamed, M., & Chilamkurti, N. RETRACTED: A framework for risk assessment, management and evaluation: Economic tool for quantifying risks in supply chain. Future Generation Computer Systems, 2019, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 489-502. DOI: 10.1016/j.future.2018.08.035.

Pournader, M., Kach, A., & Talluri, S. A review of the existing and emerging topics in the supply chain risk management literature. Decision sciences, 2020, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 867-919. DOI: 10.1111/deci.12470.

Loquercio, A., Segu, M., & Scaramuzza, D. A general framework for uncertainty estimation in deep learning. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2020, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 3153-3160. DOI: 10.1109/LRA.2020.¬2974682.

Cameron, R., Sankaran, S., & Scales, J. Mixed methods use in project management research. Project Management Journal, 2015, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 90-104. DOI: 10.1002/pmj.21484.

Alves, J. L., Ferreira, E. A., & de Nadae, J. Crisis and risks in engineering project management: A review. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2021, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1-17. DOI: 10.14488/BJOPM.2021.026.

Wickham, H. et al. The Grammar of Graphics. Package ‘ggplot2’. Version 3.4.3. Repository CRAN, 2023. 304 p. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ggplot2/ggplot2.pdf (accessed 20.08.2023).

Therneau, T. et al. Recursive Partitioning and Regression Trees. Package ‘rpart’. Version 4.1.19. Repository CRAN, 2022. 34 p. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rpart/rpart.pdf (accessed 20.08.2023).