Agent-based negotiation mechanism for multi-project human resource allocation

References

• Allen, T. J., R. Katz, J. J. Grady and N. Slavin, “Project team aging and performance: The roles of project and functional managers,” R&D Management, 18, 295–308 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Amit, R. and M. Belcourt, “Human resources management processes: A value-creating source of competitive advantage,” European Management Journal, 17, 174–181 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Byars, L. L. and L. W. Rue, Human Resources Management, 5th ed., McGraw Hill, New York, NY (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Chao, K. M. and P. Norman, “An agent-based approach to engineering design,” Computers in Industry, 48, 17–27 (2002).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu, C. H., C. J. Chang and H. C. Cheng, “Empirical studies on inter-organizational collaborative product development,” ASME Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 6, 179–187 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Everett, H., “Generalized Lagrange multiplier method for solving problems of optimum allocation of resources,” Operations Research, 11, 339–417 (1963).
   Google Scholar
• FIPA, http://www.fipa.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Grinnell, S. K. and H. P. Apple, “When two bosses are better than one?,” Machine Design, January, 84–87 (1975).
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, M. H. A., B. Voeten and L. Kroep, “Human capacity allocation and project portfolio planning in practice,” International Journal of Project Management, 17, 181–188 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• JADETM, http://jade.cselt.it/.
   Google Scholar
• Jean-Charles de Borda, Mémoire sur Les Élections Au Scrutin [The Memory on the Elections], Historie de l’Académie Royale des Sciences, Paris (1781).
   Google Scholar
• Jennergren, P., “A price schedules decomposition algorithm for linear programming problems,” Econometrica, 41, 965–980 (1973).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kast, F. E. and J. E. Rosenzweig, Organization and Management: A Systems and Contingency Approach, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY (1985).
   Google Scholar
• Kochanski, J., P. Mastropolo and G. Ledford, “People solutions for R&D,” Research Technology Management, 46, 53–56 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Larson, E. W. and D. H. Gobeli, “Matrix management: contradictions and insights,” California Management Review, 29, 126–138 (1987).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, Y. I., Y. W. Chou, J. Y. Shiau and C. H. Chu, “Multi-agent negotiation based on price schedules algorithm for distributed collaborative design,” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24, 545–557 (2012).
   Google Scholar
• Lin, Y. I., K. W. Tien and C. H. Chu, “Multi-agent hierarchical negotiation based on augmented price schedules decomposition for distributed design,” Computers in Industry, 63, 597–609 (2012).
   Google Scholar
• Lin, Y. I., K. W. Tien and C. H. Chu, “A multi-target hierarchical negotiation mechanism for distributed design,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 2nd revision (2013).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pinto, J. K. and O. P. Kharbanda, “Project management and conflict resolution,” International Journal of Project Management, 26, 45–54 (1995).
   Google Scholar
• Pruitt, D. G., Negotiation behaviour, Academic Press, New York, NY (1981).
   Google Scholar
• Tong, T. K. L. and C. M. Tam, “Fuzzy optimisation of labour allocation by genetic algorithms,” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10, 146–155 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich, K. T. and S. D. Eppinger, Product Design and Development, 2nd ed., McGraw Hill, New York, NY (2011).
   Google Scholar
• Van der Merwe, A. P., “Multi-project management – Organizational structure and control,” International Journal of Project Management, 15, 223–233 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Wu, Y. K., “On the manpower allocation within matrix organization: a fuzzy linear programming approach,” European Journal of Operational Research, 183, 384–393 (2007).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, T., N. Ye and D. Zhang, “Comparison of distributed methods for resource allocation,” International Journal of Production Research, 43, 515–536 (2005).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar