Tendering factors considered by Syrian contractors

Wanous, M; Boussabaine, A H and Lewis, J (1998) Tendering factors considered by Syrian contractors. In: Hughes, W (ed.) Proceedings of 14th Annual ARCOM Conference, 9-11 September 1998, Reading, UK.

Abstract

For construction contractors, it is not an easy decision whether to bid or not to bid for a new project. That involves quantifying the combined impact of many factors and then producing a quick cost estimation for the project. All that should be done within a short limited time. Developing a decision-support system for making “bid/ no bid” and “mark up size” decisions will be of great help to contractors. This paper reports the progress of the first stage of developing a decision-support system to help contractors in bidding situations. The Syrian tendering system is presented and, through a questionnaire survey supported by six semi-structured interviews with interested expert contractors, thirty-eight factors were uncovered and ranked according to their importance to contractors operating in Syria. Meeting the “to-tender” conditions, financial capability of the client, and relations with and reputation of the client are the most important factors in the bidding decision. On the other hand, relation with other contractors/suppliers, the proportions to be subcontracted and the local customs are the least important factors in making this decision.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: practical bidding model; bid/no bid criteria; Syria
Index terms: bid/no-bid, bidding, construction contractor, questionnaire, Syria, survey, cost estimating, tendering system, interview, mark-up
Subjects: financial and cost management, bidding, political and administrative geography, practitioner, data collection methods, price determination, tendering
Topics: Roles and Professions, Procurement, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here