Oo, B L and Tang, O S (2023) Information feedback in construction contract bidding: Perceptions of Hong Kong contractors. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(6), pp. 1044-1052. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Contractors learn from their experiences in which feedback information plays a key role to enable experiential learning in recurrent bidding. However, little is known about how contractors perceive and act in response to varying levels of bidding feedback information from construction clients. Focussing on construction procurement in Hong Kong, this exploratory study examines: (i) the level of bidding information feedback from public, private and quasi-government client groups, and (ii) the sources, types, uses and adequacy of bidding feedback information from these client groups from contractors' perspective. Data was collected using online questionnaire. The results provide strong evidence that the respondents perceive bidding feedback information from the three client groups are inadequate. They have heavily relied on multiple and/or 'unofficial' sources for obtaining bidding feedback information. Nonetheless, there is suggestive evidence of different possible uses of bidding feedback information among the contractors, which could substantially affect bidding outcomes. This study provides a much-needed insight into clients' information feedback conditions and how feedback information might be used by contractors in competitive bidding. The research implication for clients is that they should take into consideration contractors' need for feedback information in their procurement design so as to enhance efficiency in their procurement practices.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; feedback; information; tendering |
| Index terms: | exploratory study, experiential learning, competitive bidding, bidding, evidence, questionnaire, construction client, Hong Kong, efficiency, construction procurement, construction contract |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, bidding, practitioner, learning methods, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, contract type, Geography, performance management, research methods |
| Topics: | Education, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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