Seydel, J and Olson, D L (1990) Bids considering multiple criteria. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 116(4), pp. 609-623. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Typically, the only criterion quantitatively considered in competitive bidding optimization is profit criterion. This may or may not lead to suboptimal decisions when a decision maker’s total utility is considered, depending upon the importance of profit relative to other criteria, such as loss avoidance or work force continuity. Common sense generally provides a basis for subjective modification of profit-based bidding strategies in order to incorporate additional criteria. However, the more complex the situation, the more difficult it becomes to determine what strategy modifications are appropriate. This paper presents a quantitative method for incorporating decision-maker preferences into the bidding process when multiple criteria are to be considered. The method is based upon the merging of stochastic bidding models with the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Inputs are cost data, competitor data, and decision-maker preferences, while output is a set of composite weights by which alternative bid markups may be ranked by multiple criteria.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | analytical hierarchy process, cost data, composite, bidding, preference, quantitative method, profit, strategy, competitive bidding |
| Subjects: | accounting and finance, decision-making and reasoning, management, decision-making and optimization, materials science, economic analysis, data analysis and analytics, bidding |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Cost Management, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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