Jaselskis, E J and Russell, J S (1992) Risk analysis approach to selection of contractor evaluation method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(4), pp. 814-821. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Every project owner is faced with the contract administration decision of what evaluation method to select to adequately establish and ensure the qualification of candidate construction contractors. The evaluation methods available include (1) owner-contractor prequalification, (2) surety bonding, or (3) owner-contractor prequalification along with surety bonding. This paper describes an investigation into these evaluation methods and their impact on project outcome: (1) failure or (2) nonfailure. Failure is defined in this study as a significant breach of the contractor's legal responsibilities to the owner (for example, bankruptcy or material breach of contract related to meeting desired project objectives such as cost, schedule, and quality). Data were collected using a questionnaire survey and personal interviews. With regard to the questionnaire survey, 85 different organizations responsed and provided a total of 120 projects; 47 involved a contractor failure. Twenty industry experts provided probabilities associated with the various project outcomes. Expected value theory is used to determine expected outcomes of relevant project performance parameters. Results demonstrate that better owner-contractor evaluation leads to enhanced project performance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | survey, surety, interview, breach of contract, risk analysis, construction contractor, expected value, questionnaire, project outcome, owner, qualification, contract administration, bankruptcy, investigation, project performance |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, project completion, data collection methods, practitioner, dispute resolution, sociology, statistical analysis, environmental hazards, educational resources, contract management, project management theory and practice, warranties |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Education, Contract Administration, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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