Shash, A A (1998) Subcontractors' bidding decisions. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(2), pp. 101-106. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Bid decisions by subcontractors are complex due to the uncertainty about many factors affecting their outcomes. This study was able to identify, through a questionnaire survey, many factors characterizing the bid decision-making process. The questionnaire was mailed in August 1995 to 320 subcontractors in Colorado. The results indicate that the contractor's credit history, habit in the issuance of periodical payments, and leadership and capability in planning and managing the project are identified as the top factors that affect a subcontractor's decision to bid for a project. The subcontractor's previous relationship with the contractor, the contractor's capabilities, financial capacity, current work load, and specialty, and the prospect of future business relationships are the highest ranked factors affecting quotation decision. Suggestions are advanced to subcontractors for improving their bidding decisions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | questionnaire, decision to bid, bidding, subcontractor, habit, history, survey, periodical, business relationship, decision-making process |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, architectural and construction history, bidding, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner, data collection methods, research dissemination and communication, strategic management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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