Oo, B L; Abdul-Aziz, A R and Lim, Y M (2011) Information feedback and learning in construction bidding. Construction Economics and Building, 11(3), pp. 33-44. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Information feedback in recurrent construction bidding is an important variable in optimal procurement design. Contractors tend to optimize their bids in recurrent bidding with positive reviews of historic bids. Our experiment examines the effects of no and partial information feedback on the bidding trends of (inexperienced) student bidders', and the extent to which their bidding tends to agree with the behavioural patterns proposed by learning theory. The results show that the variations in bids over time for both information feedback levels are statistically significant. Although the bidders with partial bidding feedback are more likely to vary their bids as indicated by learning theory, their bids are less competitive than those with no bidding feedback information. Construction clients would need to consider the information feedback in their procurement of construction services to achieve efficiency in construction bidding.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; experiment; feedback; learning |
| Index terms: | experiment, construction client, bidding, bidder, efficiency, variation, learning theory |
| Subjects: | bidding, performance management, learning theory, data collection methods, practitioner, contractual condition |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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