Vassallo, J M (2007) Implementation of quality criteria in tendering and regulating infrastructure management contracts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(8), pp. 553-561. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In recent years, several public authorities have been making advances in developing bidding terms for contracts regulating the management of infrastructure. Up to now these bidding terms have focused on granting the contract to the bidder who, having agreed to comply with the requirement of a specified level of quality, as stipulated in the contract, submits the lowest tender in terms of price. As a result, the experience of implementing quality-related incentives for the management of infrastructure has been scarce. This paper demonstrates that, if infrastructure quality is verifiable and the social benefit derived from it is measurable, there is a better way both to tender and to regulate those contracts, based on a combination of price and quality standards. In addition, the paper proposes a new procurement procedure to encourage bidders to provide better quality levels. The last part of the paper provides a practical example of how to calculate a quality index for contracts regulating the management of infrastructure. The paper ends with a set of conclusions related to the advantages of the new tendering mechanism and its possible application.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bids; contract administration; infrastructure; regulations |
| Index terms: | implementation, bidding, contract administration, lowest tender, social benefit, infrastructure management, quality standard, regulation, public authority, bidder |
| Subjects: | bidding, contract management, infrastructure engineering, theoretical framing, administrative law, quality assurance, contractual arrangements, tendering, political science |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Quality Management, Procurement, Contract Administration, Governance, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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