Hatush, Z A (1996) Contractor selection using the multiattribute utility theory. PhD thesis, University of Salford, UK.
Abstract
Literature and past research suggests that one of the reasons for the poor performance of the construction industry is due to the inappropriateness of the awarded contractor. In order to ensure a successful completion of a project, a comprehensive and careful assessment of contractors data in a prequalification stage is required. Appointing an appropriate contractor to carry out the construction work, therefore, becomes one of the most important tasks to ensure the success of a project. In this thesis the author has made a preliminary survey to investigate the bidding process currently used in the construction industry through literature survey, extensive interviews with the construction professionals and an industry wide questionnaire. The investigation has focused on the procedures of prequalification and bids evaluation, it also covers the list of criteria considered for selecting contractors in prequalification and bid evaluation stages. The thesis investigated the perceived relationship between contractor selection criteria (CSC) currently in use and predominant project success factors (PSF) in terms of time, cost and quality involving a sample of experienced construction professionals. This research is based on the premise that selection should concentrate on determining contractor potential for achieving project goals in terms of time, cost and quality. The study presented a quantitative technique to combine the contractor data in terms of these goals. The study also presented an evaluation strategy that involves the consideration both of the client goals as ends and contractor data as the means, the strategy based on the rnultiattribute utility theory for the frnal selection or rank ordering of the contractors. The selection is ultimately based on the preferences and the attitude of the decision maker toward risk. A real case study was used to validate the proposed methodology for contractor prequalification. The benefit of this work is that it provides a means using the PERT methodology to incorporate uncertainty andlor imprecision associated with the assessment of contractors data, this all in terms of the ultimate project success factors of time, cost, and quality. The utility technique proposed should help clients in selecting contractors and the contractors themselves for selecting sub-contractors in offering a means of broadening their analysis of tenderers beyond that of simply relying on tender values. It also alerts contractors to the importance of increasing their ability to satisfy the needs of the clients in terms of their ultimate project goals.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; case study; client; contractor selection; interview; prequalification; project success; sub-contractor; uncertainty; utility theory |
| Index terms: | construction professional, investigation, construction work, construction industry, contractor selection, case study, project success, bid evaluation, methodology, questionnaire, sub-contractor, preference, bidding, interview, client goal, utility theory, strategy, survey |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, professional development, management, tendering, decision-making and reasoning, research methods, industry analysis, economic theory, practitioner, data collection methods, client relations, bidding, operations management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder 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