Zhao, N (2021) Developing a framework for roading infrastructure projects procurement system selection. PhD thesis, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand.
Abstract
The ability to select an optimal procurement system is critical to project success and can potentially contribute to the sustainability of the construction society. Although its importance has been recognised, current systematic approaches for procurement system selection (PSS) are far from efficient or automated. Although New Zealand has taken a series of steps to expedite the rate in adopting innovation procurement, only a few infrastructure projects have applied novel procurement strategies successfully in the last decade. This thesis aims to improve the quality of the decision-making process for New Zealand roading infrastructure procurement. A mixed research strategy was employed to construct the framework of a PSS procedure, describing potential improvements in the outcomes of procurement activities.The research started with a systematic analysis of the relevant literature to identify the key themes of PSS. Using a pilot study and interviews, the research then investigated these core components of PSS from the perspectives of public administrators, contractors and consultancies within the New Zealand roading infrastructure projects sector. By analysing relevant documents and the interview data, an algorithmic decision-making framework was developed with the aid of computer programming. Finally, a case study was employed to validate the framework. The framework is designed to achieve the dual outcomes of enriching the cognition of PSS practices and promoting the understanding of alternative procurement options. It is anticipated that these insights into the standardisation of procurement activities will not only help the roading infrastructure sector in New Zealand to improve procurement success but also other sectors that have similar decision-making conditions. Furthermore, the insights could aid other countries with small construction markets to gain a better understanding of effective and efficient PSS processes, as these countries often struggle to determine a procurement system that is seemingly successful elsewhere.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Ying, F and Tookey, J |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | sustainability; decision making; innovation; markets; programming; project success; New Zealand; case study; market; infrastructure project; interview |
| Index terms: | strategy, interview, society, infrastructure sector, consultancy, decision-making, cognition, documents, programming, decision-making process, procurement strategy, project success, New Zealand, case study, markets, infrastructure project, option, construction market, standardization, procurement system |
| Subjects: | communities and social development, market analysis, cognitive psychology, Geography, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, programming, organization, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, decision analysis, professional development, project management theory and practice, management, performance measurement, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Procurement, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Project Management, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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