Ghazali, F E M; Rashid, S A and Sadullah, A F M (2018) Disparity between the procurement process best practices for PPP projects in the UK and Malaysia. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 171(6), pp. 264-270. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
Even though a typical public-private partnership (PPP) procurement process framework has been implemented in various countries, the specific procurement processes have not been able to be implemented due to the differences in the structure of governance and culture as well as the existing construction industry environment of each country. This paper aims to identify the differences and gaps in the PPP procurement process in Malaysia with the process implemented in the UK, including Private Finance 2, through an extensive comparative study. The method that has been used in this study is the analysis of the literature review about the PPP procurement flow process for both countries by determining their similarity and disparity. For the practice that has been implemented in Malaysia, there are several series of interviews that have been conducted to get the data. The UK procurement process focuses mainly on achieving detailed procurement processes. The procurement process in Malaysia, meanwhile, provides limited decision authority to public sector clients as most of the procurement decisions are solely being made by the cabinet ministers, which conclusively has led to biased outcomes as a result of minimal competitive tendering and the disregard of some key significant procurement activities.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts & law; procurement; public-private partnerships |
| Index terms: | governance, Malaysia, private finance, partnership, procurement decision, best practice, comparative study, disparity, construction industry, procurement process, competitive tendering, interview, literature review, public-sector client |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, business, data collection methods, industry analysis, procurement strategy, sociology, partnership management, contractual arrangements, social justice, Geography, tendering |
| Topics: | Ethics, Procurement, Geographical Context, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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