Kwok, E C S; Ng, S H S and Tam, J C L (2009) Risk assessment as an explicit dimension for tender evaluation. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 162(3), pp. 117-120. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
Tendering plays a very important role in a project's life cycle and the outcome of the tendering process will have a direct impact on the overall project cost. It should be clear that in evaluating tenders, it is not just the bid price that counts. The quality of the selected contractor will in many ways affect the success of the project; that is delivery on time, within budget and to the required quality. The selection of a 'wrong' contractor could easily lead to late completion or over expenditure. Unfortunately, uncertainties of events and unpredictability of their outcome do exist at the tendering stage, the effect of which could be costly in some circumstances. To manage the risks associated with such uncertainties, the introduction of risk assessment as an explicit dimension in the tender evaluation process is proposed. In this approach, decision makers will be made aware of high-risk elements upfront so that more informed decisions can be made. With more supportive information in a complex decision-making process, it is hoped that project risks and, in turn, costs can be lowered as far as practicable.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | risk and probability analysis; tendering |
| Index terms: | decision-making process, life cycle, tendering process, dimension, risk assessment, project cost, probability analysis, tender evaluation |
| Subjects: | financial risk, tendering, economics, statistical analysis, decision analysis, value management, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Project Management, Risk Management, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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