Ahadzi, M K (2004) Public private partnerships in infrastructure procurement: A generic multi-attribute hierarchical model for minimising pre-contract time and cost overruns (GMAHM). PhD thesis, Heriot-Watt University, UK.
Abstract
The pre-contract phase of the Public Private Partnerships (PPP) procurement process in the UK has suffered the problem of bidding cost and time overruns since its introduction in the early 1990s. The main contribution of this piece of research is a greater understanding of the competency gaps within the public and private sector organisations that contribute to these procurement problems. A Generic Multi-Attribute Hierarchical Model is developed that identifies those characteristic attributes of the project environment that significantly influence the ability to negotiate PPP contracts in a timely and cost effective manner. The differences in perception between public and private sector parties on the relative importance of the attributes that contribute to successful negotiation are investigated. The study adopted the quantitative research methodology, using descriptive statistics to investigate the extent of bidding time and cost overruns. Inferential statistics are used to develop, test and validate the generic model and investigate the perceptual differences between the public and private sectors on the respective negotiation success attributes. The sample was drawn from the health, schools and civil engineering sectors within the UK. The research yielded three important outcomes. Firstly, the pre-contract time and bidding cost are generally high for PPP projects with the health and education sector projects experiencing exceptionally high overruns. Secondly, the study identified the public sector client's organisational and technical attributes as the most significant ones that influence the efficiency of the pre-contract procurement process, followed by those of the Consortium, the Project and the External Environment. Thirdly, though there is general agreement within the public and private sectors on the hierarchical order of significance of the main attributes, differences in opinion occurred on such sub-attributes as the public sector client sensitising public opinion on projects, the consortium's openness during negotiations and their early involvement of the stakeholders, including their readiness to accept risks.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | UK; bidding; civil engineering; client; consortium; education; negotiation; private sector; public private partnerships; public sector; quantitative research; schools |
| Index terms: | quantitative research, time overrun, efficiency, consortium, public sector, private sector, cost overrun, negotiation, public private partnership, statistics, procurement process, relative importance, overrun, public-sector client, methodology, private sector organization, bidding |
| Subjects: | research methods, organization, contractual arrangements, bidding, performance management, sociology, project controls, conflict resolution, partnership management, industry analysis, administrative law, mathematical modelling, risk assessment, financial and cost management, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Procurement, Risk Management, Quality Management, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Stakeholder Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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