Dissanayake, D M Nayana S (2017) Fuzzy multi-attribute analysis model for engineering-procurement-construction contractor selection. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
This research develops a Fuzzy Multi-Attribute Analysis (FMAA) model to select the most appropriate contractors for Engineering-Procurement-Construction (EPC) projects. It will enable EPC project owners to eliminate the over-reliance on subjective contractor selection and risks associated with incomplete information, imprecise data and vagueness in human decision making. With the combination of fuzzy set theory and multi-attribute analysis, this model addresses the fuzzy nature in human decision making and helps EPC clients achieve the best value of the contract.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Xia, Bo; Skitmore, Martin and Trigunarsyah, Bambang |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | engineering-procurement-construction; procurement; contractor selection; tender evaluation; delphi; fuzzy set theory; multi-criteria decision making; multi-attribute analysis |
| Index terms: | multi-attribute analysis, construction contractor, owner, fuzzy set theory, tender evaluation, contractor selection, decision-making, best value |
| Subjects: | practitioner, tendering, bidding, sociology, decision analysis, decision-making and optimization |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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