Govender, N; Laryea, S and Watermeyer, R (2022) A framework for assessing quality of tender documents. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 12(4), pp. 573-589. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: Several researchers in the construction industry have mentioned that quality of tender documents is declining without tangibly assessing quality. Similarly, in practice, no standardised instrument exists to assess tender document quality. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to develop a framework to assess the quality of tender documents produced by built environment professionals in the construction industry. A framework was chosen to address the gaps in theory and practice as it provides a flexible but structured mechanism to assess tender document quality. Design/methodology/approach: The research methodology contained three stages, namely: multi-investigator triangulation, a workshop with infrastructure experts and framework development and validation. A consolidated list of key quality indicators was developed following the literature review and multi-investigator triangulation. The indicators were discussed with ten experts in the South African construction industry, who were responsible for validating and providing insight on whether additional indicators were required. This informed development of the framework. Findings: This paper proposes a framework to assess tender document quality by evaluating six key quality indicators namely: accuracy, clarity, completeness, standardisation, relevance and certainty. Research limitations/implications: The framework is limited to the assessment of tender document quality in the construction industry and is suited to the “Design by Employer” contracting strategy. From an academic perspective, this paper provides researchers with a framework to measure and benchmark quality of tender documents in future studies. Practical implications: This framework can be used by clients to continuously assess and benchmark quality of tender documents produced by professionals. Originality/value: A comprehensive and standardised approach to assess tender document quality was not available in the construction literature or the construction industry. Therefore, this paper addressed this gap in knowledge, by providing consumers (clients and contractors) of tender documents and researchers a mechanism to assess quality.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; quality; tender documents |
| Index terms: | accuracy, literature review, strategy, framework development, workshop, triangulation, future study, construction industry, validation, tender document, research methodology, built environment, quality indicator, standardization, methodology |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, contractual arrangements, project delivery, construction type, research design and methodology, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, professional development, management, performance measurement, research methods, tendering |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Procurement, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Urban Studies, Quality Management |
| 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