Marzouk, M and Moselhi, O (2003) A decision support tool for construction bidding. Construction Innovation, 3(2), pp. 111-124. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
A reliable estimate of markup is essential for successful bid proposals. This paper presents a decision support model for construction bidding. The developed model can assist contractors in estimating markup, and owners and/or their agents in evaluating bid proposals. The model is generic and can be used as a tool to evaluate different alternatives in engineering, procurement, and construction. It utilizes the multi-attribute utility theory and the analytic hierarchy process and makes use of their advantages. Unlike models developed for similar purposes, the proposed model provides a decision support environment for the two functions; that is, estimating markup and evaluating bids. It also enables the user to construct the decision hierarchy that best suits his/her company's business environment and bidding strategy in a flexible manner. It accounts for the decision maker's attitude towards risk. Two numerical examples are presented to demonstrate the use and capabilities of the proposed model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytic hierarchy process; competitive bidding; evaluation of bid proposals; markup; mlti-attribute decision support |
| Index terms: | competitive bidding, owner, strategy, estimate, multi-attribute utility theory, bidding, proposal, decision support, agent, estimating |
| Subjects: | decision-making and optimization, project planning, financial and cost management, sociology, management, decision analysis, bidding, practitioner |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Cost Management, Project Management, 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