Russell, J S; Hancher, D E and Skibniewski, M J (1992) Contractor prequalification data for construction owners. Construction Management and Economics, 10(2), pp. 117-135. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
In this paper, an industry evaluation of the perceived impact of various decision factors and subfactors on the contractor prequalification decision-making process has been conducted and the results are presented herein. The three organization types participating in the study were public owners, private owners, and construction managers. An analysis of the mean impact responses by organization type has been performed. An analysis of the correlation coefficients among the questionnaire items has also been completed. The mean impact responses of the various organization types were evaluated for statistical significance. The results indicate a significant statistical difference in the value of the perceived impact among public owners when compared to private owners or construction managers, while private owners and construction managers responded similarly. These results provide documented evidence of organizational similarities and differences that are, in some cases, intuitively perceived to exist. A sumary of the study results is also highlighted.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction contracts; contractor prequalification; contractor qualification; decision-making; owners |
| Index terms: | construction contract, qualification, owner, decision-making process, decision-making, evidence, questionnaire, construction manager, public owner |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, profession, contract type, educational resources, decision analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Procurement, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Research Practice, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PA |
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