Fong, P S W and Choi, S K Y (2000) Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process. Construction Management and Economics, 18(5), pp. 547-557. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Some contractor selection methods currently in existence are criticized as incomplete and biased, and lacking consideration in terms of the contractor's ability to achieve simultaneously, time, cost, quality and safety standards. This research examines an alternative contractor selection model called the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), which will help construction clients to identify contractors with the best potential to deliver satisfactory outcomes in a final contractor selection process which is not based simply on the lowest bid. The AHP comprises three parts: hierarchic structure, prioritization procedure, and calculation of results. This model is tested by a hypothetical scenario where three contractor candidates are evaluated. The criteria used for contractor selection in the model have been identified, and the significance of each criterion has been arrived at by conducting a questionnaire survey in public organizations in Hong Kong. Comparisons are made by ranking the aggregate scores of each candidate with regard to their performance against each of the criteria, and the candidate associated with the highest scores is the best contractor on this occasion.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | analytical hierarchy process; contractor selection; final selection; prequalification; tender price |
| Index terms: | contractor selection, Hong Kong, construction client, aggregate, analytical hierarchy process, survey, tender price, questionnaire, safety standards |
| Subjects: | decision-making and optimization, occupational health and safety management, Geography, tendering, practitioner, materials science, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Procurement, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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