Christodoulou, S E (2008) A bid-unbalancing method for lowering a contractor's financial risk. Construction Management and Economics, 26(12), pp. 1291-1302. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
A method is presented for unbalancing bids and optimizing the allocation of overall project profits to individual activities by considering the financial parameters of a project (bid mark-up and projected cash flow), in conjunction with lowering the exposure to possible financial disorder in the project. The method utilizes the general concept of entropy and a variant of it (hereby termed 'monetary entropy', HM) as measures of a project's perceived level of disorder, in order to distribute the total bid mark-up to the project activities. The entropy-based bid-unbalancing method seeks to minimize a possible financial disorder (the monetary entropy) resulting from limited monetary resources available to the project and from badly developed project cash flows. The intended primary users of the method are contractors during the initial bidding stage of a project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bid-unbalancing; cash flow optimization; entropy; project profitability |
| Index terms: | profit, entropy, mark-up, cash flow, bidding, exposure, profitability |
| Subjects: | price determination, thermal systems, public and environmental health, financial management, economic analysis, bidding |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Procurement, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 1 C |
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