El-Sayegh, S M (2009) Multi-criteria decision support model for selecting the appropriate construction management at risk firm. Construction Management and Economics, 27(4), pp. 385-398. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Selecting the appropriate firm is of paramount importance especially when using a unique delivery method such as construction management at risk. In addition to general contracting services, the construction management at risk firm provides construction management services throughout the design and construction phases. A new decision support model is proposed to assist owners in the selection decision. Key selection factors were identified through a literature review. They are divided into four categories: firm characteristics; technical and commercial bid; construction management services; and general contracting services. Each consists of five selection factors. The selection criteria were determined using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) based on a questionnaire that was sent to construction professionals. The proposed model consists of five functions: strategic alignment; selection criteria; initial screening; firms' evaluations; and sensitivity analysis. The heart of the model is the use of the AHP to develop the decision criteria and compare candidate firms. A case study is also presented to demonstrate the application of the model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; construction management at risk; contracting; decision support models; selection factors |
| Index terms: | bidding, management service, questionnaire, literature review, decision support, sensitivity analysis, analytical hierarchy process, heart, selection criteria, construction professional, decision criteria, design and construction, delivery method, owner, screening, case study |
| Subjects: | tendering, medical science and clinical practice, management, professional development, decision analysis, sociology, delivery method, environmental hazards, decision-making and optimization, data collection methods, bidding, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Health and Safety, Information Management, Research Practice |
| 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