Hoezen, M; van Rutten, J; Voordijk, H and Dewulf, G (2010) Towards better customized service-led contracts through the competitive dialogue procedure. Construction Management and Economics, 28(11), pp. 1177-1186. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Recently, for the procurement of complex contracts the European Commission (EC) has developed the competitive dialogue (CD) procedure, a procurement system aimed at aligning the complex demands of principals with the possible solutions of contractors. The major question is how, in the practice of procuring service-led contracts by the CD procedure, will the dialogue conversations be affected by tension between the CD procedure's principles of transparency and confidentiality? A single case study of a large infrastructural project procured through the CD procedure has been conducted to find an answer to this question. It is concluded that the dialogue offered by the CD procedure in the Dutch Second Coen Tunnel project helped to align the complex demands with the several available solutions without harming the confidentiality principle or stimulating cherry picking. The procedure could be improved by the provision of standardized documents and actual, adequate and improved information about the project context.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contractor selection; infrastructure; procurement |
| Index terms: | documents, procurement system, confidentiality, contractor selection, infrastructural project, tunnel, case study, transparency |
| Subjects: | professional ethics, contractual arrangements, tendering, infrastructure and transport systems, infrastructure engineering, professional development, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Procurement, Information Management, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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