Hartono, B and Yap, C M (2011) Understanding risky bidding: A prospect-contingent perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 29(6), pp. 579-593. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
A descriptive research school of thought provides the context for an examination of contractors' risky bid markup decisions in a competitive bidding setting. Grounded in prospect theory and the one-reason decision model, a contingency-based theoretical model was developed to explain and to predict bid mark-up decisions in light of four identified determinants, namely: perceived 'rate of returns', 'revenues', 'project backlogs' and 'project strategic importance'. Three scenarios according to this model were verified by means of a self-administered survey in the Singapore construction industry. By using cluster analysis, five groups of bidders with distinctive bid profiles were identified and the associated bid mark-ups were calculated. The emerging groups provide an empirical illustration on how the theoretical model is utilized. For instance, one group of bidders (n = 16) demonstrates a scenario of the model in which participating bidders had considered the reported project bid as having high strategic importance to their organizations and hence made aggressive, low bid mark-ups. The theoretically grounded framework could be used by contractors to improve their own bidding strategy in anticipating the likely behaviour of the competitors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidding; cluster analysis; contingency; mark-up; prospect theory |
| Index terms: | bidding, prospect theory, cluster analysis, strategy, revenue, survey, mark-up, competitive bidding, construction industry, determinant, bidder, Singapore |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, risk assessment, bidding, data analysis and analytics, economic analysis, management, Geography, industry analysis, price determination |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Procurement, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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