Laryea, S (2011) Quality of tender documents: Case studies from the UK. Construction Management and Economics, 29(3), pp. 275-286. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Tendering is one of the stages in construction procurement that requires extensive information and documents exchange. However, tender documents are not always clear in practice. The aim of this study was to ascertain the clarity and adequacy of tender documents used in practice. Access was negotiated into two UK construction firms and the whole tender process for two projects was shadowed for six to seven weeks in each firm using an ethnographic approach. A significant amount of tender queries, amendments and addenda were recorded. This showed that quality of tender documentation is still a problem in construction despite the existence of Co-ordinated Project Information (1987) and British Standard 1192 (1984, 1990, 2007) that are meant to help in producing clear and consistent project information. Poor quality tender documents are a source of inaccurate estimates, claims and disputes on contracts. Six recommendations are presented to help in improving the quality of tender documentation. Further research is needed into the recommendations to help improve the quality of tender documents, perhaps in conjunction with an industry-wide investigation into the level of incorporation of CPI principles in practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; contractor; tender documentation; tendering; UK |
| Index terms: | documentation, construction firm, tender document, documents, case study, dispute, investigation, construction procurement, estimate |
| Subjects: | dispute resolution, data collection methods, organization, contractual arrangements, financial and cost management, professional development, tendering |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Information Management, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Procurement, Legal Issues |
| 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