S Nmez, M; Yang, J B and Holt, G D (2001) Addressing the contractor selection problem using an evidential reasoning approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(3), pp. 198-210. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Selecting the best' main contractor is a complex decision process for construction clients. It requires a large number of criteria to be simultaneously measured and evaluated. Many of these criteria are related to one another in a complex way and therefore, they very often conflict insofar as improvement in one often results in decline of another(s). Furthermore, as contractors' attributes are expressed in both quantitative and qualitative terms, decision-makers have to base their judgements on both quantitative data and experiential subjective assessments. In this paper, the evidential reasoning (ER) approach (which is capable of processing both quantitative and qualitative measures) is applied as a means of solving the contractor selection problem (CSP). The process of building a multiple criteria decision model of a hierarchical structure is presented, in which both quantitative and qualitative information is represented in a unified manner. The CSP is then fully investigated using the ER approach. Both the advantages of applying this model in practice and the analysis process itself are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bidder evaluation; contractor selection; evidential reasoning; linguistic variables; multiple criteria decision analysis; preference elicitation |
| Index terms: | bidder, main contractor, contractor selection, decision analysis, decision process, construction client, preference, reasoning |
| Subjects: | practitioner, bidding, tendering, decision-making and reasoning, decision analysis, cognitive psychology |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Procurement, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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