A needs-based methodology for classifying construction clients and selecting contractors

Abstract

Clients' needs are inadequately evaluated in project schemes. Without a precise establishment of clients' preferences, the essential criteria for project implementation and especially contractor evaluation cannot be appreciated fully. It is not surprising therefore that subjective decisions have prevailed in tender evaluations and clients' needs have not been satisfied completely. Objective contractor evaluation will be realized only when clients' needs and contractors' capabilities can be quantified and matched reliably. The methodology described herein rests on identifying clients' needs preferences as comprehensively as possible at project inception and progressing to identifying contractors who can satisfy them optimally; relying on 'multidimensional scaling' and 'cluster analysis' techniques. The investigations suggest that clients' project needs are not along the traditional classifications of private, public and developer clients; a reclassification of clients into five needs-based groups is proposed. A new contractor evaluation methodology matching client satisfaction to attainment of established needs in project schemes has been developed for bidding purposes.Classification, Clients, Tender Evaluation, Scaling, Briefing,

Whole Life Performance Assessment: Critical Success Factors

“…In addition to the mean score, the five-point scale was transformed to relative importance indices using the relative index ranking technique (A.Shash 1993;Chan and Au 2009;Chinyio et al 1998;Kometa et al 1995;Tarawneh 2004), to determine the rankings of the factors and verify the evaluation by the mean score. The relative importance indices (RII) were calculated using the following formula:…”

Factor analysis of construction practices for infrastructure projects in Korea

“…Various researches on selection criteria and selection methods have been actively conducted (Chinyio et al, 1998;Hatush and Skitmore 1998;Holt et al, 1994;Lo et al, 1998;Samuelson and Levitt 1982). In other words, selecting a contractor that can successfully execute the project implies selecting a contractor that has the least possibility of failure.…”

Accounting for rater credibility when evaluating AEC subcontractors

“…However, the importance of the sources of this type of information has generally been neglected in earlier research. To support the evaluation of bidding AEC subcontractors, construction management researchers have proposed tools, which incorporate methodologies such as fuzzy logic (Okoroth and Torrance, 1999), analytical hierarchy process (Sik-Wah Fong and Kit-Yung Choi, 2000), multi-attribute utility theory (Russel et al, 1992;Holt et al, 1995;Holt, 1996;Wanous et al, 2000), and multi-dimensional scaling techniques (Chinyio et al, 1998). However, also in this body of research, little attention has been given to the problem of evaluating subjective information provided by peer industry practitioners using qualitative measures.…”