TenSeM: a multicriteria and multidecision-makers' model in tender evaluation

In tender evaluation, there appears to be a lack of a realistic working models capable of simultaneously (1) compiling multiple decision-makers' inputs, (2) incorporating risk and uncertainty, and (3) offering computer interaction that makes a model flexible to any change in situation. Thus, the research has developed a more realistic working model including the necessary capabilities mentioned. The vital theory behind the model was a combination of a utility function and a social welfare function. The model was divided into two main steps (step1: evaluating contractor ability and step2: evaluating tenders) consisting of three main processes: (1) the contractor ability criteria selection process; (2) the contractor ability criteria balancing/measuring process; and (3) bid price and contractor ability balancing/measuring process. The model incorporated computer interaction in which Microsoft Excel performed calculation tasks while Visual Basic for Application (VBA) was coded for user interaction. To obtain a realistic working product, the model was tested for user friendliness, verification, sensitivity analysis, and validation. The test has shown that the multicriteria and multidecision-makers' model, TenSeM, is a rational and realistic approach in solving a tender evaluation problem.

[1]  Za Hatush.  Contractor selection using the multiattribute utility theory , 1996 .

[2]  Martin Skitmore,et al.  Assessment and evaluation of contractor data against client goals using PERT approach , 1997 .

[3]  J. Diekmann,et al.  Cost-Plus Contractor Selection: A Case Study , 1981 .

[4]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS: ENGINEERING PLANNING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT , 1990 .

[5]  Zohar J. Herbsman,et al.  MULTIPARAMETER BIDDING SYSTEM - INNOVATION IN CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION , 1992 .

[6]  John Walkenbach,et al.  Microsoft Excel 2000 Power Programming with VBA , 1999 .

[7]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[8]  Richard J. Lipton,et al.  Social processes and proofs of theorems and programs , 1977, POPL.

[9]  Martin Skitmore,et al.  Contractor selection using multi criteria utility theory: an additive mode , 1998 .

[10]  Jeffrey S. Russell,et al.  QUALIFIER-1: CONTRACTOR PREQUALIFICATION MODEL , 1990 .

[11]  Gary David Holt,et al.  Incorporating project specific criteria and client utility into the evaluation of construction tenderers , 1994 .

[12]  Simon French,et al.  Multi-Objective Decision Analysis with Engineering and Business Applications , 1983 .

[13]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Multiple criteria decision making , 1994 .

[14]  Van Uu Nguyen,et al.  Tender evaluation by fuzzy sets , 1985 .

[15]  Miroslaw J. Skibniewski,et al.  Qualifier-2: Knowledge-Based System for Contractor Prequalification , 1990 .

[16]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[17]  Gary David Holt,et al.  A conceptual alternative to current tendering practice , 1993 .

[18]  Gary David Holt,et al.  Evaluating performance potential in the selection of construction contractors , 1994 .

[19]  Jared L. Cohon,et al.  Multiobjective programming and planning , 2004 .

[20]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  Multiobjective Decision Analysis With Engineering and Business Applications , 1983 .

[21]  John M. Cozzolino,et al.  Fundamentals of Operations Research for Management. , 1976 .