The use of time and cost utility for construction contract award under European Union Legislation

Abstract Public Awarding Authorities around the world aim at procuring construction contracts that will achieve project completion within predefined cost, time and quality constraints. Nowadays, national and supranational public works programmes define strict completion dates at the client's risk of losing funding if deadlines are not met. The choice of procurement method is therefore of utmost importance. In most cases, the client's award is based on financial offers only. As the construction time for project completion within funding programme targets is extremely important, it should also be considered as an award criterion. In this paper, the most common award methods are evaluated and a new one is proposed. The award criterion considered is the most economically advantageous tender as defined in the European Union Legislation and takes into account the construction cost and completion time. The evaluation of both financial and time offers is carried out by implementing utility theory. An illustrative example is provided.

[1]  Ekambaram Palaneeswaran,et al.  Recent advances and proposed improvements in contractor prequalification methodologies , 2001 .

[2]  T. Saaty.  Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process , 1986 .

[3]  Martin Skitmore,et al.  Identifying non-competitive bids in construction contract auctions , 2002 .

[4]  Zohar J. Herbsman,et al.  A+B BIDDING METHOD--HIDDEN SUCCESS STORY FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION , 1995 .

[5]  Martin Skitmore,et al.  Criteria for contractor selection , 1997 .

[6]  K. Lai,et al.  A method used for evaluating bids in the chinese construction industry , 2004 .

[7]  Kamal M. Al‐Subhi Al‐Harbi,et al.  Application of the AHP in project management , 2001 .

[8]  T. Saaty.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[9]  Miroslaw J. Skibniewski,et al.  DECISION CRITERIA IN CONTRACTOR PREQUALIFICATION , 1988 .

[10]  Zohar J. Herbsman,et al.  COST-TIME BIDDING CONCEPT: AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH , 1990 .

[11]  Patrick S. W. Fong,et al.  Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process , 2000 .

[12]  Luis G. Vargas.  An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications , 1990 .

[13]  Gary David Holt,et al.  A review of contractor selection practice in the U.K. construction industry , 1995 .

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

[15]  Mohammad A Mustafa,et al.  Decision support for bid evaluation , 1990 .

[16]  S. T Ng,et al.  Client and consultant perspectives of prequalification criteria , 1999 .

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

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

[19]  Y. Ilker Topcu,et al.  A decision model proposal for construction contractor selection in Turkey , 2004 .

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

[21]  Gary David Holt,et al.  WHICH CONTRACTOR SELECTION METHODOLOGY , 1998 .

[22]  Khaled A El-Rayes,et al.  Optimum planning of highway construction under A + B bidding method , 2001 .

[23]  Sou-Sen Leu,et al.  Average-Bid Method—Competitive Bidding Strategy , 1993 .