Analysing a consultant's competitiveness in two envelope fee tendering
A method for analysing the competitiveness of a consultant's two-envelope fee tendering history is proposed and illustrated in an application to one of Hong Kong’s larger quantity surveying practices. Separate measures for determining consultants’ fee, quality score and overall competitiveness are considered to accommodate the special nature of the Hong Kong system which makes cross-auction comparisons impossible. Maximum fee competitiveness is assumed to be the lowest submitted tender fee while maximum quality score competitiveness is taken to be the highest quality score attained by a competing consultant. Fees and quality score are then expressed as separate competitiveness ratios relative to these maximums and aggregated for determining overall competitiveness.
In analysing bidding performance it was found that this consultant’s fee, quality score and overall competitiveness are all above the competitor average. These competitiveness measures reveal large differences in variability between quality score and fees with quality score variability being considerably lower. Such a large imbalance in competitiveness variability effectively discounts quality and promotes the influence of the fee since competitiveness ratio differences between fees are much larger than the competitiveness ratio differences between quality scores.
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||bidding, competitiveness, consultant, fee, quality, tendering|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > TECHNOLOGY (100000)|
|Divisions:||Past > QUT Faculties & Divisions > Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2001 Taylor & Francis|
|Copyright Statement:||First published in Construction Management and Economics 19(5):pp. 503-510.|
|Deposited On:||16 May 2006|
|Last Modified:||10 Aug 2011 23:55|
Repository Staff Only: item control page