This paper presents results of an empirical investigation involving private construction clients in Malaysia, which seeks to establish appropriate tender evaluation criteria and weightings for a risk-oriented tender evaluation system.
At the initial stage of this study, a list of significant risks is identified and gathered through literature review. These risks are then mapped onto tender evaluation criteria. Following this, the identified risks and their mappings are validated through a questionnaire survey to determine appropriate criteria for tender evaluation. Weightings for the selected evaluation criteria are established through an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) group decision-making (GDM) method.
In practice, different lists of criteria, covering tender's technical capability and financial performance, are often used by different client organisations. However, there is a paucity of research behind the selection of these criteria and the weighting being attributed to different criteria.
This study provides an important and a valuable insight into the actual criteria used during tender evaluation practice based on an analysis of documentary evidence. Both current practice and existing tender evaluation studies failed to address the risk element adequately. There is a lack of an explicit link between evaluation criteria and project risks. This study fills this knowledge gap by identifying tender evaluation criteria through reviewing criteria used in practice and examining their links to risk factors.
