The ‘lowest‐price wins’ philosophy has been a consistent theme of contractor selection over the years. To comprehensively elucidate this selection preference and compare it with the use of a multi‐criteria selection (MCS) approach in the tenderer evaluation process, this paper investigates MCS tender price selection preferences. That is, project‐specific criteria (PSC) and lowest‐price wins selection practices of UK construction clients, in both building and civil engineering works at in detail via results of the empirical survey. The investigation provides further insight into the evaluation of contractors' attributes (i.e. PSC). Levels of importance assigned (LIA) for each criterion were analysed (i.e. quantitative analysis of the differences in opinions and, variance amongst the respondents) in a multivariate statistical method. Importance attached by construction clients to the ‘lowest‐price wins’ philosophy is also presented. Contrast was made between the MCS approach and the ‘lowest‐price wins’ option amongst the surveyed construction clients. It was found that increased awareness of the use of PSC prevailed amongst the survey construction clients. This indicated that cost has to be tempered with the evaluation of PSC and the attempt of construction clients searching for a new evaluation paradigm (i.e. adoption of MCS approach rather than basing on the lowest‐price wins alone).
Article navigation
1 April 2001
Review Article|
April 01 2001
Multi‐criteria selection or lowest price? Investigation of UK construction clients' tender evaluation preferences
CHEE H. WONG;
CHEE H. WONG
Built Environment Research Unit, School of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, St Peter Square, Wolverhampton, West Midlands WV1 1RH, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
GARY D. HOLT;
GARY D. HOLT
Built Environment Research Unit, School of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, St Peter Square, Wolverhampton, West Midlands WV1 1RH, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
PHIL HARRIS
PHIL HARRIS
Built Environment Research Unit, School of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, St Peter Square, Wolverhampton, West Midlands WV1 1RH, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
Publisher: Emerald Publishing
Online ISSN: 1365-232X
Print ISSN: 0969-9988
© MCB UP Limited
2001
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (2001) 8 (4): 257–271.
Citation
WONG CH, HOLT GD, HARRIS P (2001), "Multi‐criteria selection or lowest price? Investigation of UK construction clients' tender evaluation preferences". Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 8 No. 4 pp. 257–271, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb021187
Download citation file:
New and popular articles
Suggested Reading
Determining evaluation criteria for digital libraries' user interface: a review
The Electronic Library (October,2011)
Evaluating qualitative research: past, present and future
Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal (December,2015)
Which criteria matter most in the evaluation of venture capital investments?
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development (August,2014)
Evaluating privacy impact assessment methods: guidelines and best practice
Information and Computer Security (September,2019)
Management of fisheries public services in the coastal regions and islands of Vietnam
Journal of International Economics and Management (October,2025)
Related Chapters
Good Practices Research: From Selection to Impact Evaluation
Empowering Women Through Italy's Recovery and Resilience Plan: Innovative Practices in Complex Organizations
Evaluating Public Policies and Programmes: An Introduction to Evaluation Concepts, Instruments and Criteria
The Brazilian Way of Doing Public Administration: Brazil with an ‘s’
The Effect of Traditional Performance Evaluation Criteria on the Market Value Added: Application on Informatics Index (XBLSM)
New Challenges for Future Sustainability and Wellbeing
Recommended for you
These recommendations are informed by your reading behaviors and indicated interests.
