IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ibrjnl/v15y2022i3p85.html

A Multi-Criteria Model to Evaluate Public Services Contracts

Author

Listed:
  • Luís Valadares Tavares
  • Pedro Arruda

Abstract

A major trend to improve Public Administration has been the increase of contracting out services hoping to achieve better levels of performance. However, the effectiveness and efficiency of this approach implies the application of appropriate models to evaluate such performance This is why a multi-criteria model was developed by the authors to evaluate and to improve the performance of public services contracts focusing on four key dimensions- the process of contract formation, the contract costs, the benefits achieved by the contract execution and its impacts. The proposed model provides a stable, consistent and integrated framework allowing not just the evaluation of contracts but also the identification of the priorities for improvement. A successful application to the evaluation of Home Respiratory Services is also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Luís Valadares Tavares & Pedro Arruda, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Model to Evaluate Public Services Contracts," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(3), pages 1-85, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ibrjnl:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:85
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/download/0/0/46826/50063
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/0/46826
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siou Chew Kuek & Cecilia Paradi-Guilford & Toks Fayomi & Saori Imaizumi & Panos Ipeirotis & Patricia Pina & Manpreet Singh, 2015. "The Global Opportunity in Online Outsourcing," World Bank Publications - Reports 22284, The World Bank Group.
    2. Karen Eggleston & Richard Zeckhauser, 2002. "Government Contracting for Health Care," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0202, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    3. James S. Dyer, 2016. "Multiattribute Utility Theory (MAUT)," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 285-314, Springer.
    4. Bernard Roy, 2016. "Paradigms and Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 19-39, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cosmin Cernăzanu-Glăvan & Andrei-Ștefan Bulzan, 2025. "Explainable AI and Fuzzy Linguistic Interpretation for Enhanced Transparency in Public Procurement: Analyzing EU Tender Awards," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-21, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2019. "A review of cost–benefit analysis and multicriteria decision analysis from the perspective of sustainable transport in project evaluation," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 327-358, November.
    2. Dinis, Duarte Caldeira & Figueira, José Rui & Teixeira, Ângelo Palos, 2023. "A multiple criteria approach for ship risk classification: An alternative to the Paris MoU Ship Risk Profile," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Andrey SHEVCHUK & Denis STREBKOV, 2023. "Digital platforms and the changing freelance workforce in the Russian Federation: A ten‐year perspective," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 162(1), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Fernández, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain & Díaz, Raymundo & Molina Morejón, Victor Manuel, 2026. "An outranking relation built on an additive value function preference model: Creating synergy between both paradigms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    6. Gerber, Christine & Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2019. "Brave New Digital Work? New Forms of Performance Control in Crowdwork," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 121-143.
    7. Irène Abi-Zeid & Jérôme Cerutti, 2025. "Multi-criteria decision aiding for built heritage value assessment: Model and application in Québec City, Canada," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 353(1), pages 77-92, October.
    8. Estrella Gomez-Herrera & Frank Müller-Langer, 2019. "Is There a Gender Wage Gap in Online Labor Markets? Evidence from Over 250,000 Projects and 2.5 Million Wage Bill Proposals," CESifo Working Paper Series 7779, CESifo.
    9. Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Annarosa Pesole & Enrique Fernandez Macias, 2019. "Digital Labour Platforms in Europe: Numbers, Profiles, and Employment Status of Platform Workers," JRC Research Reports JRC117330, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Tobias Witt & Matthias Klumpp, 2021. "Multi-Period Multi-Criteria Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Renewable Energy Transition Case from Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, June.
    11. repec:osf:socarx:k3hy4_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Mark Graham & Isis Hjorth & Vili Lehdonvirta, 2017. "Digital labour and development: impacts of global digital labour platforms and the gig economy on worker livelihoods," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 23(2), pages 135-162, May.
    13. Michael Gusenbauer & Sarah Könitzer & Marius Kitowski, 2025. "A remedy for the liability of smallness? How digital work platforms augment the smallest enterprises," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 19(9), pages 2867-2898, September.
    14. Christian Stummer & Dennis Kundisch & Reinhold Decker, 2018. "Platform Launch Strategies," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 60(2), pages 167-173, April.
    15. Chiara Belletti & Daniel Erdsiek & Ulrich Laitenberger & Paola Tubaro, 2021. "Crowdworking in France and Germany," Working Papers hal-03468022, HAL.
    16. Lorenz Kammermann & Karin Ingold, 2019. "Going beyond technocratic and democratic principles: stakeholder acceptance of instruments in Swiss energy policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 43-65, March.
    17. Lehdonvirta, Vili, 2018. "Flexibility in the Gig Economy: Managing Time on Three Online Piecework Platforms," SocArXiv k3hy4, Center for Open Science.
    18. Hamza Umer, 2021. "Illusory freedom of physical platform workers: Insights from Uber Eats in Japan," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 32(3), pages 437-452, September.
    19. Kässi, Otto & Lehdonvirta, Vili & Stephany, Fabian, 2021. "How Many Online Workers are there in the World? A Data-Driven Assessment," SocArXiv 78nge, Center for Open Science.
    20. Braesemann, Fabian & Stephany, Fabian & Teutloff, Ole & Kässi, Otto & Graham, Mark & Lehdonvirta, Vili, 2021. "The polarisation of remote work," SocArXiv q8a96, Center for Open Science.
    21. Smeulders, Bart & Crama, Yves & Spieksma, Frits C.R., 2019. "Revealed preference theory: An algorithmic outlook," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 803-815.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ibrjnl:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:85. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.