IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijpman/v9y2016i6p684-700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding pre-qualification preferences of public clients in traditional and design-build procurement systems

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Goel

Abstract

The present study investigated the pre-qualification (PQ) process followed by various public clients in India to find their preferences regarding the pre-qualification criterions and also to ascertain if 'single step' procurement or a 'two-step' procurement process was favoured by clients. The approach used in this study was content analysis of 111 numbers of request for qualification (RFQ)/request for proposal (RFP)/notice inviting tenders (NITs) issued by public clients. Total eight 'pre-qualification categories' were identified along with 14 'PQ criterions' for traditional procurement and 13 'PQ criterions' for design build (DB) procurement. The study concluded that 'experience in executing similar projects', 'performance of executed projects' and 'financial capability of bidder' were the most preferred PQ categories and it was also found that single step procurement was preferred by public clients compared to two-step procurement for all types of construction projects. The findings of this study are expected to make contribution to the existing body of knowledge due to their relevance to academic fraternity as well as to those stakeholders of construction industry who wish to gain better understanding of PQ process in Indian public project procurement.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Goel, 2016. "Understanding pre-qualification preferences of public clients in traditional and design-build procurement systems," International Journal of Procurement Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(6), pages 684-700.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijpman:v:9:y:2016:i:6:p:684-700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=79980
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ids:ijpman:v:9:y:2016:i:6:p:684-700. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=255 .

    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.