IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/iimkoz/v9y2020i2p129-142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subcontractor Selection Process Through Vendor Bids: A Case of An Outsourcing Service in Construction

Author

Listed:
  • Shobha Ramalingam

Abstract

Subcontractors handle a large portion of the work in construction projects. The ability of the general contractor to deliver projects on time, within budget and with the expected level of quality are significantly dependent on the performance of subcontractors. Thus, selecting the right subcontractor for the right task is a determining factor for project success. Literature has identified several criteria for subcontractor selection that predominantly includes financial capacity, ability to complete on time and reputation and quality of workmanship. However, as projects are becoming more global and complex, ensuring selection and award through a fair and competitive formal process becomes imperative. Nevertheless, an understanding of a formal process, backing the selection criteria, seems to be lacking; more so in the context of engineering outsourcing services. Vendor bid analysis is one such service, wherein the general contractor packages the bids received from several subcontractors to a team in a different country who evaluate and enable the general contractor to select and award the subcontractors for project tasks. To this end, an exploratory case study was conducted in an outsourcing firm in India that provide services to general contractors in the USA to understand the formal process of subcontractor selection across organizational boundaries along with its inherent risks and challenges. Data was collected through a participatory research approach, supplemented with participant observation and team interviews which were analysed through inductive reasoning and cross-case comparison methods. The findings showed a formalized 5-phase process across the organizational interface that included assess, identify, evaluate, negotiate and optimize phases. Further, delving into the evaluate , negotiate and optimize phases, the nuances in outsourced projects and the firms strategy to overcome them were evident, such as selection criteria and negotiation strategy adopted in the case of a single bidder with high pricing to mitigate probable bid-rigging practices or ensuring constant training to overcome the challenges due to lack of trade and country specific know-how . In addition, through a reflective approach, the value addition services provided to the general contractor aimed to optimize the process and improve project governance. These findings are expected to provide practical implication for firms in similar business and act as a steppingstone to conduct further robust research.

Suggested Citation

  • Shobha Ramalingam, 2020. "Subcontractor Selection Process Through Vendor Bids: A Case of An Outsourcing Service in Construction," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 9(2), pages 129-142, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:iimkoz:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:129-142
    DOI: 10.1177/2277975220942078
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2277975220942078
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2277975220942078?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Porter, Robert H & Zona, J Douglas, 1993. "Detection of Bid Rigging in Procurement Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 518-538, June.
    2. Jasper Mbachu & Raymond Nkado, 2007. "Factors constraining successful building project implementation in South Africa," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 39-54.
    3. Martha S. Feldman & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2011. "Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1240-1253, October.
    4. Stephen Gruneberg & Will Hughes & Debbie Ancell, 2007. "Risk under performance-based contracting in the UK construction sector," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(7), pages 691-699.
    5. Stephen R. Barley & Gideon Kunda, 2001. "Bringing Work Back In," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 76-95, February.
    6. Paul Bowen & Akintola Akintoye & Robert Pearl & Peter J. Edwards, 2007. "Ethical behaviour in the South African construction industry," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 631-648.
    7. M. I. Okoroh & V. B. Torrance, 1999. "A model for subcontractor selection in refurbishment projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 315-327.
    8. Hemanta Doloi, 2009. "Analysis of pre-qualification criteria in contractor selection and their impacts on project success," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(12), pages 1245-1263.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michiel Bal & Jos Benders & Lander Vermeerbergen, 2022. "‘Bringing the Covert into the Open’: A Case Study on Technology Appropriation and Continuous Improvement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. McBeath, Bowen & Collins-Camargo, Crystal & Chuang, Emmeline & Wells, Rebecca & Bunger, Alicia C. & Jolles, Mónica Pérez, 2014. "New directions for research on the organizational and institutional context of child welfare agencies: Introduction to the symposium on “The Organizational and Managerial Context of Private Child Welf," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 83-92.
    3. Lene Pettersen, 2019. "Why Artificial Intelligence Will Not Outsmart Complex Knowledge Work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 33(6), pages 1058-1067, December.
    4. Fleur Deken & Paul R. Carlile & Hans Berends & Kristina Lauche, 2016. "Generating Novelty Through Interdependent Routines: A Process Model of Routine Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 659-677, June.
    5. Laurent Lamy, 2013. "“Upping the ante”: how to design efficient auctions with entry?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 194-214, June.
    6. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    7. Eshien Chong & Carine Staropoli & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2014. "Auction versus Negotiation in Public Procurement: Looking for Empirical Evidence," Post-Print hal-00512813, HAL.
    8. Lamy, Laurent, 2012. "The econometrics of auctions with asymmetric anonymous bidders," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(1), pages 113-132.
    9. Barrett, Michael & Cooper, David J. & Jamal, Karim, 2005. "Globalization and the coordinating of work in multinational audits," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-24, January.
    10. Dakshina G. De Silva & Timothy Dunne & Georgia Kosmopoulou & Carlos Lamarche, 2015. "Project modifications and bidding in highway procurement auctions," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2015-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    11. Namrata Malhotra & Timothy Morris, 2009. "Heterogeneity in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 895-922, September.
    12. Shih-Chang Hung & Yung-Ching Tseng, 2017. "Extending the LLL framework through an institution-based view: Acer as a dragon multinational," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 799-821, December.
    13. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    14. Erica Bosio & Simeon Djankov & Edward Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2022. "Public Procurement in Law and Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1091-1117, April.
    15. repec:kap:iaecre:v:15:y:2009:i:4:p:421-436 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Jehiel, Philippe & Lamy, Laurent, 2014. "On discrimination in procurement auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 9790, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Merkel, Janet & Suwala, Lech, 2021. "Intermediaries, work and creativity in creative and innovative sectors. The case of Berlin," EconStor Open Access Book Chapters, in: Culture, Creativity and Economy. Collaborative practices, value creation and spaces of creativity., pages 56-69, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    18. Biran, Omer & Forges, Françoise, 2011. "Core-stable rings in auctions with independent private values," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 52-64, September.
    19. Ricardo Azambuja & Gazi Islam, 2019. "Working at the boundaries: Middle managerial work as a source of emancipation and alienation," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01959107, HAL.
    20. Michael Dooley & Peter Isard & Mark Taylor, 1992. "Exchange Rates, Country Preferences, and Gold," NBER Working Papers 4183, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Clark, Robert & Coviello, Decio & de Leverano, Adriano, 2020. "Complementary bidding and the collusive arrangement: Evidence from an antitrust investigation," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-052, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:sae:iimkoz:v:9:y:2020:i:2:p:129-142. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.