IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v18y2000i4p457-466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To bid or not to bid: a parametric solution

Author

Listed:
  • M. Wanous
  • A. H. Boussabaine
  • J. Lewis

Abstract

One of the most important decisions that has to be made by construction companies/contractors is whether or not to bid for a new project when an invitation has been received. It would be of great help if a structured model could be developed that deals systematically with different bidding situations. A simple parametric solution for the ';bid/no bid' decision is reported in this paper. This solution is based on the findings of six semi-structured interviews and a formal questionnaire through which 38 factors that affect the bid/no bid decision were identified and ranked according to their importance to contractors operating in Syria. Only the most influential factors were considered in the development process. The model was optimized using data about 162 real bidding situations. Then the optimized model was tested using another 20 real projects. It proved 85% accurate in simulating the actual decisions. Although, the proposed model is based on data from the Syrian construction industry it could be modified very easily to suit other countries.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Wanous & A. H. Boussabaine & J. Lewis, 2000. "To bid or not to bid: a parametric solution," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 457-466.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:4:p:457-466
    DOI: 10.1080/01446190050024879
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01446190050024879
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446190050024879?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence Friedman, 1956. "A Competitive-Bidding Strategy," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 104-112, February.
    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. YeEun Jang & JeongWook Son & June-Seong Yi, 2021. "Classifying the Level of Bid Price Volatility Based on Machine Learning with Parameters from Bid Documents as Risk Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Martin Ekstrom & Hans Bjornsson & Clifford Nass, 2003. "Accounting for rater credibility when evaluating AEC subcontractors," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 197-208.
    3. Qiao, Yu & Labi, Samuel & Fricker, Jon D., 2021. "Does highway project bundling policy affect bidding competition? Insights from a mixed ordinal logistic model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 228-242.
    4. Ren Tan & Kairong Hong, 2021. "Research on Extreme Dispute Decisions of Large-Scale Engineering Projects from the Perspective of Multidimensional Preferences," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(22), pages 1-24, November.
    5. Fuchigami, Helio Yochihiro & Tuni, Andrea & Barbosa, Luísa Queiroz & Severino, Maico Roris & Rentizelas, Athanasios, 2021. "Supporting Brazilian smallholder farmers decision making in supplying institutional markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(1), pages 321-335.
    6. Joe Wong & Eddie Hui, 2006. "Construction project risks: further considerations for constructors' pricing in Hong Kong," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 425-438.

    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. Ronald M. Harstad, 2007. "Does a Seller Really Want Another Bidder?," Working Papers 0711, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    2. Qiao, Yu & Labi, Samuel & Fricker, Jon D., 2021. "Does highway project bundling policy affect bidding competition? Insights from a mixed ordinal logistic model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 228-242.
    3. Ballesteros-Pérez, Pablo & del Campo-Hitschfeld, Maria Luisa & Mora-Melià, Daniel & Domínguez, David, 2015. "Modeling bidding competitiveness and position performance in multi-attribute construction auctions," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 24-35.
    4. Swider, Derk J. & Weber, Christoph, 2007. "Bidding under price uncertainty in multi-unit pay-as-bid procurement auctions for power systems reserve," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1297-1308, September.
    5. Alan Mehlenbacher, 2007. "Multiagent System Platform for Auction Simulations," Department Discussion Papers 0706, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    6. Skitmore, Martin, 2002. "Identifying non-competitive bids in construction contract auctions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 443-449, December.
    7. Fanzeres, Bruno & Ahmed, Shabbir & Street, Alexandre, 2019. "Robust strategic bidding in auction-based markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 1158-1172.
    8. Yuichi Takano & Nobuaki Ishii & Masaaki Muraki, 2017. "Multi-period resource allocation for estimating project costs in competitive bidding," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(2), pages 303-323, June.
    9. Vukina, Tomislav & Zheng, Xiaoyong & Marra, Michele & Levy, Armando, 2008. "Do farmers value the environment? Evidence from a conservation reserve program auction," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1323-1332, November.
    10. Cova, Bernard & Mazet, Florence & Salle, Robert, 1996. "Milieu as a pertinent unit of analysis in project marketing," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 5(6), pages 647-664, December.
    11. Paulo Fagandini & Ingemar Dierickx, 2023. "Computing Profit-Maximizing Bid Shading Factors in First-Price Sealed-Bid Auctions," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 1009-1035, March.
    12. Pickl, Matthias & Wirl, Franz, 2011. "Auction design for gas pipeline transportation capacity--The case of Nabucco and its open season," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 2143-2151, April.
    13. O'Shaughnessy, Eric, 2019. "Non-monotonic effects of market concentration on prices for residential solar photovoltaics in the United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 182-191.
    14. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2012. "Optimal bidding in auctions of mixed populations of bidders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(3), pages 653-663.
    15. Martin Skitmore & Goran Runeson & Xinling Chang, 2006. "Construction price formation: full-cost pricing or neoclassical microeconomic theory?," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7), pages 773-783.
    16. Haitian Xie, 2020. "Finite-Sample Average Bid Auction," Papers 2008.10217, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.
    17. Yi Su & Gunnar Lucko, 2015. "Synthetic cash flow model with singularity functions for unbalanced bidding scenarios," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 35-54, January.
    18. Florence Naegelen, 1986. "La malédiction du vainqueur dans les procédures d'appels d'offres," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 37(4), pages 605-636.
    19. G. Anandalingam & Robert W. Day & S. Raghavan, 2005. "The Landscape of Electronic Market Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 316-327, March.

    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:taf:conmgt:v:18:y:2000:i:4:p:457-466. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    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.