6cn010 dissertation proposal (mohamed ismath kalideen, s.no. 1132951) (1)

Schoolof TechnologyUndergraduate Dissertation

UNIVERSITY OF

WOLVERHAMPTONKNOWLEDCE . INNOVATION . ENTERPRISE

mismath

Text Box

Mohamed Ismath Kalideen BSC/QS/QR/02/1132951 04-April-2012

user

Text Box

Mohamed Ismath Kalideen Student No: 1132951 02 - June - 2013

user

Text Box

Mohamed Ismath Kalideen Student No: 1132951 02 - June - 2013

user

Text Box

Frame work for Competitive Bidding

DISSERTATION PROPOSAL

Mohamed Ismath Kalideen (SN: 1132951)

Contents: Page No

1. Acknowledgement 2. Research Context 1 3. Research Aim and Objective(s) 3 4. Methodology 4 5. Restraints/Limitations 5 6. Research Program 5 7. References 6 8. Appendix 7


ACKNOWLEDGMENT:-

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

First praise is to Allah, the Almighty, on whom ultimately we depend for sustenance and

guidance. Second, my sincere appreciation goes to my Module Leader Mr. John

Reynolds & Module Team Dr Ezekiel Chinyio, Mr. Phil Harris & Mr. Neil Hingorani,

whose guidance, careful reading and constructive comments were valuable. His timely

and efficient contribution helped me shape this into its final form and I express my

sincerest appreciation for his assistance in any way that I may have asked.

I would like to express my greatest gratitude to the people who have helped & supported

me throughout my research proposal. A special thank of mine goes to my colleague who

helped me in completing the research proposal & he exchanged his interesting ideas,

thoughts & made this research proposal easy and accurate.

I wish to thank my parents for their undivided support and interest who inspired me and

encouraged me to go my own way, without whom I would be unable to complete my

research proposal. At last but not the least I want to thank my friends who appreciated me

for my work and motivated me.



Mohamed Ismath Kalideen (SN: 1132951) 1

6CN010

ASSESSMENT 1: DISSERTATION PROPOSAL - TEMPLATE This accounts for 20% of the marks for your Dissertation module

Submission date: 04th April 2012

GENERAL DETAILS

Note: Add in text to ALL sections, following the guidelines given in each section, and

using Ariel 11 font, 1.5 spaced. Do not change the margins on this form.

Research Title:

Bidding strategy : the consultants' perspective

Student Details:

Family Name: Kalideen

First Name: Mohamed Ismath

Phone: +966 5331 97941 Email: [email protected]

Student No.: 1132951

Date Submitted: 04th April 2012


Research Context

Despite the effort of researchers in developing bidding models in the past half century,

bidding decisions nowadays are still primitively based mainly on intuition and subjective

experience.

Unlike theories in other research areas in which progressive enhancement is normally a

consequence of further research development, bidding theories and models proposes by

Friedman and Gates and their followers as well as through to modern researches are

however inconsistent and a sound theoretical framework is inadequate, as concluded by

Runeson and Skitmore (1999) in their article “Tendering Theory Revisited”, thus leading to

poor implementation of these theories and models practically.

Bidding can be interpreted on the basis of game theory which is the analysis of problems

involving the interactions of rational agents (Baumol, 1977). Revealed by this view is the



interactive nature of bidding among competitors which complicate the way of making

bidding decisions. One of the reasons for the impracticability of previous models is their

normative nature which is the concept of optimization by utility maximization founded on

the neoclassical assumptions of perfect information, infinite sensitivity and maximizing

behavior. Normative decision models concerned with the way in which idealized, rational,

super-intelligent people should act. This research aims to develop a systematic bidding

model with a prescriptive nature focusing on its applicability in reality. Whilst a prescriptive

model concerned with how decision makers ought to behave, it does not depend on the

unrealistic assumptions of perfect sensitivity and complete knowledge. Prescriptive

models are essentially pragmatic in nature and are intended to offer guidelines which can

be followed, rather than idealized mathematical formulations. In contrast to normative

models, prescriptive models recognize the limitations imposed by bounded rationality

which originally introduced by Simon (1957) describing situations where decisions are

made in the absence of perfect information by humans who posses a limited processing

capacity as well as the concept of satisfying which is used to describe decision making

behavior which is based on the acceptance of solutions which are “good enough”.

In the context of bidding, perfect information is obviously impossible to achieve. Even if all

cost data could be obtained with complete reliability, the intractable problem of predicting

the competitors’ act would remain. Sensitive as bidding data is and thus its confidentiality

in competitors’ organizations, previous normative models by the application of

mathematical formulations does restrict their implementation in practice.

The systematic bidding model concluded in this research, being a prescriptive decision

model, intends to provide a framework to help the decision maker identify the issues

involved in the decision and think about them explicitly.

The above-mentioned bidding models plus other tools and techniques such as

Incremental Decision Process Model, system approach, contingency approach, Analytic

Hierarchy Process (AHP), etc. were integrated together to develop a systematic bidding

model which aims to be able to implement in the real world in a practical manner.

Established by integrating elements from this research, literature as well as off-the-shell

tools and techniques, the systematic bidding model is in a cyclic form comprising stages

of identification, development, selection and implementation. The rationale behind this

model is to systemize the intuitive and subjective decision making process currently



adopted by bidders by guiding them through a logical and systematic process via which

relevant determinants are taken into account in order to come up with the bidding

decisions.

Being aimed at practicality, this research also proposes ways of implementing the

systematic bidding model which comprises phases including short term, medium term and

long term implementation.

Research Aim and Objective(s)

Aim

Introduce the concept and general background of bidding and bidding strategy based on

which theories and models have been proposing by researchers,

Objectives Knowing the bidding scenario of the consultants in the construction industry, the prime

objective of this research is to study the behavior of the consultants in their decision

making process for making bidding decisions, thereby proposing a systematic bidding

model aimed at being able to be implemented practically in real situation.

Bidding decisions in respect of:

(a) Whether to bid or not to bid a project; and

(b) mark-up level determination;

Are particularly looked at by:

(a) Identifying the significant factors considered by local construction consultants

when making bidding decisions of:

(i) Whether to bid or not to bid a project; and

(ii) mark-up level determination;

(b) Analyzing the inter-relationships amongst the identified factors to reveal any

implication on the decision making process with regard to bidding;

(c) Developing bidding models for the making decisions of:



(i) Whether to bid or not to bid a project; and

(ii) mark-up level determination;

Aiming at rationalising the decision making process for marking bidding decisions.

Findings from the above plus literature and other analytical approaches are put together in

order to develop a systematic bidding model which is capable of being able to be

implemented in a practical manner. The intention is to assist management in consultancy

companies in the construction industry to come up with bidding decisions by undergoing a

rationalized and systematic decision making process, rather than merely relying on

intuition and subjective experience.

For avoidance of doubt, the objective of this research is to generalize a systematic bidding

model by studying the bidding behavior of the practitioners in order to rationalize the well-

known subjective and intuitive bidding decision making process which is to some extent

dependent upon personal characteristics and even emotional factors, but not to develop a

golden rule or principle for bidding which is true for all scenarios nor to give any guarantee

on the chance of winning a bid by its application.

Methodology

Bidding is a dilemma in which the bid price has to be high enough to ensure profit but in

the meanwhile low enough to get the job won in order to make profit to maintain as well as

to expand the business. This section outlines the method adopted in this research to

analyze the behavior of making bidding decisions from the perspective of consultants in

the construction industry.

The objective of this research is therefore four-fold in that the factors affecting bidding

decisions, including bid/ no bid and mark-up level, are

1. Identified from the consultants’ perspective in the construction industry.

2. The relationship among these pre-requisites for making bidding decisions is analyzed.

3. Identified factors into modeling by means of discriminate analysis and multiple

regressions,

4. Models for classifying bid/ no bid clusters as well as the likely mark-up level are

established.



These findings plus previous research findings and literature all contribute to the

development of a systematic bidding model which aims at providing to the consultants

with a logical and systematic model rather than relying on intuitive and subjective feeling

when making bidding decisions, which is a critical issue for existence of the company.

This approach is further described and elaborated in the following sub-sections.

Restraints/Limitations

Bidding strategy is a broad topic which is applicable in any sort of industries and

professions in which bidding process is involved. This research is however not intended to

study generically the bidding strategy in all situations but limited to the following:

(a) Bidding strategy is thought to be subjective and intuitive which is to some extent

geographical and cultural specific. This research looks at the bidding behavior of the

consultants in the construction industry only.

(b) This research deals with bidding strategy for consultancy companies only and

excludes bidding for construction works from the contractors’ point of view.

(c) Consultancy services in this research include consultancy services for building projects

and civil projects; and for new works projects as well as renovation works to existing

buildings or structures.

(d) Consultancy services in this research are limited to project based type services. As

defined in A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), a

project is temporary in nature with a definitely beginning and a definite end which is in

contrast with operations which is day-to-day and long lasting in nature without a definite

end (Project Management Institute, 2000).

(e) Consultancy services in this occasion include the services provided in feasibility stage

and design stage as well as during construction stage.

Research Programme

Please refer the Appendix I



References

Ahmad, I. (1990). Decision Support System for Modeling Bid/No Bid Decision Problem.

Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, American Society of civil

Engineers.

Benjamin, N. and Meador, R. (1979).A Comparison of Friedman and Gates Competitive

Bidding Models.ASCE Journal of Construction Division.

Broemser, G.M. (1938). Competitive Bidding in the Construction Indsutry. Ann Arbor,

Mich: Unviersity Microfilms International, 1994.

Baumol, W.J. (1977). Economic Theory and Operations Analysis. 4th edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Friedman, L. (1957). Bidding Models, in Introduction to Operations Research. Churchman, C.W., Ackoff, R.L. and Amoff, E.L., (eds), New York: Wiley. Gates, M. (1967). Bidding Strategies and Probabilities. Journal of the Construction Division. American Society of Civil Engineers. Gates, M. (1970). Closure to “Bidding Strategies and Probabilities”. ASCE Journal of the Construction Division. Gates, M. (1976). Gates Bidding Model – a Monte Carlo Experiment. ASCE Journal of the Construction Division.

Lo, H.P. and Lam, M.L. (2001). A Bidding Strategy Using Multivariate Distribution, Journal

of Financial Management of Property and Construction.

Marsh, P.D.V. (1989). Art of Tendering - Successful Bidding and Tendering, England:

Wildwood House.

Herman, H (1998). The Consultant's Guide to Proposal Writing: How to Satisfy Your

Clients and Double Your Income (3rd Edition). New York: Wiley.

Nickson, David (2003). The Bid Manager's Handbook. Burlington, V.T.: Gower.

Park, William R., P.E. (1979) Construction Bidding for Profit, Canada: John Wiley & Sons

Inc.



Lewis, Harold (2003). Bids, Tenders & Proposals: Writing Business Through Best Practice

London and Sterling, VA: Kogan Page Ltd.

Runeson, G. and Skitmore, M. (1999). Tendering Theory Revisited. Construction

management and Economics.

Simon, H.A. (1957). Administrative Behaviour. 2nd edition. New York: MacMillian. Wanous, M, Boussabaine, H.A. & Lewis, L. (2003). A Neural Network Bid/No Bid Model: the Case for Contractors in Syria. Journal of Construction Management and Economics (October 2003).

Appendix

Appendix I – Research Programme

Appendix II – Dissertation Form

Appendix III - Amended Ethics Student Form


October November December January February March April May June July August September October

1 Carry out research proposal with multiple topic

2 Select suitable topic & module leader approval

3 Project Inception Work & collecting the resources

4 Completion of Dissertation Proposal & Ethics forms.

5 Informal consultations with module leader and tutors

6 Overview of proposal & Research into selective topic allocation

7 Case study reseach & Submission of dissertation Proposal

8 Waitting for Proposal marked and feedback

9 Investigation finding from feedback

10 Complete conclusion and recommendation

11 Discussion with Module leader & tutor getting advise on conclusion

12 Preparing Final Draught

13 Complition & Submission of Final Dissertation

Research Programme (2011/2012)Appendix I

2011 2012Task to be carried outNo


6CN010 DISSERTATION INCEPTION FORM

School of Technology – Built Environment

_______________________________________________________________________________________ This form is an ‘ideas forming’ tool to help you to select a provisional topic for your dissertation and ultimately arrive at a research question which will form the aim of your dissertation.

What area of construction do you work in? Working in Tendering Department as a Tendering Engineer of Power Substation Making Company. (My Contract up to June 2012)

What is your main role? 1. Check the initial tender documents received from various clients. 2. Prepare soft copy and segregate the documents and give to concerned tender engineers for further processing. 3. Collect all pre bid clarifications and inform to all concerned. 4. Study and send enquires for the particular scope of work allotted. 5. Study the technical offers for its correctness and completeness. 6. Site visit and preparation of report and send to all tender engineers. 7. Attend bid opening meetings. 8. Cooperate with all other tender engineers. 9. Keep all the documents In proper manner.

Identify five issues/topic areas that have a significant effect on the Qatar construction industry and the way in which it will develop or operate in the future? 1. Studying Duties and Skills of Qatar Quantity Surveyors. 2. An Investigation into the Performance of Selective Tendering in Qatar Construction Industry 3. Development of A Framework for Total Quality Management Principles to the Construction Companies in the State of Qatar. 4. Effectiveness of technology transfer in the search for sustainable development: the case of Qatar 5. Cost control in the period of recession: Post tender cost control and cost reduction in a contractor organization in Qatar

Identify three issues/topic areas that have a significant effect on your own working practices and company/organisation? 1. Bidding strategy: the consultant perspective. 2. Total Cost Management at the Design Stage Using a Building Product Model. 3. Life cycle costing (LCC) as a contribution to sustainable construction: a common methodology

What areas of construction are you interested in? Building Construction

What sources of information do you have access to? (including people) I believe that the books, journals, construction article & internet browsing will help to carry out my research. After selecting the heading; I want to find out people who are working related to my heading.

6CN010 DISSERTATION INCEPTION FORM

School of Technology – Built Environment

_______________________________________________________________________________________ Write out two potential research questions

A) What do I have to think about & how do I know whether my dissertation topic is achievable? B) Most importantly, will my study have a significant impact on my field?

UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY ETHICAL CONSIDERATION FOR STUDENTS STUDYING TAUGHT PROGRAMMES Please tick ( ) aspects relevant to you and your investigation Section 1: Your details First Name & Surname: Mohamed Ismath Kalideen Student No: 1132951 Course: BSc (Hons) in Quantity Surveying Project Title Bidding strategy : the consultants' perspective Section 2: Your Project Topic 2.1 What problem/issue is this project addressing? (100 words or less)

Interviewing expert in the field is very difficult in Saudi arabia

2.2 Will information or artefact resulting from your project be available externally to the University?

No

2.2.1 If you answered ‘yes’ to 2.2, Will any such information place anyone at risk or possibly result in any action that might be detrimental to their wellbeing? (See guidelines)

Yes

2.2.2 In what format will the information or artefact be made available?

Reference from books

Section 3: Method of Data Collection 3.1 Does any part of your proposed project involve human participants? If No go to Section 4.

No

3.1.1 If you answered ‘yes’ to 3.1, Is the sole involvement of human participants in order to provide opinions to support the specification or testing of an artefact to be produced as an outcome of the project?

Yes/No?

3.1.2 If you answered ‘yes’ to 3.1.1, Does this artefact/information have any characteristics which might be detrimental to the wellbeing of any human participants in your project? If so, explain.

Yes/No?

3.2 If you answered ‘yes’ to 3.1, Are there other ways you might meet your project aims without involving human participants? If not, why? If yes discuss with your Supervisor how you will achieve this and go to section 4.

3.2.1 How will you select your participants?

3.2.2 How many participants will you contact?

3.2.3 How will you approach potential participants? E.g. email, letter, face to face, telephone?

3.2.4 Are your participants adults? (over 18 and competent to give consent) If no, answer 3.2.5

Yes/No?

3.2.5 Are your participants children or adults over 18 and not competent to give consent? If yes, why is it necessary to involve these participants? (See guidelines) Explain how you will ensure parental/guardian consent.

1

mismath

Text Box

Appendix III

3.2.6 Are you offering any incentives to any of your participants, financial or otherwise? (See guidelines)

Yes/No?

3.2.7 How much time do you estimate will be needed from any participants? (See guidelines)

3.2.8 Please list the method of data collection and analysis intended to be used

3.2.9 Will all of the data collected contribute towards your results?

Section 4: Confidentiality and data handling Please read methods of ensuring confidentiality in the guidelines. 4.1 Will you ensure the anonymity of data collected from/and about participants?

Yes

4.2 Will you store/protect data collected from individuals e.g. password protected files?

Yes

4.3 Once your project is complete and information is no longer needed, will you destroy your data?

No

4.4 Will anyone else have access to the data collected? No If so, (i) please name the individuals and/or groups that will have access; (ii) why is access being given to those listed in (i)?

Section 5: Working with other parties and companies 5.1 Will you be using data on subjects held by another party or organisation?

No

If Yes, (i) Please refer to the covering letter template (ii) How will you gain access to this information?

NB: If working with another organisation or company please familiarise yourself with their Health & Safety procedures. Things you must be aware of: Data Protection Act: http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/data_protection.aspx Freedom of Information Act: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000036_en_1 University of Wolverhampton Ethical Approval Procedural Guidelines Checklist:

1. Please include an introductory cover letter stating some information about you, your project proposal and how your data will be used.

2. In addition, if you are using a questionnaire or interview sheet please include a list of sample questions with your submission.

3. Final versions of questionnaires and interview questions to be submitted to supervisor for confirmation of ‘fitness for purpose’ BEFORE any data is collected.

2

http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/data_protection.aspx

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000036_en_1

http://www.wlv.ac.uk/PDF/aca-pols-ethics-scrutiny.pdf

Student’s Declaration Sign and date against one declaration only Category 0. I have answered

‘No’ to questions 2.2 and 3.1. My project involves no human participation except for myself and I agree to ensure that any information or artefact produced will not be available outside the University.

Category A1. I have answered (delete one from each block)

‘Yes’ to questions 2.2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 and ‘No’ to questions 2.2.1 and 4.4. ‘No’ to question 2.2

My project involves limited human participation and I agree to ensure that

(i) any such participation is not detrimental in any way to the interests of the participants;

(ii) all information collected as a part of the project will be handled in accordance with the answers that I gave to question 4;

(iii) No information or artefacts which may place anyone at risk or be detrimental to their wellbeing will be made available outside the University.

Category A2. I have answered ‘Yes’ to question 3.1

or I have answered ‘Yes’ to question 2.2

and my answers to subsequent questions prevent the project being classified as A1. My project involves human participation and may present some risk to participants. I have considered alternative means of pursuing the project which do not entail this risk but believe that there is no practicable alternative. I agree to ensure that I take all necessary steps to minimise risks to participants and third parties. I agree not to proceed with any activities involving human participation until I have received approval from the Department Ethics Panel.

Category B-E. My project does not conform to Category 0, A1 or A2. I have considered alternative means of pursuing the project which do not entail risk to human participants but believe that there is no practicable alternative to the proposal made. I agree to ensure that I take all necessary steps to minimise risks to participants. I agree not to proceed with any activities involving human participation until I have received approval from the School or University Ethics Committee, as appropriate.

Supervisor’s Declaration Sign and date against one declaration only Category 0 or A1. I concur with the classification of this project as 0 or A1 and authorise continuation of the project. I have forwarded a copy of this form to the Department Ethics Panel for monitoring purposes.

Other. I believe that this project should be classified other than 0 or A1. I do not authorise continuation of the project until approval has been received from the appropriate Ethics Panel or Committee. I have forwarded a copy of this form to the Department Ethics Panel for consideration.

3

FOR SUPERVISOR/PANEL/COMMITTEE USE ONLY: CLASSIFICATION ALLOCATED BY SUPERVISOR

Supervisor Action: Authorise and forward to DEP Date DEP Action: File for possible monitoring Date

Selected for monitoring (tick) Date Classification agreed? Yes No If ‘No’, give: reason

0, A1

action Supervisor Action: Refer to DEP for decision Date CLASSIFICATION ALLOCATED BY DEPARTMENT ETHICS PANEL 0, A1 DEP Action: Project authorised to continue Date

Considered by DEP below Date 2.2 Is any risk associated with access to project acceptable in context? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

3.1 Is involvement of human participants justified? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

3.3 Is experimental method acceptable with regard to risk and inconvenience to participants? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

4 Are arrangements for confidentiality and data protection appropriate? If no, give reasons below

Yes No

5 Do arrangements for working with external bodies protect interests of participants and the external bodies? If no, give reasons below

Yes No

DEP Action: Continuation of project approved:

Yes No Date

A2

Conditions: DEP Action: Refer to School Ethics Committee Date CLASSIFICATION ALLOCATED BY SCHOOL ETHICS COMMITTEE 0, A1 SEC Action: Continuation of project approved Date

Considered by SEC below Date 2.2 Is any risk associated with access to project acceptable in context? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

3.1 Is involvement of human participants justified? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

3.3 Is experimental method acceptable with regard to risk and inconvenience to participants? If no, give reasons below:

Yes No

4 Are arrangements for confidentiality and data protection appropriate? If no, give reasons below

Yes No

5 Do arrangements for working with external bodies protect interests of participants and the external bodies? If no, give reasons below

Yes No

SEC Action: Continuation of project approved:

Yes No Date

A2, B

Conditions:

Other

Other

Other SEC Action: Refer to University Ethics Committee

Date

4

6cn010 dissertation proposal (mohamed ismath kalideen, s.no. 1132951) (1)

Documents