Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Application of Multi-Criteria Analysis in the Public Procurement Process Optimization Cover

Application of Multi-Criteria Analysis in the Public Procurement Process Optimization

Economic Themes
Volume 54 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)
By:  and    
Open Access
|Jun 2016
References

References

  1. Alarcon, L.F. & Mourgues, C. (2002). Performance modelling for contractor selection., 18 (2), 52–60.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. Al-Harbi, K. M. & A.-S. (2001). Application of the AHP in project management., 19 (1), 19 –27.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  3. Andruškevičius, A. (2005). Evaluation of contractors by using COPRAS – the multiple criteria method., 11(3), 158–169.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  4. Azis, I.J. (2010). Predicting a Recovery Date from the Economic Crisis of 2008., 44, 122-129.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  5. Banaitis, A. & Banaitien, N. (2006). Analysis of criteria for contractors’ qualification evaluation, Technological and Economic., 12(4), 276–282.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Blair, A.R., Mnadelker, G.N., Saaty, T.L. & Whitaker, R. (2010). Forecasting the resurgence of the U.S. economy in 2010: An expert judgment approach., 44(3) 114-121.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Carr, P. G. (2012). Investigation of Bid Price Competition Measured through Prebid Project Estimates, Actual Bid Prices, and Number of Bidders., 131(11), 1165–1172.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  8. Dobi, K., Gugić, J., Kancijan, D. (2010). AHP As a Decision Support Tool in the Multicriteria Evaluation of Bids in Public Procurement Proceedings of theJune 21-24, Cavtat, Croatia.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. Fong, P. S. W.& Choi, S. K.-Y. (2000). Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process., 18(5), 547–557.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  10. Ginevicius, R. & Podvezko, V. (2008). Multicriteria graphical analytical evaluation of the financial state of construction enterprises., 14(4), 452–461.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. Hatush, Z. & Skitmore, M. (1998). Contractor selection using multicriteria utility theory: An additive model., 33(2-3), 105–115.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  12. Holt, G.D. (1997). Classifying construction contractors: a case study using cluster analysis., 25(6), 374–82.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  13. Holt, G.D. (1998). Which contractor selection methodology?, 16(3), 153–164.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  14. Holt, G. D. & Edwards, D. J. (2005). Domestic builder selection in the UK housing repair and maintenance sector: a critique., 6(1), 123–137.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  15. Hughes, M. (2005). Evaluation of the Local Government Procurement Agenda – Baseline Survey Report. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London. [On-line]. Available at. [Last retrieved April 20, 2006].
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Ishizaka, A. & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process., 38(11): 14336–14345.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Izveštaj o javnim nabavkama u Republici Srbiji za period 01.01.2014-30.06.2014.godine, Republika Srbija, Uprava za javne nabavke, Beograd, 2014.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. Jayant, A., Paul, V. & Kumar, U. (2015). Aplication of Analytic Network Process (ANP) in Business Environment: A Comprehensive Literature Review,, 5(1), 29-37.
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. Kandanala, R., Al-Hussein, M. & Vanderstar, A. (2005). Automation of pre-bidding process for construction projects., 147(6), 30–34.
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. Lam, K.C., Hu, T., Ng, S.T., Skitmore, M. & Cheung, S.O. (2001). A fuzzy neural network approach for contractor prequalification., 19(2), 175–188.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  21. Laver, J. & Larsberger, O. (2011). The Art of identifying „The Most Economically Advantageous Tender” – the Use of Relative Evaluation Models in Public and Utilities Procurement, Hannes Snellman Attorneys Ltd.,.
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. Mahdi, I.M., Riley, M.J., Fereig, S.M. & Alex, A.P. (2002). A multi-criteria approach to contractor selection., 9(1), 29–37.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. Minchin, Jr. R.E. & Smith, G.R. (2005). Quality-based contractor rating model for qualification and bidding purposes., 21(1), 38–43.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  24. Mitkus, S. & Trinkuniene, E. (2008). Reasoned decisions in construction contracts evaluation., 14(3), 402–416.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. Molenaar, K. R. & Johnson, D. E. (2003). Engineering the procurement phase to achieve the best value., 3(3), 137–141.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  26. Ng, S. T. & Skitmore, R. M. (1999). Client and consultant perspectives of prequalification criteria., 34(5), 607–621.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  27. Nikolovová, P., Palguta, J. & Pertold, F. (2012). Public Contracts in the Czech Republic. What the Data Say on Behaviour of Contracting Authorities? Veřejné zakázky v ČR: Co říkají data o chování zadavatelů?.. [Online] 6. [Citace: 10. May 2013.].
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Paul, A. & Gutierrez, G. (2005). Simple probability models for project contracting.165(2), 329–338
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  29. Plenkiewicz, E. (2009). Contractor prequalification model using fuzzy sets.15(4), 377–385
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. Russell, J.S. & Skibniewski M. (1987). A structured approach to the contractor prequalification process in the USA., Session D:240-51. Danish Building Research Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. Russel, J.S. (1991). Contractor failure: analysis., ASCE, 5(3), 163-180.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  32. Russell, J. S., Hancher, D. E. & Skibniewski, M. J. (1992). Contractor prequalification data for construction owners., 10(2), 117–135.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  33. Saaty, T. L., (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York, McGraw-Hill.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  34. Saaty, T. L. & Kearns P. K. (1985). Analytical planning, The Organization of Systems, The Analytic Hierarchy Process Series, Vol. IV, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. Saaty, T. L., (2005). Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process, Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risk, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. Saaty, T. (2010). Economic forecasting with tangible and intagible criteria: the analytic hierarchy process of measurement and its validation,, 1, 5-45.
    Search in Google Scholar
  37. Saaty T.L. & Peniwati K. (2008). Group decision making: drawing out and reconciling differences. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. Shen, L. Y., Lu, W., Shen, Q. & Li, H. (2003). A computer-aided decision support system for assessing a contractor’s competitiveness., 12(5), 577–587.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  39. Sipahi, S. Timor, M. (2010). The analytic hierarchy process and analytic network process: an overview of applications., 48(5), 775 – 808
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  40. Skibniewski, M., & Chao, L. (1992). Evaluation of advanced construction technology with AHP method., ASCE, 118, 255–261.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  41. Strand, I., Ramada, P. & Canton, E. (2011).A study on procurement regulation. Prepared for the European Commission, March 2011, London Economics, ECORYS.
    Search in Google Scholar
  42. Topcu, Y. I. (2004). A decision model proposal for construction contractor selection in Turkey., 39(4), 469–481.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  43. Turskis, Z. (2008). Multi-attribute contractors ranking method by applying ordering of feasible alternatives of solutions in terms of preferability technique.14(2), 224–239.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  44. Vaidya, O.S & Kumar, S. (2006). Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications,, Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 169(1), 1-29.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  45. Wong, C. H., Holt, G. D. & Harris, P. (2001). Multi-criteria selection or lowest price? Investigation of UK construction clients’ tender evaluation preferences., 8(4), 257–271.
    Search in Google Scholar
  46. Wong, C. H., Holt, G. D. & Cooper, P. A. (2000). Lowest price or value? Investigation of UK construction clients’ tender selection process., 18(7), 767–774.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  47. Voulgaridou, D., Kirytopoulos K.E. & Leopoulos, V. (2009). An Analytic Network Process Approach for sales forecasting,9, 35-53.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  48. Zavadskas, E. K., Kaklauskas, A. & Banaitiene, N. (2001). Multi-criteria analysis of a building life cycle. Vilnius:, 380 p. (in Lithuanian).
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ethemes-2016-0006 | Journal eISSN: 2217-3668 | Journal ISSN: 0353-8648
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 103 - 128
Submitted on: Dec 22, 2015
Accepted on: Mar 23, 2016
Published on: Jun 8, 2016
Published by: University of Niš, Faculty of Economics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
procurement,
criteria,
evaluation,
weighting coefficient,
choice,
multi-criteria analysis
JEL:
C44,
C82
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Political economics,
Political economics, other

© 2016 Predrag Mimović, Ana Krstić, published by University of Niš, Faculty of Economics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 54 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)
Previous article
Next article