Dimension | Indicators | No. of items | Cronbach Alpha |
Contractor prequalification selection criteria | Financial stability evaluation | 6 | 0.953 |
Management and technical ability evaluation | |||
Contractor’s experience evaluation | |||
Contractor’s past performance | |||
Plant and human resources evaluation | |||
Health and safety and environmental measures | |||
Multi-criteria methods | Multi-criteria utility theory (MUT) | 6 | 0.924 |
Complex Proportional Assessment (COPRAS) | |||
Evidential Reasoning (ER) | |||
Analytic Network Process (ANP) | |||
Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) approach | |||
Fuzzy Set Theory (FST) | |||
Benefits | Facilitate the achievement of project success and the objectives within the scheduled time | 6 | 0.980 |
Reduce the associated project risk during the bidding and the construction processes | |||
Maximize overall value to the project owner or client | |||
Enable the client or project owner to select contractors who are performers for the project | |||
Minimize the possibility of contractor default | |||
Save the project owner a lot of time | |||
Challenges | Removal of effective and competent contractors | 9 | 0.923 |
It leads to projects failure in terms of time delay | |||
Poor quality standard | |||
Some of the criteria are very complex and difficult to apply in practice | |||
Excessive cost and time overrun | |||
Substandard work | |||
Imprecise assessments due to lack of information | |||
Shortcomings in expertise in the application method | |||
Disputes among contractors and clients |