W3.0 – AhmedALAbri- Bid Evaluation no compensatory models

1. Problem Definition

Four bidders submitted their technical and commercial bids to win the contract of design and construction of drill site, access road to drilling site and camp works from an oil and gas company.

The role of the infrastructure manager of oil and Gas Company and his team to evaluate the technical bids of the four bidders prior opening the commercial bids.  

2. Identify the Feasible Alternative

Infrastructure manager and his team decided to use no compensatory models to evaluate and rank the bidders and this model is made up of:-

  • dominance
  • satisficing
  • disjunctive resolution, and
  • lexicography

The above four models will be implemented to evaluate and rank the bidders.

3. Development of the Outcome for Alternative

The Evaluation criteria are listed below:-

  • General information
  • Project Execution plan
  • Project organization
  • Quality assurance and Quality control
  • Health, safety and Security plan
  • Tenderer’s resources
  • Technical Expectation
  • Current commitment and workload
  • Experience and Track record

4. Selection Criteria

 The criteria of the feasible alternatives using no compensatory models as follow:


5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative

Analysis and comparison of the alternatives as below tables:-





 From above tables, it is obvious that alternative can be expressed in many ways. Dominance is useful screening method for eliminating inferior alternative from the analysis. Satisficing, sometimes referred as the method of feasible ranges it is required the establishment of the minimum or maximum acceptable value. Disjunctive method is similar to satisficing; it is comparing the Criteria Category of each alternative to the standard. And lexicography method is the suitable for decision situation in which a single Criteria Category is judge to be more important that all others Criteria Category.

 6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

As show from table -5-, lexicography method is a perfect technique to be used in bid evaluation that because its simplicity, informative and gives clear indication for the decision maker to pick out the best bidder.

 7. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

Multi-attributes of no compensatory models are one of the best techniques for selecting the best option.

8. Reference:

  1. UK North Sea oil production decline. Retrieved from http://www.oilvoice.com/n/UK_North_Sea_oil_production_decline/5e0b0a2ab66b.aspx#gsc.tab=0
  2. Humphreys, G.C. (2011). Project Management Using Earned Value, Second Edition, Humphreys & Associates, Management Consultants.
  3. Giammalvo, P. D. (2012). AACE Certification Preparation Course Handouts.
  4. Sullivan Wicks Koelling, Engineering Economy (fifteenth Edition). Prentice Hall
  5. Andi (2014, March 21). W4_Andi_Decision Making Multi Attributes | Kristal AACE 2014. Retrieved June 14, 2014, from http://kristalaace2014.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/w4_andi_decision-making-multi-attributes/
  6. Griffiths, J. (2012, May 14). Non-Compensatory Choices: Not All Decisions are a Simple Trade Off | By Jeremy Griffiths. Retrieved June 13, 2014, from http://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4056066.html
  7.  Calude, Cristian (1994). Information and randomness. An algorithmic perspective. EATCS Monographs on Theoretical Computer Science. Springer-Verlag. p. 1. ISBN 3-540-57456-5.Zbl 0922.68073




2 thoughts on “W3.0 – AhmedALAbri- Bid Evaluation no compensatory models

  1. Pingback: W5.0 – AhmedALAbri- Test and validate a contractor scoring model. | PMI-Oman 2014

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s