- Problem Definition:
This has reference to the previous W3 blog in which Grid Analysis had been chosen to figure out the alternative in investment. Using the same tender evaluation, Non Compensatory models is examined to select the best alternative.
- Development of Feasible Alternatives:
Based on the tender applicants, we have identified the three companies which meet the Mandatory Requirements in our technical evaluation criteria provided by our company tender prime document. The three companies are M Company, A Company and T Company.
- Development of the outcome for alternative:
c) Media (Volunteers).
e) First Aid
- Selection Criteria
|M Company||A Company||T Company|
|Experience||7 events in the last two yrs.(Full Event Management)||4 Events in the last two years. .(Full Event Management)||3 Events in the last two years .(Full Event Management)|
|Cost||832, 000 OMR||752,000 OMR||596, 000 OMR|
|Media (Volunteers)||Collection of Volunteers Plan Provided.||Collection of Volunteers Plan Provided.||No Collection of Volunteers Plan Provided.|
|Catering||Provided all menu’s for the event.(+6)||Menu’s not provided for the event.||Provided all menu’s for the event.(+6)|
|First Aid||Including First Aid Room(a supervisor and two nurses)||Including First Aid Room. (two nurses)||Not Including First Aid room nor the staff for it.|
|Transportation||2 Buses minimum, Luxurious buses, Company decided and included. Plenty of Experience in Salalah port.||Number of buses is not included, company is not decided yet. Participants will not wait longer than 10 minutes.||Nothing is mentioned, needs to be clarified.|
|Management||Full package of management.||Full Package of management and Managers are identified by names.||Not Mentioned, needs to be clarified.|
Table 1 Illustrates the Summary information for Tender Decision Making.
There are four Non-compensatory models to be tested:
|M Company vs A Company||M company vs T Company||A Company vs T Company|
Table 2. Check for Dominance among Alternatives.
From the table above, we know that each attribute has no dominance among another. So, we can move on to Satisficing (method of feasible range) .
|Minimum Acceptable||Maximum Acceptable||Unacceptable Alternative|
|Experience||4 Events in the last two years||–||T Company is eliminated|
|Media (Volunteers)||4 different categories of Volunteers||–||T Company|
|Catering||Provide 4 Menu’s||–||Alpha omega (needs to be clarified)|
|First Aid||First Aid room and two First Aiders||–||T Company|
|Transportation||Bus for every 30 PAX||–||T Company|
|Management||Identify managers and supervisors||–||T Company|
Table 3. Feasible Ranges for Satisfying.
c. Disjunctive Resolution:
Table 4. Attributes Ranking.
|Experience||6||M Company > A Company> T Company|
|Management||5||A Company> M Company > T Company|
|Media||4||M Company >A Company > T Company|
|First Aid||3||M Company > A Company > T Company|
|Catering||2||M Company = T Company > A Company|
|Transportation||1||M Company = A Company > T Company|
|Cost||0||T Company > A Company > T Company|
Table 5. Illustrates the Application of Lexicography.
- Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative:
In this situation it’s not good enough for decision making purpose as there isn’t any option that dominates another option fully.
Based on Table3, T Company is eliminated from the tender alternatives.
c. Disjunctive Solution:
According to the tender prime document, those are the weights of the attributes.
Using Lexicography model, M Company is selected because Experience is the top ranked attribute in the tender prime document.
- Selection of the Preferred Alternative:
M Company is the best alternative among the three alterative companies. It is selected according to the Lexicography model and Experience is the top ranked attribute in the tender prime document. If same model have similar experience, then go with the second ranked attribute which is Management.
- Performance Monitoring:
Non-Compensatory Model has proved that it’s a valuable model to be using in the decision making process, beside the Grid Analysis that was used in W3 Blog. It’s my first time using this method in tender evaluation, therefore I would submit this blog to my GM and check his feedback.
- Topazsmartd (2014). Decision Making Considering Multiattributes. Retrieved from: http://topazsmartd.wordpress.com/2014/05/13/w3_hp_decision-making-considering-multiattributes/
- College Schollarship (2014).Ten Rules Selecting a College or Universities. Retrieved from: http://www.college-scholarships.com/ten_rules_for_selecting_a_college_or_universities.htm
- Sullivan, William G., Wicks, Elin M. & Koelling, C. Patrick (1942), Engineering Economy 15th Edition, Chapter 14, page 555 – 560. Singapore: Prentice Hall, Inc.