![Sample our Built Environment journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5926/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Built-Environment.jpg"})
Abstract
In order to achieve a fair, probity, transparent and open competition environment in the construction industry, the Chinese government has developed and applied a multi-criteria competitive tendering system for the procurement of construction projects. However in many cases, the system only works on compilation of requirements and problems still frequently occur. The aim of this paper is to review the current construction tendering system and practice and propose strategies for improvement. A number of methods have been used to obtain research data, including focused group workshops and discussions, on-site observations, desk top study of relevant regulations and policies and review of three actual project tendering cases. It was found that China has gone a long way from project assignment to the current competitive tendering practice. However, the current tendering system has prevented bidders from focussing on value for money and construction innovation. Furthermore, the tender evaluation processes were rather formal and compilation of procedures and requirements than in-depth and project-specific. In addition, the time (half a day) given for evaluating tender submissions was insufficient. In some cases, the tender evaluation criteria was set after the bidders had been selected and there was no mechanism in place to review or audit the contract award decisions made by the tender evaluation committees. Based on these findings, it is suggested that as part of the market economic system, the Chinese government should allow bidders to calculate project cost on the basis of market price information and the company’s technical and management capabilities, instead of following quotation books and regulations and guidelines issued by the government. It is also suggested that detailed evaluation criteria be prepared prior to calling for tender and more time be given to evaluate tender submission documents. Finally, it is suggested that random audit of archived cases be conducted to ensure the decisions made were fair, open and probity.