As project failure risk is reduced with the inclusion of additional factors when choosing a contractor, so too is client risk. As an approach to multi-criteria decision-making, the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is explored to determine whether the traditional AHP (consistency ratio 0.1) and the weakly consistent AHP (consistency ratio 0.5–0.1), currently used for contractor selection, produce the same result. A case study comparing both methods reveals that the top-ranked contractor was the same while the ranking of the remaining contractors were different. Because choosing the right contractor can mean the difference between project success and failure, the consistency rule for the traditional AHP should be used for contractor selection, and not the weakly consistent AHP, especially as inconsistency increases random outcomes. This finding becomes important if the first-choice contractor opts out of a contract or is terminated by the client and a suitable second choice must be made from the original bids.
|Number of pages||12|
|Journal||International Journal of Construction Management|
|Early online date||08 Dec 2016|
|Publication status||Published - 02 Jan 2018|
Bibliographical notePublisher Copyright:
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
- contractor selection
- multi-criteria decision
- weak consistency
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Building and Construction
- Strategy and Management
- Management of Technology and Innovation