W7_MA_site surveys under Adhoc servies Part 2

Problem Definition

As suggested by Dr Paul to include another alternative to the investigation, which is Job Order Contracting (JOC).  This might open other or change the direction of the procurement strategy if it found to be feasible and preferred after the evaluation.

Identify the Feasible Alternative

As a change in procurement strategy of the site surveys, new methodology is introduced. This includes contracting with site surveyors under long term contract (Ad-Hoc). in this case common scope of work would be required and develop for such service. Adding to this the new alternative which is Job Order Contracting where the contractor normally shares the design with the off taker. It is normally used in company with repetitive work orders but the company does not know when, where and how many they are going to procure.

Development of the Outcome for Alternative

For this investigation Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) will be used. “Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) involves making preference decisions (such as evaluation, prioritization, selection) over the available alternatives that are characterized by multiple, usually conflicting, attributes” [1]. The evaluation of the alternative will be based upon time and cost.

Selection Criteria

During the three years period, it is estimated that 6 topographic surveys will be conducted at least. The tender process would have a minimum of 40 days under the tender law. After receiving the bids there will be a period of evaluation and award and finalizing the contract which last for at least two weeks. It is estimated that the cost of both methods is similar.

Attribute	JOC	Ad-hoc
Document prepration (RFP)	6 weeks	2 weeks
tender evaluation	6 weeks	2 weeks
availability	5 days	5 days
resources cost	6000 OMR	2000 OMR
learning curve of surveyor	high	high
cost per hectare	Medium	Slightly higher
Market Competition & support	Higher	Low
flexibility	Higher	low

Table 1

Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative

For the analysis two models are used which are the Non-Dimensional Scaling and the Additive Weighting Technique.

1.       Non-Dimensional Scaling

In the none dimensional scaling normally a range from 0 to 1. However due to the number of the alternatives, the scoring will be either 1 (as preference decision) or 0 (for the avoided decision).

Attribute	Ad-hoc	JOC
Document preparation (RFP)	1	0
tender evaluation	1	0
availability	1	0
resources cost	1	0
learning curve of surveyor	1	0
cost per hectare	0	1
Market Competition & support	0	1
flexibility	0	1
total	5	3

Table 2

2.        Additive Weighting Technique

Attribute	Relative rank	Normalized weighted (A)	Ad-hoc			JOC
			B		A*B	B	A*B
Market Competition & support	1	0.0278	0	0		1	0.0278
Tender evaluation	2	0.0556	1	0.056		0	0
Document preparation (RFP)	3	0.0833	1	0.0833		0	0
Learning curve of surveyor	4	0.111	1	0.111		0	0
Flexibility	5	0.1389	0	0		1	0.1389
Cost per hectare	6	0.1667	0	0		1	0.1667
Availability	7	0.1944	1	0.1944		0	0
Resources cost	8	0.222	1	0.222		0	0
Total	36	1	5	0.6667		3	0.3333

Table 3

The relative ranking changes the value of each attribute and this gives higher weightage to the preferred attribute. This is some cases change the evaluation and the recommended options.

Selection of the Preferred Alternative

As shown in the tables above, the preferred option STILL is the Ad-hoc site survey services as in this case there is a slightly less design requirements comparing to other type of projects. The method used for ad-hoc site survey here is very similar to the JOC and it is done for three years. The cost of the unit is similar to JOC as well. the only thing that is the contract durations and scope of work variations of each party which is evaluated as flexibility.  

Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

To conclude, the ad-hoc site study would work the best for the company business as there are very minimum changes that could occur during the contract term.

[1] Durability of Building Materials and Components 8. (1999) Edited by M.A. Lacasse and D.J. Vanier. Institute for Research in Construction, Ottawa ON, K1A 0R6, Canada, pp. 1787-1797. National Research Council Canada 1999

[2] D. Carrithers, 15/1/2015, An overview of Job Order Contracting a construction and renovation contracting, Retrieved from { https://www.slideshare.net/ChiefBeeKeeper/job-order-contracting-101  }

[2] K. Anupama, S. Gowri, B. Rao, and P. Rajesh, “Application of madm algorithms to network selection”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Electrical, Electronics, Instrumentation and Control Engineering, Vol.3, Issue 6, pp. 64-67, 2015.

[3] GUILD OF PROJECT CONTROLS COMPENDIUM and REFERENCE (CaR) | Project Controls - planning, scheduling, cost management and forensic analysis (Planning Planet). Retrieved from { http://www.planningplanet.com/guild/gpccar/managing-change-the-owners-perspective }