IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v111y2022ics0305048322000676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessments in public procurement procedures

Author

Listed:
  • Martínez, Ricardo
  • Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquín
  • Llorca, Natividad

Abstract

In this paper we study how to assess the performance of a group of individuals according to their achievements in several attributes or categories by means of a scoring system. Such an assessment is the composition of two steps. First, each individual obtains a partial score in each category (that may potentially depend on her opponents’ performance). And second, those partial scores are combined into a global assessment. The partial score in each attribute is upper bounded by an exogenous threshold or cap. Each problem is determined by four elements: a set of agents (or tenders), a set of attributes to be evaluated, a matrix of achievements that specified the score each agent has obtained in each attribute, and a vector of caps. By means of the axiomatic methodology, we identify the families of assessment functions that satisfy some natural requirements (anonymity, continuity, monotonicity, null contribution, additivity, and separability). Our findings state that these families are weighted averages of the attribute assessments. Finally, as an illustration, we analyze a public tender whose purpose was to carry out an accounts auditing of a public company. As a practical implication of our theoretical results, we show that truncation presents significant advantages with respect to other methods. Particularly, it avoids the exclusion paradox.

Suggested Citation

  • Martínez, Ricardo & Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquín & Llorca, Natividad, 2022. "Assessments in public procurement procedures," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:111:y:2022:i:c:s0305048322000676
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2022.102660
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048322000676
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2022.102660?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    2. Pablo Ballesteros-P�rez & Martin Skitmore & Eugenio Pellicer & M. Carmen Gonz�lez-Cruz, 2015. "Scoring rules and abnormally low bids criteria in construction tenders: a taxonomic review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 259-278, April.
    3. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2010. "Post-objective determination of weights of the evaluation factors in public procurement tenders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 261-267, January.
    4. Kalai, Ehud, 1977. "Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1623-1630, October.
    5. Falagario, Marco & Sciancalepore, Fabio & Costantino, Nicola & Pietroforte, Roberto, 2012. "Using a DEA-cross efficiency approach in public procurement tenders," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 523-529.
    6. Mattar, SG & Macdonald, RJ & Choo, EU, 1992. "Procurement process: Decision by exclusion and pairwise comparisons," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 705-712.
    7. Pictet, Jacques & Bollinger, Dominique, 2008. "Extended use of the cards procedure as a simple elicitation technique for MAVT. Application to public procurement in Switzerland," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(3), pages 1300-1307, March.
    8. Vieira, Ana C.L. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2020. "Enhancing knowledge construction processes within multicriteria decision analysis: The Collaborative Value Modelling framework," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Ralph L. Keeney, 1976. "A Group Preference Axiomatization with Cardinal Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 140-145, October.
    10. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Corrêa, Émerson C. & De Corte, Jean-Marie & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2002. "Facilitating bid evaluation in public call for tenders: a socio-technical approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 227-242, June.
    11. Simon Domberger & Stephen Rimmer, 1994. "Competitive Tendering and Contracting in the Public Sector: A Survey," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 439-453.
    12. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1950. "A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 328-328.
    13. Beata GAVUROVA & Martin MIKESKA & Eva HUCULOVA, 2020. "Evaluation Of Selected Determinants Of Public Procurement In The Health Sector," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2020(34), pages 45-63, June.
    14. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2020. "Competitive bidding in asymmetric multidimensional public procurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(1), pages 211-220.
    15. Paweł Mielcarz & Dmytro Osiichuk & Ryszard Owczarkowski, 2018. "Tender Bids Evaluation in the Context of Value-Based Management," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Tadeusz Dudycz & Grażyna Osbert-Pociecha & Bogumiła Brycz (ed.), Efficiency in Business and Economics, pages 133-144, Springer.
    16. Ralph L. Keeney & Craig W. Kirkwood, 1975. "Group Decision Making Using Cardinal Social Welfare Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 430-437, December.
    17. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Carlos Gonc{c}alves-Dosantos & Ricardo Mart'inez & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2024. "Measures of relevance to the success of streaming platforms," Papers 2403.08421, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Vieira, Ana C.L. & Freitas, Liliana & Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Bana e Costa, João & Freitas, Ângela & Santana, Paula, 2023. "Collaborative development of composite indices from qualitative value judgements: The EURO-HEALTHY Population Health Index model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 475-492.
    2. Suzana de Suzana Dantas Daher & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2012. "The Use of Ranking Veto Concept to Mitigate the Compensatory Effects of Additive Aggregation in Group Decisions on a Water Utility Automation Investment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 185-204, March.
    3. J González-Pachón & C Romero, 2006. "An analytical framework for aggregating multiattribute utility functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1241-1247, October.
    4. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    5. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    6. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    7. Benítez-Fernández, Amalia & Ruiz, Francisco, 2020. "A Meta-Goal Programming approach to cardinal preferences aggregation in multicriteria problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Dillon, John L. & Perry, Chad, 1977. "Multiattribute Utility Theory, Multiple Objectives And Uncertainty In Ex Ante Project Evaluation," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(01-2), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Prasad, Sanjeev K. & Mangaraj, B.K., 2022. "A multi-objective competitive-design framework for fuel procurement planning in coal-fired power plants for sustainable operations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    10. Anocha Aribarg & Neeraj Arora & Moon Young Kang, 2010. "Predicting Joint Choice Using Individual Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 139-157, 01-02.
    11. Khaled Jabeur & Jean-Marc Martel & Slim Ben Khélifa, 2004. "A Distance-Based Collective Preorder Integrating the Relative Importance of the Group's Members," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 327-349, July.
    12. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    13. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    14. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    15. Mimica R. Milošević & Dušan M. Milošević & Ana D. Stanojević & Dragan M. Stević & Dušan J. Simjanović, 2021. "Fuzzy and Interval AHP Approaches in Sustainable Management for the Architectural Heritage in Smart Cities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-29, February.
    16. González-Pachón, Jacinto & Romero, Carlos, 2011. "The design of socially optimal decisions in a consensus scenario," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 179-185, April.
    17. Cheaitou, Ali & Larbi, Rim & Al Housani, Bashayer, 2019. "Decision making framework for tender evaluation and contractor selection in public organizations with risk considerations," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Panos Xidonas & Ilias Lekkos & Charis Giannakidis & Christos Staikouras, 2023. "Multicriteria security evaluation: does it cost to be traditional?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 323(1), pages 301-330, April.
    19. Daske, Thomas, 2021. "The Incentive Costs of Welfare Judgments," EconStor Preprints 230318, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    20. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public procurement; Tender; Assessment; Scoring; Cap; Weighted average; Truncation; Proportionality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D45 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Rationing; Licensing
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • H40 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - General
    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:111:y:2022:i:c:s0305048322000676. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.