IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i6p2488-d1358636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framework for Strategic Selection of Maintenance Contractors

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Umer Zubair

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, King Faisal University (KFU), P.O. Box 380, Al-Hofuf 31982, Saudi Arabia)

  • Osama Farid

    (NUST Institute of Civil Engineering (NICE), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan)

  • Muhammad Usman Hassan

    (NUST Institute of Civil Engineering (NICE), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan)

  • Taha Aziz

    (NUST Institute of Civil Engineering (NICE), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan)

  • Sameer Ud-Din

    (NUST Institute of Civil Engineering (NICE), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan)

Abstract

Selecting the right maintenance contractor is crucial for efficient operation and project success. Traditionally, this selection has been cost-driven, but the ever-growing complexity of projects has led to a shift towards best-value selection. The best value selection criteria evaluate the contractors based on factors like experience and past performance, along with the proposed cost. However, this approach lacks substantiated knowledge of these factors and often includes factors that cannot be validated at the time of procurement. This paper proposes a framework that applies the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to the maintenance contractor selection process. A detailed literature review was carried out to identify factors involved in maintenance selection. Data were collected from experts through a questionnaire developed based on the identified factors, facilitating AHP implementation. Substantiation strategies were identified using expert judgments. Our findings reveal that past performance criteria hold the maximum weight in the selection process. The proposed framework offers a more comprehensive approach for selecting maintenance contractors, ensuring both value and efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Umer Zubair & Osama Farid & Muhammad Usman Hassan & Taha Aziz & Sameer Ud-Din, 2024. "Framework for Strategic Selection of Maintenance Contractors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2488-:d:1358636
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2488/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/6/2488/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karapetrovic, Stanislav & Rosenbloom, E. S., 1999. "A quality control approach to consistency paradoxes in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 704-718, December.
    2. Senay Oguztimur, 2011. "Why Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach For Transport Problems?," ERSA conference papers ersa11p438, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    4. Eddie W. L. Cheng & Heng Li, 2004. "Contractor selection using the analytic network process," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(10), pages 1021-1032, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Pablo Aragonés‐Beltrán & Mª. Carmen González‐Cruz & Astrid León‐Camargo & Rosario Viñoles‐Cebolla, 2023. "Assessment of regional development needs according to criteria based on the Sustainable Development Goals in the Meta Region (Colombia)," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 1101-1121, April.
    2. Chetan A. Jhaveri & Jitendra M. Nenavani, 2020. "Evaluation of eTail Services Quality: AHP Approach," Vision, , vol. 24(3), pages 310-319, September.
    3. Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Homogenous Groups’ Preferences by Using AIP and AIJ Group AHP-PROMETHEE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Sharma, Mahak & Sehrawat, Rajat, 2020. "A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method for cloud adoption: Evidence from the healthcare sector," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    5. Haddad, Brahim & Liazid, Abdelkrim & Ferreira, Paula, 2017. "A multi-criteria approach to rank renewables for the Algerian electricity system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 462-472.
    6. Andreas Schiessl & Richard Müller & Rebekka Volk & Konrad Zimmer & Patrick Breun & Frank Schultmann, 2020. "Integrating site-specific environmental impact assessment in supplier selection: exemplary application to steel procurement," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(9), pages 1409-1457, November.
    7. Crary, Michael & Nozick, L. K. & Whitaker, L. R., 2002. "Sizing the US destroyer fleet," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 680-695, February.
    8. Giada Feletti & Mariachiara Piraina & Boris Petrenj & Paolo Trucco, 2022. "Collaborative capability building for critical infrastructure resilience: assessment and selection of good practices," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 207-233, June.
    9. Pérez-Mesa, Juan Carlos & Galdeano-Gómez, Emilio & Salinas Andújar, Jose A., 2012. "Logistics network and externalities for short sea transport: An analysis of horticultural exports from southeast Spain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 188-198.
    10. José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador & Pilar Gargallo & Alfredo Altuzarra, 2016. "Systemic decision making in AHP: a Bayesian approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 261-284, October.
    11. Rabelo, Luis & Eskandari, Hamidreza & Shaalan, Tarek & Helal, Magdy, 2007. "Value chain analysis using hybrid simulation and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 536-547, February.
    12. 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.
    13. József Temesi, 2019. "An interactive approach to determine the elements of a pairwise comparison matrix," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 533-549, June.
    14. Marlow, David R. & Beale, David J. & Mashford, John S., 2012. "Risk-based prioritization and its application to inspection of valves in the water sector," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 67-74.
    15. Jacinto González-Pachón & Carlos Romero, 2007. "Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 123-132, October.
    16. Orduño, Miguel Angel & Kallas, Zein & Ornelas, Selene Ivette, 2021. "Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Actions Based on Farmers' Environmental Preferences and Perceptions. Sustainable Agriculture, Mexico," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314967, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Ivona Ivić & Anita Cerić, 2024. "Mitigation Measures for Information Asymmetry between Participants in Construction Projects: The Impact of Trust," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-27, August.
    18. Wiebke Mohr & Anika Rädke & Adel Afi & Franka Mühlichen & Moritz Platen & Annelie Scharf & Bernhard Michalowsky & Wolfgang Hoffmann, 2022. "Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Targetti, Stefano & Schaller, Lena L. & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2021. "A fuzzy cognitive mapping approach for the assessment of public-goods governance in agricultural landscapes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    20. Le Zhang & Xueyan Li & Yanlong Guo, 2024. "Research on the Influencing Factors of Spatial Vitality of Night Parks Based on AHP–Entropy Weights," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-20, June.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:6:p:2488-:d:1358636. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.