IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v24y2006i8p791-803.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bidding models: testing the stationarity assumption

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Skitmore
  • Goran Runeson

Abstract

With notably few exceptions, bidding models contain probability distributions with parameters that are assumed to be fixed, or stationary, over time. Some methods of testing the tenability of this assumption are examined and applied to eight datasets. Of particular interest is the statistical significance of two types of periodicity: (1) that bidders gradually reduce their bids prior to winning a contract; and (2) that bidders have periods in which they are more competitive and periods in which they are less competitive. To test (1), McCaffer and Pettitt's (1976) cusum method is used and shown to have a limited interpretation in this context. McCaffer's 'deficit' statistic is then used in conjunction with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and shows (1) to be untenable for the samples involved. To test (2), the deficit statistic is again used with an ANOVA to examine all possible sub-series of bids.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Skitmore & Goran Runeson, 2006. "Bidding models: testing the stationarity assumption," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(8), pages 791-803.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:24:y:2006:i:8:p:791-803
    DOI: 10.1080/01446190600680432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01446190600680432
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446190600680432?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goran Runeson & Martin Skitmore, 1999. "Tendering theory revisited," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 285-296.
    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. Clement Smartt & Susan Ferreira, 2011. "Advancing systems engineering in support of the bid and proposal process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 255-266, September.

    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. Martin Skitmore & Goran Runeson & Xinling Chang, 2006. "Construction price formation: full-cost pricing or neoclassical microeconomic theory?," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7), pages 773-783.
    2. Qiao, Yu & Labi, Samuel & Fricker, Jon D., 2021. "Does highway project bundling policy affect bidding competition? Insights from a mixed ordinal logistic model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 228-242.
    3. Mohammed Fadhil Dulaimi & Hon Guo Shan, 2002. "The factors influencing bid mark-up decisions of large- and medium-size contractors in Singapore," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 601-610.

    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:taf:conmgt:v:24:y:2006:i:8:p:791-803. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    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.