The Study on Application of Entropy Method in the Most Advantageous Tender
Chao-Lieh Pan
1, Ying-Fang Huang
2, Grier Lin
3 1, 3University of South Australia
2National Kaoshung University of Applied Sciences
ABSTRACT
On May 27, 1999, government implemented the “government procurement law” and adopted the “most advantageous tender” as contract awarding to assist the tendering invitation institutions in solving many problems about low bidding price and procurement quality. According to contract awarding essence of the “most advantageous tender”, the tendering invitation department can conduct the multiple attribute decision making in terms of technique, quality, function, management, and commercial clauses, past contract performance, price, financial plan as well as other relevant procurement function or benefit based on requirements of procurement targets. In the practical operation of handling the “most advantageous tender”, the selection of review criteria and selection of review method invite lots of dispute. Though “government procurement law” prescribed the review criteria contents and selection methods in the “most advantageous tender”, there is no definite and detailed selection operational method. As a result it is hard for tendering invitation institution to have a complete set of selection criteria as contract awarding model in handling the selection operation of the “most advantageous tender”.
It is hoped to establish a complete set of selection method for contract awarding of the “most advantageous tender” so that tendering invitation institutions can observe the fair, just and open essence in implementing the tendering invitation of the “most
advantageous tender” and selecting the winning tender of the “most advantageous tender”. This article tries to apply the concept of entropy theory and multiple attribute decision making in establishing the selection model of the “most advantageous tender” to serve as reference to tendering invitation institution in handling the supplier’s selection of the “most advantageous tender”. The empirical results prove it can truly provide tendering invitation institution with establishing the selection basis of the “most advantageous tender”.
Key Words: Most Advantageous Tender, Multiple
Attribute Decision Making (MADM), Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), Entropy Method
INTRODUCTION
Before implementation of “government procurement law”, the procurement of each institution is based on lowest tender that conforms to tender documentation specification as contract awarding principle. This contract awarding method causes the procurement of excellent function and good condition target by institution is subject to restriction and cannot be selected.
It therefore invites lots of criticism that government cannot fully take advantage of budget and purchase good targets. As such, the formulation of the “most advantageous tender” refers to methods in the advanced countries and regulations of WTO
government procurement agreement and prescribes the contract awarding model of the “most advantageous tender”. Based on Article 13 of GPA: If certain bidder is recognized to be capable of undertaking that contract, meanwhile domestic product or service or product or service of other treaty inked countries provided in the bidding document is the lowest tender, or special tender evaluation criteria are based on announcement or tender documentation, it is regarded as the most advantageous tender. And that institution should decide that bidder as winning tender.
Therefore contract awarding method of government procurement agreement has included the contract awarding method of the “most advantageous tender”. Additionally, FAR 15.1 described: when procurement is advantageous to the States, the contract awarding can conduct the tradeoff instead of the lowest bidding price. Since the contract awarding system of the “most advantageous tender” has been implemented in the U.K. and the States, the contract awarding method is not popularly adopted because its contract awarding method is not like the lowest tender has definite criteria for contract awarding. In the adoption of the “most advantageous tender”, the incomplete selection criteria can easily cause the dispute in the contract awarding or even produce the improper practice. However the lowest tender has many drawbacks including: Unworthy bidder always grabs the tender through lowest price bidding, bid rigging and illegal bidding for survival. Afterwards it reduces the cost through shoddy work. Therefore the contract performance dispute, revision of procurement plan, overdue penalty and contract dissolution are often occurred in the contract implementation [17, 20] that brings enormous puzzle to tendering invitation department. Additionally, the bad competition for unworthy supplier with lowest price edges out the excellent supplier that indirectly causes the bad result for technique upgrading and influence of procurement quality.
If complete and sound selection criteria of the “most advantageous tender” can be established, it is no
doubt the best method to select the excellent suppliers for tendering invitation institution. According to contract awarding essence of the “most advantageous tender”, the tendering invitation department can conduct the multiple attribute decision making in terms of technique, quality, function, management, and commercial clauses, past contract performance, price, financial plan as well as other relevant procurement function or benefit based on requirements of procurement targets.
However the contract awarding process of the “most advantageous tender” is mainly focused on review factors, weighting and formulation of review criteria that are also the most troubling issues when tendering invitation institution handles the contract awarding of the “most advantageous tender”, the reasons are:
1. The selection factors of the “most advantageous tender” are complicated including quantification and qualification factors. If the score is directly conducted on past bidding to numerical quantification factors, the winning tender of the “most advantageous tender” is selected through total weighting method, while qualification factors aren’t included into selection factors. It truly cannot meet the requirements of selection operation for the “most advantageous tender” at current stage.
2. The selection method doesn’t have a complete detailed selection operation so that tendering invitation institution doesn’t know what regulations to follow.
This article tries to apply the concept of entropy theory and multiple attribute decision making in establishing the selection model of the “most advantageous tender” so that tendering invitation institution could have one complete selection model for contract awarding in handling the contract awarding process of the “most advantageous tender”.
The so-called multiple attribute decision making (MADM) aims to assist the decision maker to select a proper alternative under the conditions of limited resource and target conflict through evaluating the relative importance of each attribute and serve as final alternative selection of decision maker.
The development of multiple attribute decision making can be traced to the efficient vector, proposed by Koopmans in 1951. Later on Koopman, Simo and Markowitz applied the multiple attribute decision making in the field of economics and obtained the Nobel prize, the multiple attribute decision making thus caught the attention from all circles.
In the contract awarding operation of the “most advantageous tender”, the proprietor can select the best supplier among many bidders as he can concurrently consider whether the bidder is able to achieve the multiple objectives including technique, quality, function, management, commercial clauses, past contract performance, price, financial plan as well as other relevant procurement function or benefit so that the contract awarding operation of the “most advantageous tender” can satisfy the characteristics of multiple attribute decision making.
This research tries to apply the entropy method with cardinal number characteristic in the multiple attribute decision making that is commonly used in the field of management decision making, as methodology. With this method, this research conducts the study on specific case in the contract awarding of the “most advantageous tender” of government procurement law” with hope of establishing the selection model for the “most advantageous tender”.
Entropy theory originated from thermodynamics to describe the motions among ions and molecules that are irreversible (thermodynamics’ second law). Entropy is the physical phenomenon that indicates the elements chaos or probability index under certain condition. The lowest entropy value and orderly arranged element indicate its perfect state, while the largest entropy value
and disorderly arranged element indicate the largest disorder among elements in the system. Entropy method uses the concept of entropy value to obtain the relative weighting among criteria and computes the performance value of each criterion to each alternative to obtain the relative importance among alternatives. There are many successful applied cases in the field of management science for entropy method with many quite good research results, such as:
Wang [25] used the entropy optimization concept to obtain the best activity combination of orderliness through mutual circulation among information during activities. Hsiao [16] applied the entropy method to serve as reference to assist the harbor management authority in selecting the best harbor facility investor. Chen [5] applied the entropy coefficient method to construct the CCSI (Concession Company Selection Index) for garbage incineration plant through BOT to serve as reference to BOT bidding selection. Ho [15] introduced the information entropy theory to evaluate the advantages, disadvantages and appropriateness of many website design methods to decide the website design method of rainfall station within Tamsui river basin. Chang [3] used entropy method to evaluate the Taiwan electronics industry performance and analyze the relative weighting of each evaluation index to serve as reference to management decision. Chang [2] used the entropy weighting method to obtain the relative weighting among criteria for traveling industry drafts the competitive strategy in coping with entry to WTO. Chuang [10] used the entropy weighting method to establish the evaluation model of operational performance for airline company. Lee [18] used the entropy theory to construct the empirical comparison on scale profit, scale cost and net scale profit on each manufacturing area of spatial interaction for material monitor and PC market in the Mainland China’s five PC manufacturing locations (Beijing, Kuantung, Shanhai, Fuchien and Liaoling) to locate the most potential PC manufacturing location as reference to those who are intended to invest in the Mainland China.
The most advantageous tender originated from regulation in the Article 13 of GPA. In Taiwan, this new term was passed by legislation on May 1, 1998 and was promulgated by president on May 27, 1998. Additionally the most advantageous tender is one of four contract awarding principles in the procurement operation, yet with high technique.
The “most advantageous tender” of procurement law indicates the technique, quality, function, commercial clauses or price of supplier’s bidding target, that conform to specifications of tender documentation, are conducted the serial or countable comprehensive selection to select the most advantageous one. The most advantageous tender doesn’t take the price as the only deciding factor [9], while conducts the evaluation on supplier’s reputation, concept, construction planning ability, technical specification, commercial conditions, experience and price and selects the most advantageous as contract awarding [11, 13, 14, 21, 28, 29].
The so-called “most advantageous tender” indicates the bidder’s supply conditions are evaluated as maximum benefit by procurement department according to standards described in the bid invitation. In the evaluation process, though the supply price is one of considering factors, yet it is not the only factor. The essence of the most advantageous tender is to let the institution be able to conduct the comprehensive selection according to standards prescribed in the tender documentation, the winning tender is the one with highest selecting score, good product quality and strong function. By doing so, the institution can purchase the best target under existed budgetary scale, meanwhile it encourages the suppliers to engage in non-price competition and avoid the bad lowest price bidding in affecting the procurement engineering quality [22, 27].
The concept or practice of the “most advantageous tender” has been implemented in the part of European and American advanced countries so that there are many rules, regulations and researches provided as references. In recent years, many domestic and foreign scholars are dedicated to the study of the “most
advantageous tender” procurement such as: Chang [1] thought when public construction bidding industry adopted the most advantageous tender, it is hard to analyze its own demand, drafted the evaluation items and conducted the comprehensive analysis in terms of bidder’s price, construction duration, quality, labor safety and environmental protection so as to draft a method to select the proper supplier. Yu and Tang [30] discussed the contract awarding decision of the most advantageous tender from the angle of proprietor. Tang [23] discussed the relevant operational process and items to be noted in the military construction procurement by applying the most advantageous tender. Wang [26] tried to establish the analytical decision related to contract awarding method of government procurement law and selection method of the most advantageous tender as well as conducted the comparisons on bidder selection efficacy between the lowest tender and the most advantageous tender. Chen [6] realized new procurement law is better than old law, the lowest (highest) tender isn’t necessarily the best procurement (sale through bidding) solution. However the most advantageous tender is quite good selection solution to avoid the resource waste. Chen [8] provided the institution in handling public construction to adopt the turn-key purchase in line with the most advantageous tender with recommendations on selective items to be added and deleted. Liao [19] adopted the turn-key method in handling the procurement, while the most advantageous tender is used to conduct the selection of technical tender. Chen [4] discussed the correlation between the most advantageous tender and price tender in terms of purchase efficiency and quality. Chen [7] submitted the study when public construction adopted the most advantageous tender in selecting the construction suppliers. Cibimc and Nash [11] conducted the study on tender review factors on the lowest tender and procedures. FAR15.605 specification of American Society of Civil Engineers [14] formulated: the evaluation items of suppliers selection include the price, technique, management, past performance and
realization toward mission. Department of the Environment, U.K [12] proposed the review standards of contract awarding suppliers must include price, construction duration, running cost, properties, technical advantages, post-sale service and technical assistance. Each institution should prepare the detailed items for evaluation before tender opening, while evaluation standard doesn’t necessarily set the threshold scores in advance. Based on preset evaluation standard, each institution combines the bidding contents of each supplier, evaluates their preferences and selects the nominating suppliers to decide the most advantageous tender.
RESEARCH DESIGN
To solve current dilemma in the selection operation of the most “advantageous tender”, this research uses the multiple attribute decision criteria and relevant theories of supplier selection to handle the complicated problems, quantification and qualification factors in establishing a set of objective and practical selection model of the “most advantageous tender” to serve as basis for tendering invitation institution conducts the selection operation of the “most advantageous tender”.
The selection items of the “most advantageous tender” are selected by tendering invitation institution after compiling from experts opinions:
1. Technique: It includes the technical specification, specialty or technical personnel, professional ability and on-time contract performance ability.
2. Quality: It includes quality control ability, inspection methods, error detecting ratio, easiness of operation, easiness of maintenance, precision, safety, steadiness, reliability and comfort ability for use.
3. Function: It includes production capacity, diversity, and expansion, compatibility, fore vision or special effect.
4. Management: It includes organizational framework, personnel quality and composition, duration
management, construction site management, safety maintenance, accounting system, financial status and financial management.
5. Commercial clauses: It includes contract performance time limit, payment terms, maintenance service time, post-sale service and warranty duration. 6. Past Contract Performance: It includes contract
performance record, experience and past performance.
7. Price: It includes total bidding price and correctness and cost effect of its composition.
8. Financial Plan: It includes revenue and expenditure estimate of operated cases and investment benefit analysis of fund raising plan.
This research uses entropy method to establish the selection model of the “most advantageous tender” with steps as follows:
Step 1: To calculate the occurring probability Pij
∀
=
∑
=,
1 m i ij ij ijx
x
p
of each evaluation valuei,j Among which: Xij
Step 2: To calculate the entropy value E
is the
original evaluation value of alternative i in the j attribute m is the total number of alternatives
ij ∑ = − = m i pij pij k ij E 1 ln of each attribute ,∀ j Among which m k ln 1 = ,0≤Ej ≤1
Step 3: To calculate the dispersion dj
j E j d = 1− of each attribute ,∀ j
Step 4: To calculate the relative weighting value of each
attribute
∑
= = n j j j j d d w 1 ,∀ jAmong which: n is the total number of evaluation attribute. If decision maker has preference toward objective, then it computes the revised weightingλj
Step 5: To calculate the revised weightingλj −
j
λ : Decision maker’s preference toward objective
(the weighting is known)
Step 6: To calculate the deviation distance d1(λ,i) from each alternative to ideal point based on revised weighting n j p vij = j ij, =1,2,..., − λ d i v i m n j p p ij p j p =
∑
− ≤ ≤ = 1 , ] ) 1 ( [ ) , ( 1 1 λ λ m i v i d n j ij j − ≤ ≤ =∑
= 1 , ] ) 1 ( [ ) , ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 λ λ m i v i d n j ij j ≤ ≤ − =∑
= 1 , ) ( 1 ) , ( 1 1 1 λ λStep 7: To select the minimum value of dp(λ,i) as the best alternative
EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
This case is new construction of entrusted design in the form of tender invitation and adopts the “most advantageous tender” to conduct the tender procedure publicly. The estimated construction amount stands at NT$800 million with estimated 3 construction years, while design capacity and use year will be the largest and longest as possible.
Before tender invitation, the procurement department forms the procurement selection committee, including 11 members that are equipped with
professional knowledge of that target; however the employed experts and scholars cannot be less than 1/3 of total committee members.
Besides the committee members are responsible for deciding of selection items, weighting ratio, selection method, stipulation of selection standard, comprehensive scoring according to stipulated regulations and announcement of selected results.
The selection items of the “most advantageous tender” for this research are decided by joint discussion of procurement selection committee based on selection items in the table 1, the selection items are 8 items in total, namely, past contract performance, technology transfer items, service, training (technique), estimated plant construction cost (price), organization and personnel deployment (management), design use life (technique), working progress (management) daily production value (function), briefing contents and question answering (management).
In this case, the procurement selection committee decides the selection items, weighting, and handling of public tender invitation and announcement of bidding results. In total, there are five suppliers join the bidding, the bidding data are reviewed by selection committee, compiled as table 1:
Remarks 1: Past contract performance: It indicates the bidder has individually or jointly contracted the turnkey construction of domestic or foreign petrochemical plants and has completed the construction with NT$200 million or US $4.6 million for each construction.
Table 1. Compilation of reviewed bidding data Selection item Past contract performance (Remarks 1) Technology transfer item, service, training Estimated plant construction cost Organization and personnel deployment Design use life Working progress Daily production value Briefing contents and question answering
Selection index Number of Case It is divided into 9 rankings ($10,000) It is divided into 5 rankings
Year Month Barrel It is divided into 5 rankings
Weighting 10% 10% 15% 10% 15% 15% 15% 10%
Handling
principle Biggest Biggest Smallest Biggest Biggest Smallest Biggest Biggest Standard serial Bidder 3 6.2 73500 4.2 17 30 25000 4.0 A 3 4.2 80000 3.4 15 36 22500 3.6 B 2 6.2 75000 4.2 15 30 25000 3.4 C 3 5.8 73500 3.6 17 30 24000 4.0 D 1 4.4 75500 2.8 16 35 24500 3.3 E 2 4.6 76000 3.2 14 34 25000 3.1
4.2 The computed results by entropy method
ij
E
Bidder Past contract performance (Remarks 1) Technology transfer item, service, training Estimated plant construction cost Organization and personnel deployment Design use life Working progress Daily production value Briefing contents and question answering A 0.2202 0.1855 0.1990 0.1991 0.1980 0.1982 0.1944 0.2025 B 0.1926 0.2144 0.2002 0.2139 0.19800 0.2018 0.2024 0.1982 C 0.2202 0.2101 0.2006 0.2034 0.2072 0.2017 0.1994 0.2100 D 0.1354 0.1893 0.2001 0.1836 0.2029 0.1988 0.2009 0.1959 E 0.1926 0.1930 0.2 0.1944 0.1926 0.1994 0.2024 0.1910∑
E
j 0.9610 0.9922 0.9999 0.9944 0.9986 0.9998 0.9995 0.9976 Total amount jd
j jE
d
= 1
−
0.0390 0.0078 1.583 0.0056 0.0014 0.0001 0.0005 0.0024 0.05672∑
==
n j j j jd
d
w
1 0.68841 0.1371 0.00028 0.0984 0.0239 0.0020 0.0082 0.0417 1 Original weighting (λ
j)
0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.1 j j*
w
λ
0.0688 0.0137 4.188 0.0098 0.0036 0.0003 0.0012 0.0042 0.10172 Revised weighting( _ jλ
) 0.6768 0.1348 0.0004 0.0967 0.0353 0.0030 0.0120 0.0410 1To compute the distance of ideal point
d
1(
λ
,
i
)
( j −λ
)*(
p
ij)
Past contract performance (Remarks 1) Technology transfer item, service, training Estimated plant construction cost Organization and personnel deployment Design use life Working progress Daily production value Briefing contents and question answering jd
1
−
d
j A 0.1846 0.0225 8.126E-05 0.01912 0.0069 0.000579 0.002234 0.00086 0.237 0.763 2 B 0.1231 0.0332 8.261E-05 0.02362 0.0069 0.000606 0.002483 0.00082 0.197 0.809 32 C 0.1846 0.0310 8.302E-05 0.02024 0.0078 0.000606 0.002383 0.00096 0.248 0.752 1 D 0.0615 0.0235 8.248E-05 0.01574 0.0073 0.000584 0.00243 0.00079 0.112 0.888 4 E 0.1231 0.0246 8.234E-05 0.01780 0.0064 0.000588 0.00248 0.00074 0.176 0.824 5 1-dj：To compute the distance of ideal point.Bidder
d
1To compute the distanceof ideal point Ranking
A 0.76321 3
B 0.80931 2
C 0.75234 1
D 0.88797 5
E 0.82404 4
After considering entropy weighting, the distance of ideal point: bidder A is 0.76321, bidder B: 0.80931, bidder C: 0.75234, bidder D: 0.88797 and bidder E: 0.82404. After ranking arrangement, bidder C has the shortest distance of ideal point, therefore bidder C is the winning tender of the “most advantageous tender”.
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
This research is based on entropy theory to conduct the factor sequence selection of each bidder. The empirical study can successfully handle the quantification factors, qualification factors and multiple attribute issues, can provide tendering invitation institution with establishing the selection basis of the “most advantageous tender” and increase the judgment on selection decision of bidders in the “most advantageous tender”.
REFERENCES
1. Chang Cheng-Der, 2001, “A Study for Multi-Parameter Bidding System–with Bridge
Engineering as a Case Study”, thesis of National Yunlin University.
2. Chang Chien-Hua, 2002, “The Study on Competitive Strategy for Traveling Industry After WTO Entry”, thesis of Institute of Tourism Management, Nanhua University.
3. Chang Yo-Li, 2002, “The Rating of Taiwan Electronics Industry Performance- Application and Comparison of Grey Relational Analysis and Data Envelopment Analysis”, thesis of Department of Finance, Min Chuan University.
4. Chen Chao-Chuan, 2002, “A Study of the Most Advantageous Tender and the Price Tender: Case Study of Procurement Conducted in Military Entities”, thesis of National Defense Management College. 5. Chen Hao-Chun, 2000, “Evaluating a BOT Project
with Fuzzy Multiple Objective Programming”, thesis of Department Construction, National Taiwan University of Technology.
6. Chen Hsu-Feng, 2002, “The Study of Procurement Method in the Public Sector-Case Study”, thesis of National Sun Yat-sen University
7. Chen Lung-Seng, 2002, “The Operational Study on Construction Manufacturer Selection of Public Construction in Adopting the Most Advantageous Tender”, thesis of Chung Hua University.
8. Chen Shu-Chuan, 2002, “The Study on Selection Items of the Most Advantageous Tender Executed by Turnkey Procurement System of the Public
Construction”, thesis of National Taiwan University. 9. Chen Yu, 1996, “Improvement of Current Tender
Reviewing System to Upgrade Construction Contracting Quality”, Journal of Chinese Institute of Engineers, Engineering Monthly, Vol. 69, pp37-35. 10. Chuang Shan-Shan, 2002, “The Study on
Application of Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making in the Operational Performance Rating of Airline Company-Taking National Airline Companies as Example”, thesis of Department of Navigation Management, National Taiwan Ocean University.
11. Cibinic, J. and Nash, R.C., 1981, Administration of Government Contracts, Government Contract Program, George Washington University.
12. Contracting for Works Services (Volume II) Tendering and Contract Procedures, 1990, Department of the Environment, U.K.
13. Herbsman ,Z.J. ,Chen W.T. and Epstein W.C. , 1995, Time is Money Innovative Contracting Method in Highway Construction , ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.l21, No.3, pp273-281.
14. Herbsman, Z. and Ellis, R., 1992, Mulitiparameter Bidding System Innovation in Contract Administration, ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,, Vol.118, No.1, pp142-150.
15. Ho Ru-Cheng, 2001, “A Theoretical Study of Raingauge Network Design Using Information Entropy” thesis of Department of Agricultural Engineering, National Taiwan University.
16. Hsiao Li-Ming, “The Study of Selection for
International Harbor Facilities Investor—Application of Fuzzy Multiple Criteria
Decision Making”, thesis of Department of Navigation Management, National Taiwan Ocean University.
17. Hu Wei-Liang, Chang Chin-Ho, 1996, “Thinking under the Dispute of Bid Rigging”, Construction World, No. 4
18. Lee Hsin-Hsun, 2002, “The Best Location of Spatial Interaction for Personal Computer Industry In China” thesis of Department of Transportation, Warehousing and Logistics, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology.
19. Liao Chung-Sen, 2002, “The Study on Execution Problems and Improved Countermeasures of Public Construction Turnkey System”, dissertation of National Taiwan University.
20. Pan Chuan-Rong, Hu Wei-Liang, 1996, “Thinking and Recommendations under the Dispute of Bid Rigging and Illegal Bidding”, Construction World, No. 5.
21. Pan Hsin-Cheng, 1995, “The Pilot Study of Multiple Parameter Tendering System”, thesis of Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University. 22. Parks Gary A., McBride Robert R., 1987,
Competitive Bidding for Engineering Services, Journal of professional Issues in Engineering, ASCE, Vo. l 113 ，No. 1, pp.66-76.
23. Tang Chih-Ping, 2002, “A Study of Application of the Most Advantageous Tender for the Procurement of Military Works,” thesis of Chung Cheng Institute of Technology.
24. United States Public Contracting, 1989, American Society of Civil Engineers.
25. Wang Hung-Chuan, 2000, “The Study of Entropy Optimization to Construct New Product Development Team”, thesis of Department of Industrial Management, National Cheng Kung University. “most advantageous tender”
26. Wang Kuo-Wu, 2002, “The Decision and Analysis on Contract Awarding Method of Government Procurement Law and Its Weighting”, thesis of National Defense Management College.
27. Water Engineering and Management, 1993, Consultants Rate Market Trends, Selection Method, Vol.140, No.10, PP.26~27.
28. Wayne Du and Kasma R., 1987, Consultant Selection, Journal of Management in Engineering, ASCE, Vol.3, No.44, pp.288-296.
29. Yu Hsiang-Hsiang, 1996,”The Study of Improved Tendering Invitation System”, thesis of Graduate School of Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology
30. Yu Shih-Wei, Tang Chih-Ping, 2001, “The Contract Awarding Study of the Most Advantageous Tender by Applying AHP”, The 5th Joint Conference of Construction and Management Research, Yulin, pp617-625.
