【正文】 中文 3185 字 本科畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì) 外文文獻(xiàn) 及 譯文 文獻(xiàn)、資料題目： The Significance of the Tendering Contract on the Opportunities for Clients to Encourage Contractorled Innovation 文獻(xiàn)、資料來(lái)源： 國(guó)道數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù) 文獻(xiàn)、資料發(fā)表（出版）日期： 院 （部）： 管理 工程學(xué)院 專(zhuān) 業(yè)： 工程 造價(jià) 1 外文 文獻(xiàn) ： The Significance of the Tendering Contract on The Opportunities for Clients to Encourage Contractorled Innovation ABSTRACT During the tendering process for most major construction contracts there is the opportunity for bidders to suggest alternative innovative solutions. Clearly clients are keen to take advantage of these opportunities, and equally contractors want to use their expertise to establish petitive advantage. Both parties may very well benefit from the encouragement of such innovation and the availability of cheaper methods of construction than have been contemplated by the tendering authority. However recent developments in mon law have raised doubts about the ability of owners to seek alternative tenders without placing themselves at risk of litigation. This mon law has recognised the existence of the socalled ?tendering contract? or ?process contract?. Since the tendering process is inherently price petitive, the application of the tendering contract concept is likely to severely inhibit the opportunity for alternative tenders. This paper is primarily based on the literature review. The aim of this paper is to highlight the problems with the petitive tendering process in relation to contractorled innovation and explore ways in which owners can develop procurement procedures that will allow and encourage innovation from contractors. PROBLEMS WITH COMPETITIVE TENDERING The traditional tendering process was designed to produce direct price petition for a specified product. Evaluation of tenders could only be confined to price alone by creating a system in which price is the only criterion that could vary while design and technical content are the same for each peting tender. Albeit the contract period is stipulated as constant, owners often encourage tenderers to submit a second tender which offers an alternative price for an alternative time performance. Tenderers would achieve this by reworking their tender programme, finding the optimum contract period, and adjusting the tender price accordingly. Each tenderer would pete to find novel ways of organising the work method that would allow not only the minimum construction cost but also maximum profit margin within the price proposed. However, 2 this process is always confined by the boundary of the owner?s design. In this way, the successful tenderer?s scope to be innovative is very limited . When evaluating alternative tenders, the owner is confronted with the duty of equal treatment and fairness to all tenderers. If one is to be preferred on an alternative tender, which is not a conforming tender in terms of the original invitation, how can all tenderers be treated equally and fairly? Any individualism exhibited on the part of a tenderer outside the permitted scope of price and time must disqualify that tender from the owner?s consideration because it does not conform to the invitation. Therefore, the traditional tendering process prevents, restricts or even discourages contractorled innovation . Songer and Ibbs believed that the use of designandbuild procurement method would encourage innovation in the building process. This procurement method imposes single point responsibility on contractor for the plete building and its tendering processdiffer from that of the traditional procurement method in that it must