PhD Final Thesis April 2013.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

Thesis Keith Gale 2013obtain because it would involve tendering the same project twice, once for eachmethod. This position is unacceptable to both client and supplier due to the costs oftendering involved. So to provide an economic basis an examination will be made ofboth data sets to determine if there is any significant difference between theestimated values and tender values for projects to identify any ‘step change’ due tothe engagement methods. Action research will also be applied to a selected singleproject using both traditional and framework engagement tender methods tocompliment economic theory.H4: There is no significant difference between engagement transaction costs offramework agreements and traditional tendering methods.The literature review polarised views regarding engagement transaction costs ofprojects using traditional methods verses those undertaken with frameworkagreements. Supporters of framework agreements cite significant reductions in termsof engagement costs when compared with those required for traditional procurement.Opponents question the framework approach and argue that the cost of usingcomplicated and extensive tendering procedures with mini competitions outweighany savings made due to less initial engagement. To provide a comparative analysis,costs collected through the organisations extensive financial monitoring systems willbe used for analysis.H5: There is no significant difference between performance monitoringtransaction costs of framework agreements and traditional tendering methods.An extension of the argument used at hypothesis 4 examines the monitoringtransaction costs of traditional projects contrasted with those for frameworkagreements. The polarised views used in hypothesis 4 extend toward operational datacollection required during the construction phase. As identified during the literalreview, collection of performance data should be relevant, simple and not onerous.Views range from those who find measurement of performance as not effective andcostly, to those who see it as an essential part of the construction process. In order toprovide data for analysis, costs collected through the organisations extensivefinancial monitoring systems will form the basis of comparison.84