- Problem Definition
In early August 2013, we closed the quarry bid package after some clarification sessions with five Bidders after we received their proposals. The next thing to do is to select the best Bidder as the winner of this package based on parameters set up by Bid Committee.
Figure 1 An Example of Crusher Plant
- Identify the Feasible Alternative
There are seven parameters that we have to consider to select the best Bidder. Since the Management is demanding solid answer, then we have to use scoring code instead qualitative method. That is why we selected non dimension scale-weighing technique,  &  to do the assignment.
- Development of the Outcome for Alternative
Basic procedure of this technique is numbering all parameters as score then getting the result. For quarry package, three parameters already in given by numbers and the rest is qualitative that require relative rank score. We have produced such table including the result present hereinafter:
Figure 2 Quarry Package Review
We also provide the simulation based on four important parameters for the package if we put them alternatively as relative rank one in weighing technique table (the major important parameters for quarry package are cost, schedule, local content absorption and environmental plan). The result of this simulation present in below:
- Selection Criteria
The target of simulation is selecting the best Bidder based on seven parameters established by our Bid Committee as listed above.
- Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative
The first simulation which put cost as primary priority, we have company B as the best Bidder. Changing other priority will not change company B status except the score. It’s because the scaling unit of company B which is close to Client requirement even they only have partial environmental plan and their cost is not the cheapest one.
- Selection of the Preferred Alternative
As the result from the simulation, definitely company B is the best Bidder for the quarry package and we can proceed to the next stage with them (negotiating and contracting).
- Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result
Two options available as discussion subject with the Management. If they accept company B as the winner then they negotiate to lower the cost after improving detail on environmental plan. If we want to keep company C as bargaining position with company B, then we have to improve geology & risk analysis presentation and schedule from company C.
agsm.edu.au. (2006). Multi Attribute Decision Making. Retrieved from http://www.agsm.edu.au/bobm/teaching/EIA/lect15-3.pdf
mycbbook.com. (2012). Decision Models: Compensatory and Non Compensatory. Retrieved from http://www.mycbbook.com/MYCBBook-Consumer
Sullivan, William G., Wicks, Elin M., & C.Patrick, Koelling. (2012), Engineering Economy (15th Edition. New Jersey, United States: Prentice Hall.