How to support government procurement by a pairwise comparisons model

• Autorzy: Koczkodaj W. W. , Mackasey W. O. , Smolewski I. , Tadeusiewicz R.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study demonstrates how a government procurement process could be improved by the pairwise comparisons method. A case study, related to assessment of project proposals is used for demonstration purpose. The project proposals were requested by a Canadian government agency to assess the environmental and public safety hazards of abandoned mines. However, the presented model is applicable (with easy-to-implement modifications) to any other case of government procurement.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

government procurement; project proposal assessment; pairwise comparison; distance-based inconsistency; convergence; knowledge management

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Przyrodniczo-Humanistycznego w Siedlcach
• Czasopismo: Studia Informatica : systems and information technology
• Rocznik: 2013
• Tom: Vol. 1-2(17)
• Strony: 19--28
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 13 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Koczkodaj W. W.

• Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury ON P3E 2C6, Canada

autor

Mackasey W. O.

• Consulting geologist, WOM Associates

autor

Smolewski I.

• Independent ICT procurement expert

autor

Tadeusiewicz R.

• AGH University of Science and Technology, Mickiewicza Av. 30, 30-059 Krakow, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Bolger P. M., Duszak Z., Koczkodaj W. W., Mackasey W. O, (1993). Ontario Abandoned Mine Hazards Prioritizing - an Expert System Approach. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Abandoned Mine Land Conference, Jackson, Wyoming, 370-388.
• 2. Bozoki S., Rapcsak T., (2008). On Saaty’s and Koczkodaj’s inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices, J. of Global Optimization, 42(2): 157-175.
• 3. Duszak Z., Koczkodaj W. W., Mackasey W. O., (1993). Towards Better Abandoned Mine Hazard Prioritizing - An Expert System Approach, in The Challenge of Integrating Diverse Perspectives in Reclamation, In: Proceedings of the 10th National Meeting of ASSMR, Spokane, Washington, 577-589.
• 4. Fulop J., Koczkodaj W.W., Szarek S., (2010). A different perspective on a scale for pairwise comparisons, Transactions on computational collective intelligence I, 71-84.
• 5. Grzybowski A. Z., (2012). Note on a new optimization based approach for estimating priorityweights and related consistency index, Expert Systems with Applications, 39(14): 11699-11708.
• 6. Herman, M., Koczkodaj, W. W., 1996. Monte Carlo Study of Pairwise Comparisons, Information Processing Letters, 57(1): 25-29.
• 7. Koczkodaj, W. W., (1993). A New Definition of Consistency of Pairwise Comparisons. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 18(7): 79-84.
• 8. Koczkodaj, W. W., (1996). Statistically Accurate Evidence of Improved Error Rate by Pairwise Comparisons. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82: 43-48.
• 9. Koczkodaj W.W., Szwarc, R., (2013). On Axiomatization of Inconsistency Indicators for Pairwise Comparisons, (accepted for a journal publication; also stored in arXiv.org/abs/1307.6272 for the free downloading).
• 10. Ministry Bill, Dz.U. 2012 nr 0 poz. 877, www.uzp.gov.pl/cmsws/page/?F;239; Parliament web page isap.sejm.gov.pl/DetailsServlet?id = WDU20120000877
• 11. New EU-rules on public procurement - ensuring better value for money (Supplement to the Official Journal - Public procurement notices), Official Journal of the European Union, Reference No : 20140110BKG32432, Eur - lex.europa.eu, 2014.
• 12. Public Tendering, (2004). Journal of Laws in the Republic of Poland, 19(177).
• 13. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 41 U.S.C. 401, 1974.