Acta academica karviniensia 2016, 16(4):5-22 | DOI: 10.25142/aak.2016.028

ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF TENDERS IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Danuta Duda
Slezská univerzita, Obchodně podnikatelská fakulta, Univerzitní nám. 1934/3,73340 Karviná, Email:duda@opf.slu.cz

The article deals with the assessment and evaluation of tenders in public procurement in the Czech Republic. Evaluation and assessment of tenders is one of the most important stages of public procurement and has an influence on selection of the best tender. Therefore, it is necessary to set up the criteria rightly in order to choose the most advantageous tender. Evaluation of tenders is realized by the evaluation committee, it must proceed exactly according to the established evaluation criteria. Evaluation and assessment must be carried out in accordance with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination of tenderers. The article also includes evaluating and assessing specific public contracts with the help of a multi-criteria decision analysis, namely the methods: the Weighted Sum Approach (WSA) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), which can be used in practice. The aim of this article is to describe and evaluate the issue of assessment and evaluation of tenders in public procurement in the Czech Republic and also includes evaluating and assessing specific public contracts with the help of a multi-criteria decision analysis, WSA and TOPSIS.

Keywords: assessment tenders, evaluation tenders, multi-criteria decision analysis, public contracts
JEL classification: C39, K39

Received: June 22, 2016; Accepted: November 30, 2016; Published: December 30, 2016  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Duda D. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION OF TENDERS IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC. Acta academica karviniensia. 2016;16(4):5-22. doi: 10.25142/aak.2016.028.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Act No.134/2016 Coll, on Public Procurement.
    2. Act No. 137/2006 Coll., on Public Contracts, as amended.
    3. ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, K. P. and A. P. VAVATSIKOS, 2006. An AHP Model for Construction Contractor Prequalification. Operational Research. An International Journal, 6(3), 333-346. ISSN 1109-2858. Go to original source...
    4. BANAITIENÉ, N. and A. BANAITIS, 2006. Analysis of criteria for contractors' qualification evaluation. Ukio Technologinis ir Ekonominis Vystymas, 12(4), 276-282. ISSN 1392-8619. Go to original source...
    5. BEHZADIAN, M. et al., 2012. A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051-13069. ISSN 0957-4174. Go to original source...
    6. BRANNMAN, L. et al., 1987. The Price Effects of Increased Competition in Auction Markets. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(1), 24-32. ISSN 0034-6535. Go to original source...
    7. CARR, P. G., 2005. Investigation of Bid Price Competition Measured through Prebid Project Estimates, Actual Bid Prices, and Number of Bidders. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(11), 1165-1172. ISSN 0733-9364. Go to original source...
    8. DINÇER, S. E., 2011. Multi-criteria Analysis of Economic Activity for European Union Member States and Candidate Countries: TOPSIS and WSA Applications. European Journal of Social Sciences, 21(4), 563-572. ISSN 1450-2267.
    9. DVORSKÝ, J. et al., 2006. Software MCA8 for Computation of MCA Methods. Pp. 66-77 in sborník konference ELNET 2006. Ed. Václav Snášel. Ostrava: TiskServis Jiří Pustina.
    10. ENYINDA, C. I. et al., 2011. A Decision Support Model for Contractor Selection in a Government Procurement Supply Chain: Evidence from an Emerging Market. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 12(7), 9-17. ISSN 1913-8067.
    11. Europe Economics, 2015. Procurement [online]. [cit. 2016-06-07]. Available from: http://www.europe-economics.com/page/56/procurement.htm
    12. FONG, P. S. W. and S. K. Y. CHOI, 2000. Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process. Construction Management & Economics, 18(5), 547-557. ISSN 1466-433X. Go to original source...
    13. GINEITIENÉ, Z. and K. ŠERPYTIS, 2011. The Impact of Competition and Purchase Volume on the Price in Public Procurement Tenders (article in Lithuanian). Societal studies, 3(2), 473-485. ISSN 2029-2236.
    14. GRANECKI, P., 2014. Prawo zamowień publicznych. Komentarz. 4. Wydanie. Warszawa: C.H.Beck. ISBN 978-83-255-6355-4.
    15. Hospodářská komora České republiky, 2015. Výroční zpráva o stavu veřejných zakázek v České republice za rok 2015 [online]. [cit. 2016-06-04]. Available from: http://www.komora.cz/pro-podnikani/legislativa-a-normy/pripominkovani-legislativy/nove-materialy-k-pripominkam/107-16-vyrocni-zprava-o-stavu-verejnych-zakazek-v-ceske-republice-za-rok-2015-t-16-5-2016.aspx
    16. HSIEH, T. Y. et al., 2004. Fuzzy MCDM approach for planning and design tenders selection in public office buildings. International Journal of Project Management, 22(7), 573-584. ISSN 0263-7863. Go to original source...
    17. JABLONSKY, J. and P. FIALA, 2003. Models for Productivity Measurement of Central European Countries. Pp. 253-254 in ISAHP 2003 proceeding. Bali, Indonesia, August 7-9. Go to original source...
    18. JAFARI, A., 2013. A contractor pre-qualification model based on the quality function deployment method. Construction Management and Economics, 31(7), 746-760. ISSN 0144-6193. Go to original source...
    19. JURČÍK, R., 2014. Veřejné zakázky a koncese. 2. dopl. vydání. Praha: C.H. Beck. ISBN 978-80-7400-443-8.
    20. JURČÍK, R., 2015. New Trends in the Evaluation of Public Contracts. The Lowest Tender Price or Economic Advantageousness of the Tender? In D. SPALKOVA a L., FUROVA, eds. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Modern and Current Trends in the Public Sector Research. Brno: Masaryk University. pp. 125-133. ISBN 978-80-210-7532-0. ISSN 2336-1239.
    21. KASHAP, S., 2004. Public Procurement as a Social, Economic and Political Policy. In: Challenges in Public Procurement: An International Perspective (vol. 3), International Public Procurement Conference. Florida, USA, pp. 133 - 147 Available from: http://www.ippa.ws/IPPC1/PROCEEDING%20PAPERS/Kashap.pdf
    22. KRČ, R., 2013. Zákon o veřejných zakázkách s komentářem a judikaturou. Praha: Linde a.s. ISBN 978-80-7201-888-8.
    23. MATEUS, R. et al., 2010. Full Disclosure of Tender Evaluation Models: Background and Application in Portuguese public procurement. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 16(3), 206-215. ISSN 1478-4092. Go to original source...
    24. Ministry of Regional Development, 2014. Výroční zpráva o stavu veřejných zakázek v České republice za rok 2014 [online]. [cit. 2015-08-22]. Available from: http://www.portal-vz.cz/getmedia/e404b766-77d0-488b-8809-6951c53c0eb9/Vyrocni-zprava-o-stavu-verejnych-zakazek-v-Ceske-republice-za-rok-2014_final.pdf
    25. OECD Principles for Integrity in Public Procurement, 2009. [online]. [cit. 2015-06-07]. Available from: http://www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/48994520.pdf
    26. OCHRANA, F. and J. PAVEL, 2013. Analysis of the Impact of Transparency, Corruption, Openness in Competition and Tender Procedures on Public Procurement in the Czech Republic. Central European Journal of Public Policy, 7(2), 114 - 135. ISSN 1802-4866.
    27. ONUR, İ. et al., 2012. Public Procurement Auctions and Competition in Turkey. Review of Industrial Organization, 40(3), 207-223. ISSN 0889-938X. Go to original source...
    28. PASTOR-FERRANDO, J.P. et al., 2010. An ANP-and AHP-based approach for weighting criteria in public works bidding. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61(6), 905-916. ISSN 0160-5682. Go to original source...
    29. PAVEL, J., 2010. Analýza vlivu míry konkurence na cenu rozsáhlých staveb dopravní infrastruktury. Politická ekonomie, 58(3), 343-356. ISSN 0032-3233. Go to original source...
    30. PURI, D. and S. TIWARI, 2014. Evaluating The Criteria for Contractors' Selection and Bid Evaluation. International Journal of Engineering Science Invention, 3(7), 44-48. ISSN 2319 - 6734.
    31. RADZISZEWSKA - ZIELINA, E., 2011. Public Procurement Procedure in Construction in Poland And Problems With its Application. Organization, Technology & Management in Construction: An International Journal, 3(1), 269-275. ISSN 1847-5450. Go to original source...
    32. THAI, K. V., 2009. International Handbook of Public Procurement. Florida: CRC Press. ISBN 978-1-4200-5457-6.
    33. SAN CRISTÓBAL, J. R., 2012. Contractor Selection Using Multicriteria Decision-Making Methods. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(6), 751-758. ISSN 0733-9364. Go to original source...
    34. SKÁLOVÁ, M., 2014. Konec nejnižší nabídkové ceny jako základního hodnotícího kritéria pro zadání veřejné zakázky? epravo.cz [online]. 30. května 2014 [vid. 23. listopadu 2015]. Dostupné z: http://www.epravo.cz/top/clanky/konec-nejnizsi-nabidkove-ceny-jako-zakladniho-hodnoticiho-kriteria-pro-zadani-verejne-zakazky-94324.html
    35. ŚMIGULSKA-WOJCIECHOWSKA, A., 2014. Cena jako jedyne kryterium oceny ofert tylko w określonych sytuacjach. PortalZP.pl [online]. [cit. 2015-08-25]. Available from: https://www.portalzp.pl/aktualnosci/cena-jako-jedyne-kryterium-oceny-ofert-tylko-w-okreslonych-sytuacjach-1350442
    36. WANG, W. CH. et al., 2013. Applying the AHP to support the best-value contractor selection - lessons learned from two case studies in Taiwan. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 19(1), 24-36. ISSN 1392-3730. Go to original source...
    37. ZAVADSKAS, E. K. et al., 2012. Multiple criteria selection of pile-column construction technology. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 18(6), 834-842. ISSN 1392-3730. Go to original source...
    38. Zpráva o posouzení a hodnocení nabídek [online]. [cit. 2016-02-07]. Available from: file:///C:/Users/uzivatel/Downloads/zpr%C3%A1va%20o%20posouzen%C3%AD%20a %20hodnocen%C3%AD%20nab%C3%ADdek%20(2).pdf
    39. Zpráva o posouzení a hodnocení nabídek [online]. [cit. 2016-02-07]. Available from: http://www.poliklinikaprosek.cz/soubor-zprava-o-posouzeni-a-hodnoceni-nabidek-39-pdf

    Return to the content