Social interaction between the owner and the team starts with the tendering procedure. Many public owners use only cost to select the project team. Cost is easy to define and measure, but does not necessarily result in the best team. Some public owners use multiple factors (e.g. quality, expertise, technical capabilities) to find the best team based on a Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) method like Weighting Rating Calculating (WRC) or Best Value Selection (BVS). However, both methods have many shortcomings when helping owners in differentiating among proposals, such as mixing value and cost. We argue that there is a better way of evaluating proposals. We state that public owner should use Choosing By Advantage (CBA) to select the project team. The method is not used in the tendering procedures yet, but could be beneficial in helping owners discern relative value between proposals. CBA is a system, which uses well-defined vocabulary to ensure clarity in the decision-making process. Previous studies already illustrate that CBA provides benefits in order to differentiate between alternatives, because decisions are documented in a greater detail, with a higher level of transparency, and value and cost is separated. This paper builds on a previous research and presents sensitivity analysis on the data of a public project in San Francisco.
Best Value Selection, Choosing By Advantage, Weighting Rating Calculating, selection, tendering procedure, project team