Designing a vendor management procedure for engineering, procurement and construction management projects
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Nowadays, project organisation and communications in engineering projects are evidently complicated due to the participation of many specialists and contractors. The work and materials provided by these vendors in turn account for the majority of project costs. Furthermore, vendors have a significant influence on the success or failure of a project, as their performance directly affects the entire result of the business effort. Thus, to guarantee successful completion of engineering projects, it is of high importance to manage numerous vendors efficiently and effectively, which often becomes a challenge for many organisations. This research investigates vendor management in engineering projects and, using this as a basis, seeks to design a vendor management procedure that would serve as a guideline to handling vendors efficiently. The subject is analysed based on an extensive literature review of renowned authors in the field, as well as from the viewpoint of one of the leading engineering and consulting companies located in Finland. The literature review explores this relatively scarce topic by presenting available ideas sourced from diverse authors, while the empirical part of the research reinforces the findings by qualitative interviews conducted among 11 experienced employees of the case company, who shared the practices applied in their offices based in Finland, Sweden, Germany and Canada. The outcome of the research is a demonstration of theoretical and practical vendor management procedures. The theoretical is built on literature review and is suitable for engineering projects in general, while the practical is more comprehensive and represents practices of the case company to handle vendors in EPCM projects. Both encompass the three main phases: pre-contract, contract execution and post-contract, specifying the key activities, responsible roles and documents required when selecting a vendor, administering the contract execution, as well as closing off the contract and evaluating the results achieved. The scientific importance of this subject is the expansion of the knowledge boundaries in the field by filling the void in existing literature with the results of empirical findings, while the practical importance of the research is the thoroughly developed framework to manage vendors in EPCM projects, which will be formally documented in the case company, evaluated internally and its practical guidelines implemented in due course. Future research ought to be undertaken to investigate vendor management in other project types like EPC and to analyse the key differences between the approaches. In addition, it is suggested to explore KPIs that can be applied to evaluate the success of implemented vendor management.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,045 | 0,073 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».