2023年外文文獻及譯文moban

本科畢業(yè)設計外文文獻及譯文文獻、資料題目：TheＳｉgnifiｃanceoｆtheTenｄeriｎgＣontrａｃtｏntｈｅＯpｐoｒtuniｔieｓforＣｌiｅｎtｓtoＥncouｒａgeContｒaｃtor-lｅdInｎovatiｏn文獻、資料來源:國道數(shù)據(jù)庫文獻、資料發(fā)表（出版)日期:2023.１0.11院(部）:管理工程學院專業(yè)：工程造價班級:價本0504姓名：劉兆君學號:指導教師:黃偉典王大磊翻譯日期：20２3．6.1４外文文獻：TheＳｉgnificａncｅoftheＴenｄeriｎgContrａctｏnＴhｅＯpportuｎitieｓfｏrClieｎｔsｔoEｎｃｏuraｇｅＣoｎtractor－leｄIｎｎｏvatioｎABSＴRACTDuｒingthｅtenderingpｒocｅsｓｆoｒmｏstmaｊorcoｎstｒucｔioｎcontracｔstherｅｉstheoｐporｔｕnityforｂｉddersｔｏsuggｅｓtalternativeinｎovatｉｖesolutｉｏnｓ.Clearlyclienｔsarekeｅntotａｋeadvanｔageoftheseopporｔuｎitieｓ,aｎdequaｌlyconｔｒactoｒｓwantｔousethｅirexpｅrtisetｏeｓtaｂlishcｏmpｅｔitiveadvａnｔage.Ｂothpartｉesｍａyvｅrywellbenｅfitfromtｈeeｎｃouragemｅntofsuｃｈinnoｖaｔiｏnanｄthｅavaｉｌaｂilitｙｏｆcheａpeｒｍethodsoｆconstructionthaｎhaｖebeｅｎcoｎtemplatedbythetｅndeｒｉnｇauthoritｙ．Howeverｒecenｔdｅｖeloｐmｅｎtsｉnｃｏmｍonlawhａveraisｅddoubtsabouttheaｂiｌityofoｗnerｓtoseekalteｒｎａｔiｖeｔｅndeｒswithoutplaciｎgtheｍselvesaｔriｓkofｌiｔｉｇatioｎ.Ｔhiscomｍonlawhａsｒecognｉｓeｄthｅeｘisteｎｃｅoｆthｅso-caｌled‘tendeｒingｃonｔｒaｃｔ’or‘procｅssｃｏntract’.Sincetheｔenｄerｉngprｏcessisiｎhｅrenｔｌypriｃｅcompｅｔiｔivｅ,theappｌicaｔiｏnoｆthetｅnｄerｉngcoｎtractcｏｎcｅｐｔiｓlikelytoｓｅvｅrelyinhiｂiｔtｈeoppoｒtunityforａlterｎatｉvetenders.Ｔhispapｅｒｉsｐrｉｍａｒilyｂaseｄｏnｔｈelitｅrａt(yī)ｕrerｅｖiｅw.Theａｉmofｔhisｐaperｉstｏhighlightｔｈｅproblemsｗithtｈecomｐｅｔitivetendｅｒingprocessiｎrelaｔionｔocoｎtractoｒ-ledinnovatioｎandｅxplorｅwaysinwhiｃhｏwnerscandｅｖeｌｏｐprocuｒementproceduresｔhatｗiｌlallｏwandencoｕraｇeinnoｖationfrｏｍｃonｔracｔｏrs.PROBLＥMＳWＩTHCＯMPETITIVETENDEＲINGＴhｅｔradiｔｉoｎaltenｄerｉngprｏcesswaｓdesｉｇnedtoｐｒoduｃｅｄｉrｅｃtpriｃecｏmpｅtiｔionforaspecifｉedproduｃt.Eｖaluatioｎoｆtenｄerｓcoｕldonｌybeｃonfineｄtopriceａloｎeｂycreａt(yī)iｎgaｓysteｍinwｈicｈpriｃeistheｏnｌycriteｒionthatcoulｄvarywhｉｌｅdesignａndtｅｃhｎicａlcontｅｎtarethesameｆorｅaｃｈｃoｍpeｔingtenｄer.Ａｌｂeittｈecontrａctperｉodisstiｐuｌatedasconstant,ownersoｆtenencouraｇｅtendererstoｓubmitasecｏndtendeｒwhichoffersanaｌterｎativeprｉceforanalternatｉvｅtｉmｅｐｅrforｍaｎｃe.Tenderｅrswouldacｈieveｔｈiｓbｙrewｏrkingtheｉｒｔｅnderprｏｇraｍme,findinｇtheoｐtimumcontractperiod,andadｊustiｎgtheｔｅnderｐｒiceａccordｉｎgly.Eaｃhtｅnderｅｒwoulｄcompｅteｔofｉndｎovelwａysoforｇａｎｉsinｇthewoｒkｍetｈｏdｔhatｗouldallｏｗｎｏtonlytheminｉmuｍcｏnsｔructioncoｓtbuｔalsomaｘimumｐrofiｔmarginwiｔhｉnthepｒiceprｏposed．However,tｈisproｃessiｓalｗayscoｎfinedｂyｔhｅbｏundarｙoftｈeowner’sdeｓｉｇn.Inthｉsｗａy,theｓuccｅssfulteｎderｅr’sｓｃopetobeinｎｏvatｉvｅiｓvｅrｙｌimitｅｄ．Wｈeｎevalｕatiｎgaｌternativeｔenｄｅrs,theownerｉscｏnｆrontｅdｗiｔhtｈedutyofequaltｒｅatmentａｎdｆaiｒnesstｏalｌｔendereｒs.Ifｏneiｓtobeｐrｅferredｏnａｎalternatiｖetender，ｗｈｉcｈiｓｎｏtａｃoｎｆormingｔendｅrintermsoｆｔheoriginａlinvitatiｏn,hoｗcａnaｌltｅndｅrerｓbｅｔreaｔedequallyandfaｉｒｌy?Anｙindｉviduａlｉsmｅｘｈｉbitedoｎtｈepartｏfaｔendｅreｒoutsｉdetｈepeｒmｉttedｓcopｅofpｒｉceandtimeｍustdｉsquａlifythattｅndｅrfromthｅｏwｎeｒ’ｓcｏnsideratioｎbecａuｓeｉｔdoesｎotconfｏｒmtoｔｈeiｎvitａt(yī)ioｎ．Thereｆoｒｅ,theｔrａditｉoｎalｔenderｉngｐｒｏｃessｐrevents，rｅstrictsｏｒeｖendｉscoｕragescｏntractor-ｌedｉnnovaｔｉｏｎ.SongｅraｎdＩbbｓbｅｌiｅｖｅdtｈattheuseoｆｄｅｓign-anｄ-buiｌdproｃurｅmentｍetｈodwｏuldｅｎcouraｇeiｎnｏvａt(yī)iｏninthebuildinｇｐrocess.Thisprocuremenｔｍethｏｄimｐｏsessｉｎglepoinｔrespoｎsｉｂiliｔyonconｔracｔoｒforｔhｅcｏmｐletebuilｄingaｎｄitstenderiｎgprocｅsｓdｉfferｆｒｏmthatoｆｔhｅｔradｉtｉonalproｃuremeｎtmeｔhoｄinthａt(yī)itmusｔbｅｃａpableofevａluaｔiｎｇdesignａswｅllａsｐrｏｄuctiｏnｃapabilitｙ,tｉmeａｎdpｒiｃe，aｌlｏｎacｏmpetitiveｂasiｓ．Thisiｓnoteａｓy.Ｃｏmｐeｔitiｖedesignｉsnoteａsytoｅvaluateinthecｏntｅｘｔoｆｔｅndering.Theｏbjectivｉｔｙappearｓtｏberｅplaceｄbysubｊectiｖityinｐicｋingｔhewｉnｎｅｒ,anｄｔｈeapparentｉntｅgrityoｆtｈebiddｉｎgprｏｃessｉｓlｏst,unlｅssｖeｒyclearcriteriaaｒeeｓｔａｂlisｈedattheoｕtseｔfｏｒeｖaluaｔioｎoｆcｏmpetｉngｄesiｇｎs．Tｈisalｓomeanstoｓayｔｈａｔtheteｎderprocｅssｒulesmｕstbedesiｇnedａｓｓucｈthatitencｏurａgescontraｃtor-lｅdｉnnovatｉon,yetatthesametimeplacessｏｍelimitｏnthｅsｃoｐeforsｕｃｈinｎovation.Ｔｈelimitsmustbesuchthatthepｒojecｔdeliveredisstｉｌlｔhｅprojectforwｈichtenｄerswｅrｅinviteｄ．ＳongｅｒａｎdIｂbｓ,wｉtｈresｐeｃttothiｓaｓｐeｃt,ａｓｓertｅｄtｈａt(yī)oneｃｏｎcernofpｕblｉcaｇeｎciesishowtoａllｏwforｉnnoｖationwhilemａinｔaiｎinｇappｒoｐｒｉａt(yī)ecoｎtｒolｏfceｒｔaindｅsignaｓｐｅｃｔｓoｆtheｐroｊｅｃt.Detｅrmｉｎinganapprｏpｒiateｂaｌaｎceｏfinｎovatｉoｎandcoｎtｒoｌindesignanｄadequatelycommuｎｉcatingｔhｅｄｅsiredｂalancｅtｏpｏtentialdesign－and-buiｌdtｅndeｒerｓprovidesaｓiｇｎiｆicanｔchaｌｌengetopubｌicsecｔorａgencies．THE‘TＥNDERINGＣONTＲAＣＴ’Deｖeloｐmeｎｔsinthelawｒeｌatingtotenｄerstradｉtiｏnaｌｌytreａｔedan‘iｎvitationtoｔenｄer’oｒa‘ｒeqｕeｓｔｆortｅｎderｓ’aｓnoｍorethａnaninvｉtatioｎｔotreat,ａniｎdicationtｈaｔtheowｎeｒwasreadｙtodobusｉneｓs–soｍeｔｈingpｒioｒｔoandsｈortofanoffer.Inoｔherwｏrds,anｉnvitatｉontotreaｔｗasｎｏtａnoffertomakeacontｒaｃtwithanypｅrｓoｎwｈomightａctontheinviｔａt(yī)ioｎ,butmerｅlyafｉrsｔｓｔepｉnneｇotiationwhichmay,orｍaynｏt,lｅadtoacｏｎtrａct.Whｅneachtenderersuｂｍitｔeｄｉｔｓtｅndｅrinｔhｅprｅscriｂedform,itamouｎteｄtｏａnoｆferwhｉcｈcｏｕｌdｂerｅgａｒdedａsａnoｆｆertomaｋeacｏntｒacｔ.Iftｈｅofｆｅrmeｔwithunequｉvocalacｃeptaｎce，coｎtrａctｕａlobligaｔionarosｅbeｔweeｎtheｏｗnｅrandthｅｓｕccｅｓｓfultｅｎdｅrer.Receｎｔly,ｔhｅmodeｒｎviewtuｒnsthiｓtｈeoryuｐsidedown.Theｒeｅxistｓwhaｔiskｎoｗnasｔｈe‘twocｏntｒact’aｎａlｙsisiｎvolvｉｎｇtheemergenceoftｈe‘teｎｄｅringcoｎtｒact’.Theinvitatiｏntotｅndeｒｉsnowiｎsｏｍeｃｉrcuｍsｔaｎcｅｓｔobetreaｔedasanoffertｏmaｋeaｃｏｎtractwhiｃhａt(yī)enderｅracｃｅptswhenｉtsubｍｉtsacｏnｆｏｒmｉngtender.Theownｅrmakｅsanoffｅｒtoeａchteｎｄererｗhichmightbewoｒdedａｓfollows:“Iｆyouｓubmitatｅnｄeriｎrｅsponsetomｙinvitationａｎｄwhiｃhcｏmplieswithtｈesｔiｐulatｉonsmａde,Iwｉｌｌcoｎsidｅrthatｔｅndeｒ…”.Theｒｅisｎoｏbligatｉoｎatallatｔｈiｓpointontheｓideofthetｅndeｒerｓ，butifaconformiｎgtｅndeｒｉssubmitteｄ,acｏntractisformeｄbetweenｏwnｅrandtendereｒwhiｃhhaｓbeendescｒibｅdhereａsｔhe‘tendｅriｎgconｔrａｃt’ｏrｄeｓｃriｂedｅlsｅwhereasa‘prｅ-aｗardｃonｔract’or‘pｒoｃeｓsｃoｎtracｔ’．Thiscoｎtｒacｔisquiｔedistinctｆroｍthｅcontrａｃtevenｔualｌyｅnｔｅrｅｄintoｗｉｔhｔｈesuccｅssｆulｔenｄerer,ｃalledthemaincontｒact.Ｏblｉgaｔiｏnsｏfacｏntｒactuaｌnatureｔhｅreforearisebeｔwｅｅnｔheowneraｎdeachteｎdｅrerwhｏhaｓｓubmitｔedaｐrｏposal.Justasｔｈｅtenｄｅｒcontｒaｃtplaceｓoｂligationsontｈeowner，ｅachtendｅrａlsoimｐosesobｌigationsｏnthetendeｒｅr.Oncｅthｅｔendｅrhaｓbeｅｎsubmｉtｔeｄtotheｏｗｎeｒ,meaｎｉngｔheｔｅndｅrorfirsｔcoｎtracthａsbeenformeｄ，ｔhｅowｎerbecomesｏbligedtｏeacｈｔendｅrｅrｔopｅrfoｒmitｓｓidｅofｂargain,wｈｉchaｔthiｓｓtageｉsａnｏbｌigａｔｉｏｎtｏｃonsiｄｅraｌlｃonfｏrmingtendeｒs.Ｂｙｔhｅsａmetoken，tendeｒersbecomｅoｂｌigeｄｔonotsiｍplywitｈdｒaｗｔheirtender，thetenderｗｉlｌｒｅmainopeｎforaｓtipulateｄperiｏdｏfｔｉme.Unｄertｈｅ‘ｔwoｃoｎｔract’ｐriｎｃiｐle,ateｎｄererwhｏmakeｓamｉstaｋemayｆinｄtｈaｔthetｅｎderisａcｃeｐtedｗithnooｐｐｏｒtｕnitytoｅｓｃapeｅvｅnifｔhereiｓanerrorｉntenｄeｒcompｉlation．Ｆorｔhesakeofｃｌarity,iｔｍaybｅstateｄtｈatｔhesubmｉｓsionofaｃonforminｇtenderinｒeｓｐｏnsetｏaninvitaｔｉoｎcancrｅatecontrａctuａlobｌiｇａt(yī)ionsforbothpaｒtiｅｓ.Iｎthecａse：Onｔarioｖ.RonEngｉneering&ConstruｃtionＥaｓｔeｒｎＬtｄ,ｔheCourｔofCａnadaｈeｌｄthatａcｏntrａctwａsｂroughtiｎtoｂeiｎgaｕtｏmaticａllyｕｐｏｎtｈesuｂmiｓｓiｏnｏfarespｏｎsivetｅｎｄeｒbyeａchtｅnｄeｒeｒ.Hａｖiｎgesｔablisｈedｔhaｔa‘ｔenderｉngcontract’exｉｓts,ｉｔistｈｅnimpｏrtaｎtｔocｏnsｔｉtｕtewhatthetｅｒmsareofthatcontract.Tｈetｅrｍsareｄeｒivedfroｍthetenderconditｉoｎs,the‘tenｄerｃｏde’,andｏtherreｌｅvaｎtｍａt(yī)eｒialsuｃｈaslegｉslatｉoｎandcｏrｒespoｎdence．Alloｒsｏｍeofｔhepｒｏvｉsionsofｔhｅ‘tenderｃｏdｅ’maybｅinｃorporateｄinthｅ‘tendｅringcｏntracｔ’ｂｙrｅferｅnceand/orbyiｍｐlｉｃatｉon．Ａtermsmaybｅimplｉeｄtoｔｈeefｆecｔｔhａt(yī)theownermustcoｎsideraｌlcoｎfoｒmingｔendｅrｓ,ｍusttreａt(yī)ａｌlｔendereｒsｅqualｌyandfaｉrlｙ,ａnｄmuｓtawａrｄｏnlyacontractforｔhｅprｏjeｃｔtｅndereｄfor.GUIDＡNCＥONCONＴＲACTORSELＥCTIOＮTheSignificanｃeofProｂｉtyinTeｎdｅrinｇProbitｙｉsdeｆｉnedinｖarｉｏusｄｉｃtiｏｎａｒiesａs“moｒalexcellｅnce,integrｉty，ｕpｒiｇhｔness,coｎscientiousness,hoｎeｓty,ｓinｃeritｙ”.Iｎtheｔenｄeｒingｃｏｎｔext,ｉtgｅｎeralｌydepeｎｄｓuponｃonfiｄｅｎtialityofdoｃuｍentatioｎanddｅcisioｎmａｋｉnｇ，objｅcｔivｅａnｄcｏnsｉsｔentaｓｓesｓmｅntateachpｈａseofdｅｃisionmａkｉnganｄresolutionoｆanｙｐosｓiｂle,pｅｒceiｖedorａcｔuａlｃoｎflictsｏfintｅrｅst．Thus,oｎｅoｆtheprimaｒｙoｂjｅｃｔivｅsｏfｐrobityiｎtenｄeringisｔomainｔainthｅｉnteｇrｉtyoｆthebiddinｇpｒoｃｅss.TheCanadｉancouｒtintｈeＲoｎEngiｎｅｅｒingcasｅrｅfｅrreｄtoｔhisａstｈeobligatiｏｎofｏwnerstotｒeａt(yī)ａlｌtenｄererseｑuａlｌyａnｄfairly.Johnsｔonｅassertsthatｔｒanｓpareｎcyｉntheentirecontｒactingoutprocesｓiｓｅssｅntialsothaｔpoｔｅｎｔialｃｏnｔractoｒｓandmemｂｅrｓoｆthepｕbliccanhaｖeconfｉdencｅinｔheoｕtcoｍes.Iｆｉnｔegrｉｔyanｄimｐartialityarenotevｉdent，ｔｅｎdeｒerｓmaybereluctanttoｍａkｅabid,tｈｅfｏrmuｌaｔionｏfwhiｃhｒequｉresｓignificａntamountofｔimeandrｅsoｕrｃｅs.Iｎtｈatcase,ｃｏmpetiｔionisｌikelｙｔobeleｓｓenedandｔhｅｂestｖalｕefoｒmoｎeymａynotｂeａchiｅｖｅd.Inprinｃiplｅ，ｒecenｔdeveloｐｍｅｎtincommonｌａwaｔteｍｐｔｓtomaｉｎtainｓoｍeinｔegrｉtyｉｎthｅtenｄeｒiｎｇpｒｏｃeｓｓbyｒeｃognisｉngtheexisteｎceofthｅpａrｔｉes’obliｇatioｎstoｏneａｎoｔｈersotｈattheownerｃanｎotｓimplｙｒｅjectｏraccｅpttｅndersaｓiｔplｅaｓeｓ,orcanｎoｔｎeｇｏtiatewｉｔhoneｏrmｏretｅndeｒｅrｓtoproducesatisfactorydeaｌ．Ａｓmeｎｔionｅｄprｅｖiouｓｌy，ｔhｅconｔracｔｕaｌobligationbetweentｈeｐartｉesisreferrｅdtoａsthｅ‘tｅｎdｅrｉngcontｒact’.Ｂｒeachofｔhｅ‘tenderiｎgｃoｎtract’entｉｔlｅstheinjurｅdｐartytｏｔｈenｏrｍaｌrｅmeｄyｏfｄamages.Ｐroｂityiｎｔheteｎｄeringprocｅｓsensurｅｓthatfａirａndequaltreaｔｍenｔtｏaｌltｅnderｅrｓispｕtinｐlaceanｄmaintaｉnedsothatnotｅrｍｏfｔｈe‘teｎdｅｒingcontracｔ’ｉsｌｉkeｌytoｂebrｅａchｅｄ.AccorｄinｇtoJohnｓtonｅ，cｏmmonprobｉtyｏｂjeｃtiｖesａre:·toｅnsureallresｐoｎdeｎtsａrｅassesｓedobｊectivelyandconsistｅnｔly·tｏeｎsｕreｉntｅgritｙinallevaluationaｎdselectiｏnprocess·tｏｅnsuｒｅallｃoｎｆideｎtialinformaｔionisｓｅcｕｒｅd·toaddrｅssaｎｙpｏteｎｔiａｌ,oractuａlcｏnflictsoｆinteｒest·toprｏｍotｅｄefensibｉlｉｔｙofｐrｏcess．GuidｅｌinestoAvoidBreaｃhofｔhｅ‘TｅndeｒｉngＣoｎtract’inｔheCompetiｔiｖｅBｉddingＰｒoｃｅsｓOncoｎcluｓioｎ,Ｃraiｇsuｇgestｓsoｍeguidelｉnesｏnhowａlteｒnatｉveｔeｎdersaｎdｔendersinvolvingdesiｇnproｐosalｓmightbetakenｌegitiｍatｅlybytheｏwneｒｓｏａstoaｖｏidoｒmｉniｍiｓｅthelikelihｏodoftheclientsplacingthemseｌｖesatｒiskoflitigatiｏnｄueｔoaｂreachｏfｔhecoｎtraｃtuａlobｌigationｓａrisingoｕtofthｅ‘ｔendｅriｎgｃontrａct’.Ｔheyａreｓpｅciｆiedasfｏlｌows.·Underｔhe‘ｔenderiｎgcoｎtｒact’theowneｒisobliｇedtｏtｒeatalｌtｅndeｒｓeｑｕａllyaｎdfairｌy.Allconｆｏｒmｉｎｇtendersmｕsttheｒeforebｅｃoｎｓiｄerｅd.·Aneffectiｖｅ‘privilegeｃlaｕse’ｗhichsaｙssoｍethingｌike“anｙtｅnderwｉllnotneｃessariｌybeａcｃepteｄ”wilｌnorｍａllyｐrｅventanoｗneｒbｅcｏmiｎgobliｇeｄｔｏaｃceptａnytenｄｅｒ.Alｌtｅndeｒsmaythereforebｅproperlyrｅjeｃted．Oｎtheotherhａnd，atermtothｅｅffecttｈatacontractwillbeａｗardｅdtothｅlｏwest,orｈiｇhesｔ,ｂｉdderisenforceablｅ.Thｉｓｉmpｌｉｅsｔｈatanownercanｎotuｓethｅ‘privilｅgeｃlaｕse’asａｎexcｕseｆｏrｄeviatingfromtheｃoｎtractevａｌuationandawａrdcriteriaｓｅtdowninthｅｔｅndｅrinvitatiｏnordocumｅnts.Oｒ,pｕtiｔanotheｒｗａy,the‘pｒivｉlegecｌause’doｅｓnotalloｗｔｈeowneｒto：(i)choosecoｍｐaｒatｉｖｅlyａmｏngthｅtｅnｄerersbasedoncriterｉaｔhaｔｈasnotbeenｄｉsｃloｓｅdtoｔｈｅｔendｅrers；or（ｉi)toawａrdｔoanotheｒｔenｄｅrerorａnotherpｅrsonｓomethｉｎｇotheｒtｈanthｅｍａiｎｃontｒact．·Ｉtwoｕldbeabｒeａchofthetenderingobligaｔioｎｏfeｑualanｄfａｉrｔreａt(yī)ｍentfortheownerｔｏnegotｉａt(yī)ewithｏｎetendeｒerｏnterｍｓwhicｈdonotappｌyｔootherteｎdeｒers.·Allteｎderersareeｎtitledtoｋnowｔｈebａｓiｓonwｈiｃhｔenderswillｂeevａluaｔedandonwｈiｃｈaｃonｔraｃｔ-aｗarｄｄeｃisionwｉllｂemade.·Ｉfinｎovaｔiｏnfｒomtｅnderｅrsｉsｒequｉｒeｄ，anownerｍusｔｅxpressｌycrｅatetherightforateｎdｅrertosubmiｔａnaｌteｒnatiｖetｅndｅr．Iftherｉghttheｎeｘｉstｓ,theｏwｎeｒｉsobligedtoconｓiderｓucｈproposals.Tenderｅrｓmｕstbｅinformedofcritｅrｉａfｏrevａlｕationofｓｕchalternaｔiveproｐosals.·Tｅndｅrconditioｎsmｕｓtdefiｎetｈｅｓｃｏpeｏfaｌtｅｒnativeｔｅｎdeｒs．Tｈａt(yī)scoｐｅmusｔｂeｎoｔtｏotightｓｏaｓtorestｒictｉnnoｖatioｎ,butnotｔoowidesｏastoｒeｓulｔinaｐroposaｌforaschemequitedifｆereｎttoｔheoｎｅｏｒigiｎａｌlｙteｎderedfｏｒ.·Tｅndeｒconditionｓforprｏjｅｃtｓｉnｖolvingdeｓｉｇnmuｓｔｉncluｄecriterｉaforｅvalｕａt(yī)ingｔhatdesign．Ｔhecriteriaｍｕstｂemadｅknoｗｎtoaｌlｔenderｅｒs．·Iｔisａbreachoｆtｈe‘tenｄerｉngｃｏnｔrａｃt’fortheoｗnerｔoaｗardacoｎtracttｏateｎdeｒerwhooｆｆeｒssomｅｔｈｉngdｉfｆereｎtｔoｗhａt(yī)ｗasａskedfoｒiｎtheinvｉtatiｏntｏｔenｄer.Furtheｒmｏre，Jｏｈnｓtoneａdｄｓ·Invitａt(yī)ｉondｏcｕmeｎtｓhouldbeaccessibletoａｌlpoｔｅｎtialbiｄdｅrs.Ｔheyshoｕldbeeｘpressｅｄinｒeaｄｉlyundersｔoodｔerms.·Ｉｔｉｓeasieｒtｏfoｒmuｌateａｐpｒｏpｒiateselectioncｒｉteriaｗhｅｎｔheｐｒojecｔspeciｆicａt(yī)ｉonsaｒedeｖｅlopedfirst．Ｃｌｅarsｐeciｆicatioｎsａndseｌｅctiｏncritｅriaaｓsiｓtpossｉbleｃｏntｒactorstoformulaｔeｂidｓapprｏpriatelｙ.·Apolicyinreｌatｉｏntonon-conformingbｉdsshouldbｅforｍulatedaｎｄdｏcuｍenｔｅdinthｅinviｔatｉｏｎｄoｃumeｎｔation.·Ofｔｅnａｓsｅｓsmｅｎtoｆbidswillｉnｖolvｅanuｍberoｆaｓseｓsｍentpａnels.Iｎthissitｕatiｏｎ,tｈｅreshouｌｄbeasｅｐａrationｏfassessｍenｔpaneｌs.Ｆoreｘamｐle,apａｎelofexperｔsmayrｅｖiewfiｎaｎｃialvｉabilitywhｉｌstanｏtherwillloｏｋａt(yī)thosesamebｉｄsfromadｅsignperｓpｅctｉｖe.Asｓｅｓsmｅｎtｐanｅlswouldｃommoｎlｙｂeqｕarantinedthroughｔｈｅevａlｕaｔioｎperｉod.SUMMARYTｈispaperhｉghlightstheprｏｂlｅmsｗiｔhcompetｉtiｖeteｎderｉnｇinｒｅlatioｎtocontractｏr-ledinｎｏvatiｏn.Intｈetｒaｄitiｏnalmｅｔhｏd,ｃoｎtractoｒ-lediｎnoｖatｉoｎｍａybeencｏｕragｅdａt(yī)thetｅｎｄerｉｎｇsｔaｇe.However,ｔoｅnableａccepｔanceｂytｈｅowner,cｒiteｒiaｆorevａluａｔｉonoｆａndthｅscoｐeoｆalterｎａt(yī)ivｅtenｄersmuｓｔｂeclｅarｌｙdeｆinedｉnthetendｅrｄｏcument．Byｔｈｅsamｅtoｋｅn,ｔeｎdeｒcｏnditｉonｓforｐrojectsｉnvolvinｇｄesｉgnmｕsｔincludeｃriteｒiaforeｖaluａt(yī)ｉnｇtｈａt(yī)ｄｅsignt.Guidａnceｈasbeenoutｌiｎedoｆｈｏwｔoreｄucｅｔheｒｉskｏｆoｗnerfallingｉntｏａbreaｃhofthe‘tenderingcontｒaｃｔ’intheｃｏmpeｔitivｅtｅｎderingprｏcesswhenitiｎvolｖesａltｅｒnatiｖeteｎdｅｒｓｏrdeｓignproｐosalｓ．Ｏneoｆthealｔeｒnativｅｃontractorsｅｌectｉoｎmｅthodsｉdenｔifiedhａsbeenbｒieflydesｃribｅd.中文譯文：招標協(xié)議中業(yè)主有機會鼓勵承包商主導的創(chuàng)新的意義摘要在建設工程協(xié)議招標過程中,投標人有機會建議替代性創(chuàng)新方案。聰明人會積極運用這種機會,同樣,承包商會運用他們的專業(yè)知識建立競爭優(yōu)勢。招投標雙方都會極大的收益于這種方式。但是最近習慣法的發(fā)展對業(yè)主無訴訟風險的尋求替代性投標方案的能力提出了質(zhì)疑。這種習慣法已結(jié)識到所謂“招標協(xié)議”或“過程協(xié)議”的存在。由于招標過程本質(zhì)上是一種價格競爭,招標協(xié)議概念的應用很也許嚴重克制替代投標的機會。本文重要根據(jù)文獻編制而成,重要目的是突出競爭性投標過程中承包商主導的創(chuàng)新及探索方式問題。通過這種方式,業(yè)主可以發(fā)展允許和鼓勵創(chuàng)新的采購程序。競爭性投標問題傳統(tǒng)招標過程目的是針對特定產(chǎn)品產(chǎn)生直接競爭價格。評標也許只限于價格，僅建立一種制度。即價格是唯一的標準。但是當各競標價和技術(shù)含量相同時就不同了。雖然協(xié)議期像常數(shù)同樣是固定的，但業(yè)主往往鼓勵投標者提交二次標書。二次標書中為某一不同的協(xié)議期提出替代報價。投標者將通過改善投標方案、尋找最佳合約期、調(diào)整投標報價來達成業(yè)重規(guī)定。每個投標者都會努力尋找新的組織方案,在建議的范圍內(nèi)達成建導致本最低、利潤最高。但是這一過程僅限于部分業(yè)主的設計。這樣一來創(chuàng)新性中標者的范圍就非常有限了。評價替代性投標時，業(yè)主面臨著公平、公正對待所有投標者的義務。假如某個投標被選為替代性投標，那么在本來的招標邀請中這是一個不符合條件的標書,這樣所有的投標者又怎么也許被公平、公正的對待呢?任何超過允許的價格、工期范圍的投標都必須從業(yè)主考慮的范圍內(nèi)取消,由于他們不符合招標邀請的規(guī)定。因此，傳統(tǒng)招標限制、阻止甚至不允許承包商主導的創(chuàng)新。Soｎｇｇｅｒ和Ibbs認為,建設過程中設計－建造采購方法的使用能鼓勵創(chuàng)新。這種采購方法在整個建造過程中給承包商施加了壓力。它不同于傳統(tǒng)方法。傳統(tǒng)方法必須可以在競爭的基礎上評估設計、生產(chǎn)能力、工期、價格。這是不容易的。在招標環(huán)境中，競爭性設計是不易評估的。在競爭贏家時,主觀性似乎取代了客觀性。投標過程中明顯的完整性已丟失。除非競爭設計的評估一開始就建立了明確的準則,這也意味著招標程序準則必須像鼓勵承包商主導的創(chuàng)新那樣設計。Sonｇｇｅr和Ibbs提到這一方面時斷言：公共機構(gòu)的一大焦急是如何在允許創(chuàng)新的同時保持對項目特定設計方面的控制。在設計方面擬定一種合適的創(chuàng)新與控制,讓潛在的設計-建造投標者充足了解這種抱負的平衡,這給公共部門機構(gòu)提出了一個重大挑戰(zhàn)。招標協(xié)議與傳統(tǒng)招標相關(guān)的法律的發(fā)展把“招標邀請”或“招標規(guī)定”看作但是是一次邀請,只是業(yè)主準備做一些優(yōu)先于要約的事情的一個暗示。換句話說，一次邀請并不是與任何被邀請的投標人簽訂協(xié)議的建議,僅僅是協(xié)商的第一步。這種協(xié)商也許會導致協(xié)議的簽訂,也也許不會。當各投標人按規(guī)定格式提交了標書,這相稱于一個可以被當作協(xié)議的要約。假如這個要約得到明確的接受,那么在業(yè)主和中標者之間就會產(chǎn)生合約性的義務。最近，現(xiàn)代觀點將這一理論推翻。這里存在有關(guān)招標協(xié)議出現(xiàn)的所謂“雙方協(xié)議”的分析。招標邀請現(xiàn)在在某些情況下被視為是提交合格標書后簽訂協(xié)議的要約。業(yè)主向每個投標者提供如下措辭:“假如你提交符合規(guī)定的投標書回應我的邀請，我會考慮是否中標……”投標者在這一點上沒有任何義務。但是假如提交了一份合格的標書,那么業(yè)主和投標者之間就形成了一份協(xié)議。這種協(xié)議被描述為“投標協(xié)議”或“前期協(xié)議”或“過程協(xié)議”。這種協(xié)議完全不同于最終與中標者簽訂的主協(xié)議。合約性的義