Plot 3 : Quality Questionnaire
Bidding activities for construction of traffic works
To contribute to improving the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam, please provide us with the information and your comments and assessments mentioned in the following survey questions:
1. Date ...... month ...... year ....... interview.
2. Full name of Mr./Ms. ............................................(You may omit it)
3. Gender: MaleFemale
4. Age:Under 25From 25 - under 30From 30 - under 35
From 35 – under 40 From 40 – under 45 From 45 – under 50
50 – under 55 55 and above
5. The agency or unit where you are currently working: ..............................................
..................................................................... (You may leave this blank).
6. Work address: ........................................................................................
(You can leave it blank).
7. Professional qualifications:
PhD Master University College Other
8. Contact phone number: ........................................ (You may omit this).
9. Contact email: ................................................(You can leave it blank).
10.Highest position you have held: .........................................
...................................................................... (You may leave this blank).
11. Have you ever participated in a bidding? (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
Attended Never
12. Have you ever participated in bidding for construction of traffic works? (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
Attended Never
13. You participated in the bidding for the construction of traffic works as a member of which of the following options (Please tick ( ) in the blank box next to it).
Bidding party Contractor
State management agency of scientific research
Other qualifications (please specify) ............................................
14. Would you please circle your overall assessment scores on the quality of construction bidding for traffic works in Vietnam recently according to each criterion in the table below?
Quality criteria
Very good very good | |||||
Legality | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensure scientific (scientific basis) and scientific method) | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensuring feasibility | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensure economic efficiency and savings | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensure fairness, equality, and competition | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensuring publicity and transparency | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Ensure objectivity and impartiality | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
General construction bidding quality construction of traffic works | 1 2 | 3 4 | 5 6 | 7 8 | 9 10 |
Maybe you are interested!
-
Improving the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam - 2 -
Improving the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam - 17 -
Improving human resource quality at Hanoi Construction Joint Stock Company No. 1 - 13 -
Improving human resource quality at Hanoi Construction Joint Stock Company No. 1 - 2 -
Improving the efficiency of raw material import activities at C&T Construction and Materials Trading Joint Stock Company - 2
15. According to you, what phenomena are taking place in bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam recently that have and will reduce the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works? Please tick the corresponding boxes given or add to the blank:
Set up blue and red armies
Colluding with the inviting party, the investor, and the bid evaluation team to win the bid
Use all means to get beneficial information from investors, BMT
Buy and sell packages
Bid fraud
Other phenomena ................................................................................
16. Your opinion on the occurrence of the phenomenon of "staging blue and red troops" in bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam recently (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
No Sometimes happens
Occurs relatively frequently Occurs in most bids
Occurs in every bid
17. Your opinion on the occurrence of the phenomenon of "Collusion with the inviting party, the investor, the bid evaluation expert team to win the bid" in the recent bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam?
here (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
No Sometimes happens
Occurs relatively frequently Occurs in most bids
Occurs in every bid
18. Your opinion on the occurrence of the phenomenon of "using all forms to obtain beneficial information from investors and bidding parties" in recent bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam (Please tick ( ) in the blank box next to it).
No Sometimes happens
Occurs relatively frequently Occurs in most bids
Occurs in every bid
19. Your opinion on the occurrence of the phenomenon of "Buying and selling bid packages" in recent bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
No Sometimes happens
Occurs relatively frequently Occurs in most bids
Occurs in every bid
20. Your opinion on the occurrence of the phenomenon of "Devaluation"
"bidding" in recent bidding for construction of traffic works in Vietnam (Please check ( ) in the blank box next to it).
No Sometimes happens
Occurs relatively frequently Occurs in most bids
Occurs in every bid
21. In your opinion, what solutions should we apply to improve the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works in the coming time?
................................................................ ................................................................ ..........................
................................................................ ................................................................ ..........................
Thank you very much for your cooperation and help.
Plot 4 : Summary of survey results
a) Information about the survey respondents:
Plot 4.1 : Structure of survey respondents by gender
Status
Sex | Frequency | Frequency (%) | |
1 2 | Male Female | 103 37 | 73.6 26.4 |
Count | 140 | 100 |
Plot 4.2 : Structure of respondents by age
Status
Age | Frequency | Frequency (%) | |
1 | Under 25 years old | 3 | 2.1 |
2 | 25 to under 30 years old | 30 | 21.4 |
3 | 30 to under 35 years old | 30 | 21.4 |
4 | 35 to under 40 years old | 28 | 20.0 |
5 | 40 to under 45 years old | 26 | 18.6 |
6 | 45 to under 50 years old | 12 | 8.6 |
50 to under 55 years old | 9 | 6.2 | |
Over 55 years old | 1 | 0.7 | |
Count | 140 | 100 |
Plot 4.3 : Structure of survey respondents by level
Status
Level | Frequency | Frequency (%) | |
1 | PhD | 7 | 5.2 |
2 | Master | 22 | 16.3 |
3 | University | 105 | 77.8 |
4 | Other | 1 | 0.7 |
Count | 140 | 100 |
Plot 4.4 : Structure of survey respondents by subject
Status
Object | Frequency | Frequency (%) | |
1 | Bidding party | 41 | 28.7 |
2 | Contractor | 72 | 50.0 |
3 | State Management Representative | 14 | 9.7 |
4 | Scientific research | 11 | 7.6 |
5 | Other | 6 | 4.2 |
Count | 144 | 100 |
b) Information on the evaluation of the quality of bidding for construction of traffic works in Pho Loc 4.5 : Results of scoring the quality of bidding
construction of traffic works
Criteria
quality assessment
Total number of people score | Count point | Average score army | ||||
1. | Legality | 140 | 998 | 7.13 | ||
2. | Ensure scientific | 140 | 934 | 6.67 | ||
3. | Ensuring feasibility | 140 | 906 | 6.47 | ||
4. Ensure economic efficiency and savings | 140 | 839 | 6.00 | |||
5. | Ensure fairness equality and competition | equal, | jar | 140 | 689 | 4.90 |
6. Ensure publicity and transparency | 139 | 762 | 5.48 | |||
7. Ensure objectivity and impartiality | 139 | 698 | 5.02 | |||
Overall quality assessment Bidding for construction of traffic works | 140 | 818 | 5.84 | |||
Plot 4.6 : Evaluation score of construction bidding quality of traffic works
Status
Evaluation criteria | Scoring | Se Mode | ||||||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |||
1 | Legality | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 19 | 26 | 36 | 36 | 18 | 4 | 7.5 |
2 | Ensure scientific learn | 0 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 17 | 33 | 43 | 21 | 14 | 2 | 7 |
3 | Ensuring feasibility | 0 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 20 | 37 | 36 | 25 | 9 | 0 | 6 |
4 | Guaranteed efficiency economic, saving | 1 | 1 | 10 | 14 | 31 | 28 | 25 | 22 | 8 | 0 | 5 |
5 | Ensure fairness fair, equitable, and competitive | 2 | 11 | 14 | 27 | 35 | 25 | 17 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
6 | Ensure fairness open, transparent | 2 | 4 | 12 | 28 | 35 | 16 | 15 | 17 | 8 | 2 | 5 |
7 | Ensure customer satisfaction impartial | 4 | 7 | 20 | 25 | 30 | 20 | 17 | 13 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
Plot 4.7 : Assessment of the occurrence of negative phenomena in bidding for construction of traffic works
Status
Negative phenomenon | Frequency | Se Mode | |||||
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
1 | Set up the red and blue army | 2 | 43 | 73 | 20 | 1 | 2 |
2 | Collusion with the inviting party, investor, expert team to evaluate bids to win the bid | 2 | 53 | 73 | 20 | 1 | 2 |
3 | Use any means to get information beneficial information from investors, bidding parties | 6 | 68 | 5 | 9 | 3 | 1 |
4 | Buying and selling packages | 7 | 101 | 22 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
5 | Bid fraud | 19 | 91 | 20 | 7 | 0 | 1 |
(0) Is not available | (1) It sometimes happens | (2) It happens relatively often. | |
through | (3) It happens in most of the | bid | (4) Occurs in all bids |
Source: Test results conducted by the author from October 2005 to March 2006.