English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 27329/39174
Visitors : 2479666      Online Users : 42
RC Version 4.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Adv. Search
LoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ntour.ntou.edu.tw:8080/ir/handle/987654321/42906

Title: 營建工程定價策略模式探討
A Study of Pricing Strategy Models
Authors: Chen, Chun-Hung
陳俊宏
Contributors: NTOU:Department of Harbor and River Engineering
國立臺灣海洋大學:河海工程學系
Keywords: 營建工程;定價策略;總價承攬;總價承攬加物調;單價決標;數量決標;成本加成;成本加固定報酬
Construction Engineering;Pricing Strategy;Lump-sum contract;Lump- sum contract plus inflaction index;Price award;Quantity;Cost plus fee;Cost Plus Fixed remuneration
Date: 2014
Issue Date: 2017-05-24T08:39:38Z
Abstract: 公共工程常以招標競標低底價之總價承攬方式決標,而「總價承攬」契約之特性為,工程價目表所列之項目、數量僅供承包商參考,承包商投標時須自行按照圖說詳實計算估價,如認有項目遺漏或數量不符者,須自行於各項目之單價內調整,間接反映於總價中。由於備標期限短,又有項目遺漏、數量不符及物價波動等不確定因素的影響,理應於投標時會反應於單價,可是又怕無法得標,所以常會先取得工程之承攬權後,再行處理後續的問題,在利潤固定的情形下,於是想盡辦法壓低發包單價,所以常會被認為是工程品質無法提升的主要因素。 坊間之營建工程早期也常依循公共工程之決標模式來辦理定價決策,但也常造成工程無法如質、如期完成,最後的輸家還是定作人,”一分錢、一分貨”營建工程的真正價值底為何?應不再只是以低價完成工程。定作人近來在營建工程之定價策略上也改變了許多,雖然部分以「總價承攬」方式定價,但不再以投標競標低底價之方式而改採邀標之方式,決策時也不在採取最低標,而是以邀標之承攬人所作的施工規劃簡報做為評選的決策依據。在不以最低價的前提下,定價之策略模式就有多樣化之選擇。 定價策略模式的正確選擇,有利於後續工程之執行,本研究選擇坊間個案不同之「營建工程定價策略模式」作為研究的對象。藉由執行之案例,探討營建工程之不同定價策略所遇到的各種問題提出探討。 本論文研究,主要依三步驟進行之。首先,彚整前人之相關論述整理歸納,再以個案之案例進行探討分析,確認訂作人與承攬人間對營建工程定價的考量,冀希提供日後定作人及承攬人於協議過程有一重要之評估依據。 探討分析發現,每種定價策略模式皆有其優、缺點,定作人可利用探討結果,在不同的時機下,選擇合理的定價策略模式,與承攬人共同合作,如質、如期完成工程。
Least lump-sum method is a commonly used tender awarding method for public construction work. The characteristic of "lump-sum" contract is that the items and quantities on the construction price list are only for reference for the contractor. If any mistakes in the list of items or quantities are found, the contractor should term the unit prices of each item accordingly and the adjustment will be reflected in the total price. Usually, the unit prices of the item should reflect the influences of the short term period and of many uncertainties such as loss of items, or the price inflaction. However, in order to award the contract, the contractor often depress the unit prices of the items to pursue the profit. This is also considered as the main reason of the poor quality of public constructions. In the ealier period, the pricing strategy of construct project in the market is usually determined by following the same procedure of the public construction tender. As a result, the construction usually can not be completed as expected. As we said, "You get what you pay for". Thus, the true value of the construction project should not only depend on the least price. Recently, the pricing strategy of construction project has been changed much. Also, the final determination depends on contractor's proposal and presentation instead of just on the least price. Without under the premise of least price, many options for the pricing strategy are available. This study is organized by three parts. First, the previous studies and the related discussions are comprehensively illustrated. Then, the existing cases are discussed and analyzed distinctly. Finally, the considerations of A and B when making the pricing strategies are concluded. In this research, we expect to provide an evaluated reference for A and B during the process of reaching an agreement. Our analysis discovered that every pricing strategy has its pros and cons, and A should choose the best one under different situations based on our results to complete the construction project with high quality within the expected time period.
URI: http://ethesys.lib.ntou.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=G0040145013.id
http://ntour.ntou.edu.tw:8080/ir/handle/987654321/42906
Appears in Collections:[河海工程學系] 博碩士論文

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.



All items in NTOUR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

 


著作權政策宣告: 本網站之內容為國立臺灣海洋大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,請合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。
網站維護: 海大圖資處 圖書系統組
DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback