{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028514588859416445, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.890410958904109, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Contractor ability criteria: a view from the Thai construction industry

Realizing that there is a lack of commonality in selecting criteria to evaluate contractor ability, the study aim was to develop a common set of contractor ability criteria for both government and private sectors. This included a standardized set of physical characteristics (hierarchical organizational units) of contractors. The Thai construction industry was surveyed as to the degrees of importance placed on a range of criteria and measures. Similarities and differences between the government and private sectors in selecting contractor ability criteria have been analysed by comparing the importance index and ranking order and comparing mean importance placed on criteria and measures. Relationships between all criteria and measures have also been explored by using correlation coefficients. Factor analysis has been applied to group all highly correlated measures together so as to develop a common set of contractor ability criteria. The result of analysing similarities and differences indicated only slight differences in the mean importance of criteria and measures between the government and private sectors. Thus, a common set of contractor ability criteria has been developed by applying factor analysis, namely, ‘engineering/construction’, ‘procurement/contract’, ‘project managers’, ‘human resources’, ‘quality management systems’, ‘health and safety’, ‘plant/equipment’, ‘financial strength’ and ‘public relations’.