Development of A Risk-Based Pre-Tender Assessment Tool for Oil and Gas Construction Projects Using Analytical Hierarchy Process

Sudirman; Rosmariani Arifuddin; M Asad Abdurrahman

doi:10.29017/scog.v49i2.1962

Authors

Sudirman Universitas Hasanuddin
Rosmariani Arifuddin Universitas Hasanuddin
M Asad Abdurrahman Universitas Hasanuddin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29017/scog.v49i2.1962

Keywords:

oil and gas construction, pre-tender assessment, risk-based decision-making, analytical hierarchy process, decision-support tool

Abstract

The pre-tender stage is a critical decision point in oil and gas construction projects, particularly in capital-intensive, technically complex environments, where inappropriate project selection may increase financial, technical, operational, and regulatory risks. In practice, contractors often rely on subjective judgment in early project evaluation due to the limited availability of structured, quantitative decision-support tools. This study aims to develop a risk-based pre-tender assessment tool to support project selection decisions in oil and gas construction projects in Indonesia. The study integrates a literature review with a questionnaire-based survey involving 90 experienced construction practitioners occupying supervisory and managerial positions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine the relative priority weights of evaluation criteria and sub-criteria.The results indicate that all major criteria contribute significantly to pre-tender decision-making, with financial aspects obtaining the highest priority weight (22.9%), followed by commercial (20.1%), technical (19.4%), legal and social (19.3%), and marketing aspects (18.3%). At the sub-criteria level, expected profit margin, implementation risk, and project owner legality emerged as dominant evaluation factors. A case study application further demonstrates the practical applicability of the proposed framework, with the pipeline installation project achieving a higher feasibility score (7.48) than the oil storage terminal project (6.32). Sensitivity analysis also confirms that the ranking results remain stable under alternative weighting scenarios.The findings demonstrate that the proposed framework provides a structured, transparent, and risk-informed approach for evaluating project feasibility during the pre-tender stage. The study contributes by developing an integrated weighting-based decision-support framework specifically tailored to the characteristics and risk exposure of oil and gas construction projects, thereby supporting more objective and consistent contractor decision-making.

References

Adamu, M., Raut, A., Alyaseen, A., & Ahmed, O. S. (2025). A multi-criteria decision analytics approach for project delivery system selection in housing projects. Decision Analytics Journal, 100651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2025.100651

Adjorlolo, G., Tang, Z., Wauk, G., Adu Sarfo, P., Braimah, A. B., Blankson Safo, R., & N-yanyi, B. (2025). Evaluating Corruption-Prone Public Procurement Stages for Blockchain Integration Using AHP Approach. Systems, 13(4), 267. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems13040267

Ahlawat, S., & Singh, U. P. (2025). Pre-tender Cost Estimation and Bid Pricing. In Handbook of Construction Project Management (pp. 347–369). Springer.

Ansari, M. S. A., Abouraia, M., El Morsy, R., & Thumiki, V. R. R. (2024). Influence of transformational and transactional leadership on agile project success. Project Leadership and Society, 5, 100136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2024.100136

Burinskienė, A., & Daškevič, D. (2023). CONTEMPORARY CONCEPT OF BUSINESS COMPETITIVENESS. Management/Vadyba (16487974), 39(1). https://doi.org/10.38104/vadyba.2023.1.01

Debnath, B., Bari, A. B. M. M., Haq, M. M., de Jesus Pacheco, D. A., & Khan, M. A. (2023). An integrated stepwise weight assessment ratio analysis and weighted aggregated sum product assessment framework for sustainable supplier selection in the healthcare supply chains. Supply Chain Analytics, 1, 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sca.2022.100001

Dong, T., Yin, S., & Zhang, N. (2022). New energy-driven construction industry: Digital green innovation investment project selection of photovoltaic building materials enterprises using an integrated fuzzy decision approach. Systems, 11(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11010011

Fang, Y.-N., Namaiti, A., Zhang, S., & Feng, T. (2025). Multimodal Data-Driven Visual Sensitivity Assessment and Planning Response Strategies for Streetscapes in Historic Districts: A Case Study of Anshandao, Tianjin. Land, 14(5), 1036. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14051036

Fernández Ocamica, V., Zambrana-Vasquez, D., & Díaz Murillo, J. C. (2025). Optimizing Circular Economy Choices: The Role of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Sustainability, 17(15), 6759. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156759

Hosseinkhani, N. T. (2025). Behavioral Finance and Investor Psychology in Volatile Markets: Insights into Decision-Making, Biases, and Market Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5585212

Hussein, M. F., Abdu, G., Gebreal, A., Elnagar, F., El Demerdash, B. E., Abonazel, M. R., Shati, A. A., Al-Qahtani, S. M., & Ghazy, R. M. (2025). Developing and validating of an English questionnaire to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding Marburg virus disease (EKAP-MVD): A cross-sectional study. Medicine, 104(8), e41571. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000041571

Iastremska, O., Tryfonova, O., Mantaliuk, O., & Baranets, H. (2023). The impact of strategic decisions on the future development of organisations and economic dynamics. Futurity Economics&Law, 3(4), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.57125/FEL.2023.12.25.08

Iskandar, D. E. U. P., & Kurihara, M. (2025). Co-optimization of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) Project Using Iterative Latin Hypercube Sampling (ILHS). Scientific Contributions Oil and Gas, 48(2), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.29017/scog.v48i2.1818

Krechowicz, M., & Krechowicz, A. (2024). Passive Buildings—Big Opportunities or Big Risks? Quantitative Risk Assessment for Passive Buildings Projects. Sustainability, 16(10), 4014. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104014

Madanchian, M., & Taherdoost, H. (2025). Applications of Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Information Systems for Strategic and Operational Decisions. Computers, 14(6), 208. https://doi.org/0.3390/computers14060208

Masudin, I., Habibah, I. Z., Wardana, R. W., Restuputri, D. P., & Shariff, S. S. R. (2024). Enhancing supplier selection for sustainable Raw materials: A comprehensive analysis using analytical network process (ANP) and TOPSIS methods. Logistics, 8(3), 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics8030074

Silva, F. A. da, Vivoni, A. M., Gomes, H. M., Oliveira, L. A. dos S., Sant’Anna, A. P., & Gavião, L. O. (2025). A risk analysis model for biosecurity in Brazil using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Standards, 5(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/standards5010002

Tanaka, K., Higashide, T., Kinkyo, T., & Hamori, S. (2025). Financial Mechanisms of Corporate Bankruptcy: Are They Different or Similar Across Crises? Risks, 13(8), 158. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks13080158

Teurupun, A., Nugroho, B. S., Nurrahmana, A., & Alfarizi, K. (2024). Risk-Based Inspection Analysis of Api 581 Pressure Safety Valve & Stripper Acid Gas Removal Unit at PT XY. Scientific Contributions Oil and Gas, 47(3), 285–295. https://doi.org/10.29017/SCOG.47.3.1645

Wang, Z., Nabavi, S. R., & Rangaiah, G. P. (2024). Multi-criteria decision making in chemical and process engineering: methods, progress, and potential. Processes, 12(11), 2532. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12112532

Weng, J. C. (2023). Putting intellectual robots to work: Implementing generative ai tools in project management. NYU SPS Applied Analytics Laboratory.