Search results

1 – 3 of 3
Article
Publication date: 30 September 2020

Hossein Derakhshanfar, J. Jorge Ochoa, Konstantinos Kirytopoulos, Wolfgang Mayer and Craig Langston

The purpose of this research is to identify the most impactful delay risks in Australian construction projects, including the associations amongst those risks as well as…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this research is to identify the most impactful delay risks in Australian construction projects, including the associations amongst those risks as well as the project phases in which they are most likely present. The correlation between project and organisational characteristics with the impact of delay risks was also studied.

Design/methodology/approach

A questionnaire survey was used to collect data from 118 delayed construction projects in Australia. Data were analysed to rank the most impactful delay risks, their correlation to project and organisational characteristics and project phases where those risks are likely to emerge. Association rule learning was used to capture associations between the delay risks.

Findings

The top five most impactful delay risks in Australia were changes by the owner, slow decisions by the owner, preparation and approval of design drawings, underestimation of project complexity and unrealistic duration imposed to the project, respectively. There is a set of delay risks that are mutually associated with project complexity. In addition, while delay risks associated with resources most likely arise in the execution phase, stakeholder and process-related risks are more smoothly distributed along all the project phases.

Originality/value

This research for the first time investigated the impact of delay risks, associations amongst them and project phases in which they are likely to happen in the Australian context. Also, this research for the first time sheds light on the project phases for the individual project delay risks which aids the project managers to understand where to focus on during each phase of the project.

Details

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 28 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0969-9988

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 25 June 2019

Hossein Derakhshanfar, J. Jorge Ochoa, Konstantinos Kirytopoulos, Wolfgang Mayer and Vivian W.Y. Tam

The purpose of this paper is to systematically develop a delay risk terminology and taxonomy. This research also explores two external and internal dimensions of the…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to systematically develop a delay risk terminology and taxonomy. This research also explores two external and internal dimensions of the taxonomy to determine how much the taxonomy as a whole or combinations of its elements are generalisable.

Design/methodology/approach

Using mixed methods research, this systematic literature review incorporated data from 46 articles to establish delay risk terminology and taxonomy. Qualitative data of the top 10 delay risks identified in each article were coded based on the grounded theory and constant comparative analysis using a three-stage coding approach. Word frequency analysis and cross-tabulation were used to develop the terminology and taxonomy. Association rules within the taxonomy were also explored to define risk paths and to unmask associations among the risks.

Findings

In total, 26 delay risks were identified and grouped into ten categories to form the risk breakdown structure. The universal delay risks and other delay risks that are more or less depending on the project location were determined. Also, it is realized that delays connected to equipment, sub-contractors and design drawings are highly connected to project planning, finance and owner slow decision making, respectively.

Originality/value

The established terminology and taxonomy may be used in manual or automated risk management systems as a baseline for delay risk identification, management and communication. In addition, the association rules assist the risk management process by enabling mitigation of a combination of risks together.

Details

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 26 no. 10
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0969-9988

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 2 July 2020

Vahid Rooholelm and Abbas Sheikh Aboumasoudi

Almost all projects in the world are delayed, and sometimes even lead to the full bankruptcy of their beneficiaries. These delays can be calculated using techniques, but…

Abstract

Purpose

Almost all projects in the world are delayed, and sometimes even lead to the full bankruptcy of their beneficiaries. These delays can be calculated using techniques, but most importantly, there must be a fair and realistic division of delays between project beneficiaries. The most valid delay calculation techniques belong to the SCL Global Protocol, but they also have significant drawbacks, such as these: (1) They do not have the capability to prevent project delays (Delay Risk Management); (2) The protocol identifies and introduces any delays in activities with a ratio of one to one as a delay (Effective Delay); (3) It also does not offer the capability to share delays between stakeholders, which is a huge weakness. Floating in the base schedule activities is one of the cost control tools of projects, but it can hide project delays. In this paper, the researchers believe that the floating ownership belongs to the project and not belong to the stakeholders. This is the main tool for analyzing and sharing delays in this research.

Design/methodology/approach

The research methodology adopted included an extensive literature review, expert interviews, use of questionnaire and designing three innovative linked together models by researchers.

Findings

In this research, an integrated technique is introduced which has the following capabilities; delay risk control, result-based delay analysis and stakeholders delay sharing. This technique with an incursive and defensive approach implements claims management principles and calculates, respectively, non-attributable and attributable delays for each beneficiary.

Originality/value

This creativity led to the introduction of the Incursive and Defensive (In-De) technique; in the SCL protocol techniques, none of these capabilities exist.

Details

International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 13 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1753-8378

Keywords

1 – 3 of 3