مهم جدا جدا An empirical approach for identifying critical time ovrerun risk factors in...

Journal of Economic & Administrative Sciences Vol. 24, No. 2, December 2008 (35 - 53)

An Empirical Approach for Identifying Critical Time-Ovrerun

Risk Factors in Kuwait’s Construction Projects

Dr. Hassan Al Zubaidi Mr. Srour Al Otaibi

Kuwait-Maastricht Business

School

Construction Team leader

Ministry of Public Work

Kuwait

Abstract Risk identification is an integral part of overall risk management

framework of projects. The risks associated with projects and their response

planning differs according to the country and the sector specific environment

in which they are being implemented. In this paper, the study is carried out

to identify the critical risk factors causing delay in Kuwait’s building and

infrastructure projects. The preparation of a preliminary list of risks and risk

factors is outlined, questionnaire development and survey details are

explained, and analysis of survey responses for the identification of delay

risk factors in Kuwait is presented. A case study analysis with respect to

time-overrun/delay of about 28 building and infrastructure projects executed

in Kuwait is also presented to validate the survey results. Survey and case

study results show that the frequency of time-overrun in Kuwait’s

construction projects is very high. The five most critical time-overrun factors

identified in Kuwait’s infrastructure and building projects are: delay in

government approvals/permits, delay in preparation and approval in

variation orders, client induced additional work beyond the original scope,

changed engineering conditions from the contract document and decreased

labor productivity due to extreme climatic conditions. All the above risk

factors are rated as moderately critical to very critical in Kuwait.

Introduction

Availability of adequate infrastructure facilities at reasonable cost is a

prerequisite for the economic development of a country. In recent decades

the Middle East States in general have experienced a boom in the

construction and infrastructure industry and experienced substantial growth

after escalated oil prices brought cash pouring into their economies. Global

economic research on Kuwait has indicated of exuberant growth for Kuwaiti economy with a Nominal GDP surge of 19.3% from 2003 to 2004, which was one of the highest in the world. (Kuwait Economic and Strategic Outlook, 2005). Robust economic conditions and increased private spending

as well as a strong pick up in gross capital formation driven by several

capital projects in Kuwait is anticipated to help the economy to sustain the

double digit growth rate further. Along with the oil and gas sector, the civil

Dr. Hassan Al Zubaiadi, Mr. Srour Al Otaibi December 2008

36

infrastructure and services-led non-oil sector in Kuwait are also anticipated

to exhibit a matching growth trends. After a recession in the late 1990s,

Kuwait is rejuvenating itself for higher investment in Civil Infrastructures. It

is expected that in Kuwait, for the next five years the private sector will

invest up to US$8bn in the construction sector, in addition US$3bn in

government investment.

Most of the large-scale construction projects are operated in complex and

dynamic conditions and is constantly confronted with various risks and

uncertainties. Kartam et al (2001) have studied the significance/contribution

of risk factors towards project delay and their preference of risk allocation

among major contractors in the Kuwait’s construction industry. The

significant risk factors identified are financial failure of contractors or

subcontractors, defective design, and delayed dispute resolution. In a study

of analyzing eight (8) Kuwaiti construction projects, Al-Sabah et al (2002)

found that, arbitration tribunal awarded KD31 million on contract price of

KD100 million (at 1980 price level). Many of the past construction projects

executed in Kuwait had time- and cost-overrun problems (Koushki et al.,

2005). Major Government contracts for construction in Kuwait are let as

lump sum projects (Design-Build), which are often encountered with construction disputes resulting, claims induced delay and cost-overrun.

Many of the projects exceed completion time by 100% in addition to

exceeding their budget.

Project Risks and their Characterization

In the context of project management, Chapman et al (1983) and Perry et al (1985) have expressed risk as an exposure to economic loss or gain

arriving from involvement in the construction process, whereas Wideman

(1986) have viewed risk as an exposure to loss only. Al-Bahar (1989)

characterized risk with three components: risk event, the uncertainty of the

event and the potential loss or gain. In general, risks in a project can be

either viewed as an opportunity for greater potential of return or as hazards

or threats, which affects the goal and the economic performance of the

organization that is promoting the project. It is manifested through the

occurrences of various risk events.

In this research, “risk” is used to indicate threat/hazard to the project from one or more events of a particular category/nature or origin, for example, Time-overrun risk. Risk Event is a specific event that could occur during the

project life cycle, which has a probability of occurrence and an adverse

impact on the project objectives. The key attributes of risk events are the

probability of occurrence and the impact of occurrence (RAMP, 2000). A

Journal of Economic & Administrative Sciences December 2008

37

Risk Factor is a factor, which could lead to the occurrence of one or more

risk events and is characterized by the probability of occurrence. Risk factors

do not affect project objectives directly but do so through risk events

(indirect impact). It is assumed that the realization of respective risk factors

will contribute to the risk/risk event (under which it is classified) with

varying degrees of influences (Thomas et al; 2006). The research seeks to

identify and evaluate the critical risk factors contributing to time-overrun in

both the public and private sectors. The main hypothesis this paper is trying

to test is “Is there a difference in criticality rating by different category of

respondents.

Research Methodology

The risks associated with construction projects differ according to the

country and the sector specific environment in which they are being

implemented. The political, legal, economic and regulatory environments in

Kuwait are different from other countries and risk management strategies

carried out in other project environments may not be directly suitable for the

Kuwait infrastructure and construction environment. One of the aims of this

research is to identify the critical risk factors causing time-overrun in the

building and infrastructure projects implemented in Kuwait. The process of

identification of critical risk factors was done in two stages and summarized

in Table 1.

Table 1: Process of Risk Factor Identification

Stage Process Details

1 Preparation of preliminary list of

risk factors

Study of literature including research papers and case study reports.

Discussions with project participants.

Unstructured interviews/discussions with project

participants for consolidation of risk factors and

their classification.

Content validation of list/questionnaire through

locally available experts.

2 Identification of critical risk factors

Questionnaire survey among senior project participants in Kuwait Construction Industry.

The survey responses were statistically analysed

for identifying critical risk factors. Validation of

survey results through case studies

A mixed approach of questionnaire survey followed by case study was

used for the research (Assaf et al, 1995; Chan et al, 1997; Odeh et al, 2000;


38

Kartam et al, 2001; Aibinu et al, 2002). A preliminary list of various time-

overrun risk factors associated with building and infrastructure projects in

general and unique to the middle east and Kuwait construction project

environment was prepared based on desk based literature review and

discussions with project participants of Kuwait’s construction industry.

The preliminary list of risk factors causing time-overrun thus prepared

was further filtered out through unstructured interviews with locally

available project experts/participants. Thirty-three risk factors causing time-

overrun were short listed for including in the questionnaire. The short listed

risk factors that included in the questionnaire are given in Appendix 1.

Survey Approach

Due to the non-availability of organized information relating to the occurrence of risk factors and risk management in Kuwait’s construction industry, a mail questionnaire survey approach was considered. This

approach is well recognized and widely used in both social sciences and

management research studies. In the area of construction management,

many researchers have used this approach (Assaf et al, 1995; Chan et al,

1997; Odeh et al, 2000; Kartam et al, 2001; El-Dash et al, 2004; Assaf et al,

2006). Some of the advantages of mail questionnaire approaches are low

cost, greater anonymity, reduction in bias and wider geographic coverage.

Criteria for Risk Identification

In this research, “Criticality Index CI” is used as the criteria for identifying the critical risk factors. The degree of impact of each risk factor was included in the questionnaire under the heading “significance”. As

mentioned earlier, criticality of risk factor is assumed to be the combined

effect of probability (frequency of occurrence) and impact (significance) of

occurrence of the risk. Assaf et al, (1995) and Falqi, (2004) have used a

similar criterion. Both studies had used severity/significance of risk factors

and frequency of risk factors for evaluation of importance index as a

function of two attributes.

Survey Questionnaire

The questionnaire for the survey was designed with the main objective of identifying the most critical risks factors causing time-overrun in Kuwait’s

building and infrastructure projects. The preliminary questionnaire was

circulated among locally available experts in the field and their suggestions

with respect to contents, structure, and format were incorporated in the final

questionnaire. Questions Q.1 to Q.5 were factual questions, which elicit


39

information from the respondents regarding their background, experience

and category and also the overall time-overrun risk exposure of construction

projects in Kuwait.

Questions for Identification of Critical Risk Factors: Thirty-three risk

factors causing time-overrun in construction projects were given in the

questionnaire and respondents were asked to indicate the significance of

each risk factor on a five point Likert scale, response scale ranging from “not

significant” (1) to “extremely significant” (5). The questionnaire was

designed to examine the respondent’s observation and judgment in

determining the relative significance of risk factors.

Although the degree of impact of risk factors varies from project to

project, the questions were designed to elicit a general assessment of the

significance of risk factors. The respondents were also asked about the

frequency of occurrence of that risk factor according to their judgment and

local working experience in Kuwait construction industry on a three point

Likert scale, response scale ranging from “low” (1) to “high” (3).

Survey Responses

In order to identify critical risk factors causing time-overrun in Kuwait’s building and infrastructure construction environment, a survey was carried

out among the various stakeholders: Government representatives, builder/

contractors, clients, consultants, project managers and architects. The survey

was administrated during the period August 2006 to October 2006. Since

the responses from clients, project managers and architects were very few in

numbers; their responses were clubbed with other categories. Clients and

project managers were included in contractor/ builder category whereas

architects were included in the consultant’s category.

Out of 100 questionnaires sent, 84 responses were received out of which

4 were incomplete and discarded. The response rate of 80 percent is

considered to be very good for this kind of a mail survey. The methodology

adopted for increasing the response rate was regular email and telephonic

follow-ups. The reliability of the survey results is expected to be high

because all the respondents are top-level experienced management officials in their organizations.

The summary of the survey responses concerning category and

experience is given in Table 2. The majority of the survey respondents were having very good experience in Kuwait’s construction environment. About

ninety four percent of the respondents have at least 10 years of experience in

the area construction projects.


40

Table 2: Distribution of Respondents by Category and Experience

Category Experience in Construction Projects, in years Total

(%) > 20 15-19 10-14 5-9 < 5

Government Engineers

5

7

10

3

0 25

(31%)

Builders/ Contractors

17

7

3

1

0 28

(35%)

Consultants

21

5

0

0

1 27

(34%)

Total

(%)

43

(54%)

19

(24%)

13

(16%)

4

(5%)

1

(1%)

80

(100%)

Time-Over run in Kuwait’s Construction Projects Respondents of the survey were asked to evaluate the overall time-

overrun risk exposure of construction projects in Kuwait. The responses to

Q.4 “How often have time-overrun problems occurred in the projects you

have undertaken in Kuwait?” were statistically analyzed and summarized in

Table 3, which shows that the percentage of time-overrun in Kuwait’s

construction projects is ranging from 20-80%.

Table 3: Frequency of Time-overrun in Kuwait’s Construction Projects

Category

Percentage of Projects

< 20%

20-50%

50-80%

80-100%

Government

Engineers

3

10

12

0

Builders/

Contractors

11

8

7

2

Consultants 12 10 3 2

Total

(%)

26

(32.5)

28

(35)

22

(27.5)

4

(5)

About 93% of the respondents to Q.5 “Which type of construction

projects undertaken in Kuwait has had the highest case of time-overrun

problems?” stated that government projects executed in Kuwait have the

highest time-overrun problems. The remaining 6% mentioned private

developers’ projects.


41

Identification of Critical Risk Factors The survey responses were stored in a database and the SPSS software

was used to perform the statistical analysis. For the purpose of this research

the responses were sorted based on category of respondents (Government

Engineers, Builders/Contractors and Consultants). Based on the significance

rating and frequency rating on each risk factor, the average score of the

Significance Index (SI) and Frequency Index (FI) was calculated for the

combined as well as for each category of respondents. The average scores of

SI and FI were calculated for each risk factor by the following formulae: 5 5

SI i 1 S i Pi / i 1 Pi (1)

3 3

FI j 1 F j P j / j 1 P j

where

Si is the significance weight (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5) assigned to option i

Pi is the number of participants who responded to option i Fj is the frequency weight (1, 2 or 3) assigned to option j Pj is the number of participants who responded to option j

(2)

The calculation of the criticality index (CI) was determined through two

steps; first, identifying the score for every possible answer as shown in the

Table 4.

Table 4: Significance-Frequency Combination Matrix

Significance (S)

Frequency (F)

1 2 3

1 1 2 3

2 2 4 6

3 3 6 8

4 4 7 10

5 5 9 11

Since the weight of significance was considered on a 5-point scale

whereas that of frequency was considered on a 3-point scale, the score of

integrating S and F will run from 1 to 11. The Criticality index (CI) for each

cause was calculated as follows: 15 15

CI k 1 ( S F )k Pk / k 1 Pk , (3)

where (S F )k is the conjunction (1, 2, …., or 11) in the matrix shown in

Table 4 and Pk is the number of participants who responded to option k.


42

Based on the criticality rating of each category of respondents, the mean

criticality index was evaluated for each risk factor. Analysis of Variance

(ANOVA) using the F-test was carried out to compare the mean criticality

rating among different categories of respondents (Mendenhall, 1971; Levin

and Rubin, 1998). In the ANOVA F-test, the samples are assumed to have

been randomly selected from the population in an independent manner. The

population is assumed to be normally distributed. Moderate departure from

these assumptions will not seriously affect the properties of the test

(Mendenhall, 1971).

Overall F-tests only determine whether any significant difference exists

among the means. For cases where the F-test is statistically significant, the

Post-Hoc Tukey HSD test was carried out. This test compares sets of two

means at a time in order to determine specifically, where the significant

difference lies. The Spearman’s rank correlation technique was also used to

compare the risk criticality ranking of the three different categories of

respondents. This technique is widely used in various psychological, socio-

economic and complex environmental problems to measure the association

between two ranked variables.

Identification of Critical Time-overrun Risk Factors: Survey Results

The mean criticality index (CI) for each time-overrun risk factor was calculated based on the rating given by the government engineers,

builders/contractors and consultants and are summarized in Appendix 2.

One-way ANOVA F-tests (2- tailed) were carried out for each risk factor

and showed that there was a high degree of agreement in risk criticality

rating (at 0.05 significance level) for the majority of the time-overrun risk

factors except TO.4 (Client induced additional work beyond the original

scope) and TO.27 (Inadequate design team experience). Post-Hoc Tukey

HSD tests were carried out for the TO.4 and TO.27 risk factors. The results

appear in Table 5, which reveals significant differences between Consultants

and Government Engineers. The criticality ratings of TO.4 and TO.27 risk

factors for Consultants were lower in comparison to others.

The high degree of agreement on risk factor criticality rating and ranking (except two risk factors) shows that the respondents have a common

understanding of the risks in Kuwait construction project environment and

the reliability of their ratings are likely to be high. Since the criticality rating

of different categories of respondents were not significantly different for

thirty one risk factors out of thirty three, the critical time-overrun risk factors

for Kuwait were identified based on the combined rating of all categories.

The risk ranking based on criticality index (CI) is given in Appendix 3.


43

Risk

Factor

Dependent Variables

Mean

diff.

Std.

Error

Significance

(I) (J) TO.4 Consultants Contractors/Builders 3.11 1.14 0.021*

Consultants Govt. Engineers 3.39 1.17 0.013*

Govt. Engineers Builders/Contractors 0.28 1.16 0.969

TO.27 Consultants Builders/Contractors 1.70 1.13 0.296

Consultants Govt. Engineers 3.82 1.17 0.004*

Govt. Engineers Builders/Contractors 2.12 1.16 0.66

* S

Table 5: Multiple Comparisons (Tukey HSD)

ignificant at the 0.05 level

There is also a high correlation among different categories of respondents

in overall ranking of different risk factors. The spearman’s rank correlation

for risk factor criticality is also considered. The results show that there is

relatively good agreement between each two categories in ranking time-

overrun risk factors with the highest degree of agreement (0.87) between

Government Engineers and consultants, while the lowest degree of

agreement is between Builders and consultants (0.81). Such a relatively high

agreement demonstrates the reliability of the results.

Based on the risk criticality index analysis, most critical time-overrun risk

factors in Kuwait’s construction projects identified are given in Table 6,

which also gives the results of similar analyses for significance as well as

frequency of occurrence of critical risk factors in Kuwait.

The five highest rankings are “Delay in government approvals/permits

related to project”, “Delay in preparation and approval in variation orders”,

“Client induced additional work beyond the original scope”, “Changed engineering conditions from the contract document”, “Decreased labor

productivity due to extreme climatic conditions”. Among these five most

critical time-overrun risk factors, the values of the criticality index (CI) of

first three risk factors are around 8-8.75 whereas the values for the fourth

and fifth factors are around 6.5. Since the highest possible criticality index in

the adopted scale is 11, the range 6 to 8.75 can be treated as moderately to

very critical risk factors. None of the time-overrun risk factors are in the

range of extremely critical in Kuwait. The values of the relative criticality

index for the five most critical risk factors are shown in Figure 1.


44

Table 6: The Most Critical Time-overrun Risk Factors in Kuwait Risk

Factor No.

Risk Factor Significance

Rank

Frequency

Rank

Criticality

Rank

TO.29 Delay in Government

approvals/permits related

to project

1

1

1

TO.11 Delay in preparation and approval in variation

orders

2

2

2

TO.4 Client induced additional work beyond the original

scope

3

3

3

TO.2 Changed engineering

conditions from the

contract document

4

4

4

TO.30 Decreased labor productivity due to

extreme climatic

conditions

5

5

5

Figure 1: Criticality Index of Most Critical Time-overrun Risk Factors

The most critical problem identified is “Delay in government

approvals/permits related to project”. This is a global problem especially for


45

infrastructure construction projects. Depending on the type of projects, the

clearance/approval required from government agencies can adversely affect

the completion time. Careful observations of most critical time-overrun risk

factors reveal that all project stakeholders are equally responsible for project

delay. Government delay, delay in variation orders, additional works beyond

scope are client induced risk factors. Contractors with proper planning and

scheduling can better address problems related to change engineering

condition and labor productivity issues. Though earlier studies in some other

Middle East counties and Kuwait identified that delayed payment and

working capital shortage is a potential reason for time-overrun, such

problems are not very critical in Kuwait now. The survey result reveals that

“social and cultural problems (TO.24)” and “Accidents during construction

(TO.25)” are the least critical time-overrun factors in Kuwait.

Risk Factors Identification - Case Study Approach

In order to continue the survey based criticality assessment, twenty eight

infrastructure and Building projects executed in Kuwait were studied for

actual time-overrun occurrence and the major contributing risk factors. The

case study analysis revealed that 23 out of the 28 projects had time-overrun

problems. The case study results substantiated the survey findings of

frequent time problems of Kuwait’s building and infrastructure projects. The

average time-overrun in Kuwait’s projects (calculated from the case study) is

38%. In case of Management & Operation of Um-El haiman STP project,

the time-overrun recorded was 174%, which is the maximum among all

projects studied.

One of the main objectives of the case study research was to check how

far the critical risk factors (identified through the survey research) have

adversely affected the projects. The percentages of projects incurring time-

overrun with their critical risk factors are summarized in Table 7.

The most critical time-overrun factors like “delay in government

approvals/permits related to project (TO.29)”, “delay in preparation and

approval in variation orders (TO.11)”, “client induced additional work

beyond the original scope (TO.4)” and “changed engineering conditions

from the contract document (TO.2)” were major time-overrun reasons for the

majority of projects. More than 65% of projects had time-overrun due to

above problems. However, in contrary to the survey results, “decreased labor

productivity due to extreme climatic conditions (TO.30)” was not a major

time-overrun issue in Kuwait. Only 9% of projects studied had extreme

climatic conditions as a reason for delay. “Third party delays (TO.33)” and


46

“insufficient information of constructability (TO.3)” have delayed about

30% and 39% of the projects.

Table 7: Occurrence of Time- overrun Risk Factors in Kuwait’s

Projects

Time-overrun Risk Factors % of projects

incurring

Time-overrun

Delay in Government approvals/permits related to project 78

Delay in preparation and approval in variation orders 74

Client induced additional work beyond the original scope 87

Changed engineering conditions from the contract document 65

Decreased labor productivity due to extreme climatic conditions 9

Third party delays * 39

Insufficient information of constructability * 30

* Additional critical risk factors

Conclusions

In comparison to private and corporate body projects, government

projects executed in Kuwait have the highest time-overrun problems. On an

average, about 20-50% projects executed in Kuwait have time-overrun

problems. There is a high degree of agreement on criticality ratings among various

respondents for all risk factors causing time-overrun in construction projects

executed in Kuwait. There is a significant difference in risk criticality rating between the government engineers and the consultants with respect to two

time-overrun risk factors: “Client induced additional work beyond the

original scope” and “Inadequate design team experience”.

The five most critical time-overrun risk factors in Kuwait’s construction

projects are: “Delay in Government approvals/permits related to project”,

“Delay in preparation and approval in variation orders”, “Client induced

additional work beyond the original scope”, “Changed engineering

conditions from the contract document”, and “Decreased labor productivity

due to extreme climatic conditions”.

Client induced additional work beyond the original scope and subsequent

design changes can lead to time-overrun and in turn cost-overrun. Such risk factors will ultimately end up in aggressive claims by the contractor.

All the short-listed time-overrun risk factors can be treated as moderately

critical to very critical risk factors. None of the time-overrun risk factors is

in the range of extremely critical in Kuwait.


47

There was a fair degree of agreement between survey based risk

assessment and the actual risk impact in construction projects examined

through the case study. The average time-overrun in Kuwait’s project

(calculated from the case study) is 38%.

Limitations & Scope for Further Work

The scope of the present work was limited to specific risks, i.e., time- overrun risks. The research can be extended for other construction related risk categories like cost-overrun, political risks, legal risks, financial risk,

etc. The risk identification study carried out for building and infrastructure

projects in Kuwait can be extended and or focused on specific infrastructure

sectors like power, ports, telecommunication, etc.


48

References Aibinu, A. A. and Jagboro, G. O (2002) “The Effects of Construction Delays

on Project Delivery in Nigerian Construction Industry”, International

Journal of Project Management, 20, 593-599.

Al-Bahar, J. F. (1989) “Risk Management in Construction Projects: A

Systemic Analytical Approach for Contractors”, PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1989.

Al-Sabah, S. J, S. M. Fereig and D. J. Hoare (2002) “Construction Claims:

Result from Major Tribunal Findings in Kuwait”, The journal of

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, 68 (1), February. Assef, S.A. and S. Al-Hejji (2006) “Causes of Delay in Large Construction

Projects”, International Journal of Project Management, 24, 349-357. Assaf, S.

A., M. Al-Khalil, and Al-Hazmi (1995) “Causes of Delay in Large

Construction Building Projects”, Journal of Management in Engineering,

March-April, 45-50.

Chan, D. W. M. and M. M. Kumaraswamy (1997) “A Comparative Study of Causes of Time-overrun in Hong Kong Construction Projects”,

International Journal of Project Management, 15(1), 55-63.

Chapman, C. B. and D. F. Cooper (1983) “Risk analysis: testing some

prejudices”. European Journal of Operational Research, 14, 238-247. EI- Dadh, K. and M. A. Monem (2004) “Potential Risks in Civil

Infrastructure Projects in Egypt”. Proceedings of III IPMA-ICEC

International Expert Seminar, Bilbao, Spain, 6-8 October 2004.

Falki, I. I. (2004) “Delay in Project Completion: A Comparative Study of

Construction Delay Factors in Saudi Arabia and the United Kingdom”. Master Thesis, Heriot-Watt University.

Kartam, N. A. and S. A. Kartam (2001) “Risk and its management in the

Kuwaiti Construction Industry: a Contractors Perspective, Project Management”, International Journal of Project Management, 19, 325-

335.

Koushki, P. A. and K. Al Rashid , N. Kartam (2005) “Delays and cost

increases in the construction of private residential projects in Kuwait”,

Construction Management & Economics, Volume 23, Number 3.

Kuwait Economic and Strategic Outlook-VIII (2005), Global Investment

House (KSCC), December. Levin, I. R. and D. S. Rubin (1998) “Data Analysis for Management”,

Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1998.

Mendenhall, W. (1971) “Introduction to Probability and Statistics” (3rd

Ed.),

Duxbury Press, Belmount, California , 1971.


49

Odeh, A. M. and H. T Battaineh (2002) “Causes of Construction Delays:

Traditional Contracts”, International Journal of Project Management, 20,

67-73.

Perry, J. G. and R. W. Hayes (1985) “Risk and its management in

construction projects.” Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineering, 78(1), 499-521.

RAMP. (2000) “Risk Analysis and Management of Projects”, Thomas Telford Publishing, London, 2000.

Thomas, A. V., S. N. Kalidindi and L. S. Ganesh (2006) “Modelling and

Assessment of Critical Risks in BOT Road Projects.” Construction Management and Economics, 24, 407-424.

Wideman, R. M. (1986) “Risk management”. Project Management Journal, 9, 20-26


50

Appendix 1: Risk Factors Causing Time-Overrun

Risk

Factor No.

Time-overrun Risk factors

TO.1 Unrealistic design development periods

TO.2 Changed engineering conditions from the contract document

TO.3 Insufficient information of constructability

TO.4 Client induced additional work beyond the original scope

TO.5 Rework due to errors/omissions during construction (quantity & quality)

TO.6 Error in the estimated activity completion time

TO.7 Noncompliance with conditions of contract

TO.8 Delay in contractors payment of completing work

TO.9 Consultant/Engineer driven frequent changes in design and materials

TO.10 Lack of co-ordination between design team and contractor

TO.11 Delay in preparation and approval in variation orders

TO.12 Unplanned Maintenance of Plant & Machinery

TO.13 Lack of construction experience of client

TO.14 Capacity problem of Contractor (handling many sites at a time)

TO.15 Shortage and slow delivery of construction materials

TO.16 Shortage of skilled labour in Kuwait

TO.17 Working capital shortage of contractor

TO.18 Selection of improper project delivery system (Design-build/turnkey…)

TO.19 Shortage of utilities at site

TO.20 Conflict between Contractor and subcontractors

TO.21 Joint ownership problems of project

TO.22 Improper scheduling/sequencing of project

TO.23 Legal disputes between project participants

TO.24 Social and cultural problems

TO.25 Accidents during construction

TO.26 Inappropriate organizational structure to link project participants

TO.27 Inadequate design team experience

TO.28 Periodic regulatory changes

TO.29 Delay in Government approvals/permits related to project

TO.30 Decreased labor productivity due to extreme climatic conditions

TO.31 Inadequate contractor experience

TO.32 Change in standards and specifications

TO.33 Third party delays


51

Appendix 2: Risk Factor Criticality Rating for Time-Overruns

Risk

Factors

Government Engineers

Builders/ Contractors

Consultants

ANOVA

Combined

CI SD CI SD CI SD F Sig. CI SD

TO.1 7.20 4.11 6.32 2.98 5.78 2.91 1.18 0.31 6.41 3.36

TO.2 8.08 5.07 6.18 4.24 5.48 4.60 2.17 0.12 6.54 4.70

TO.3 6.44 3.75 6.14 4.41 4.11 3.12 2.95 0.06 5.55 3.90

TO.4 9.24 4.22 8.96 4.37 5.85 4.04 5.33 0.01* 8.00 4.44

TO.5 5.36 3.72 4.43 3.23 4.26 3.81 0.70 0.50 4.66 3.57

TO.6 6.64 4.40 5.46 4.10 5.22 4.17 0.83 0.44 5.75 4.21

TO.7 6.32 3.65 4.71 3.23 4.11 2.79 3.22 0.05 5.01 3.32

TO.8 5.20 4.10 4.61 3.36 4.07 4.03 0.56 0.57 4.61 3.81

TO.9 4.72 4.26 4.86 3.97 3.19 3.21 1.58 0.21 4.25 3.86

TO.10 6.40 4.22 6.18 4.44 4.81 4.02 1.09 0.34 5.79 4.24

TO.11 9.08 4.29 9.25 4.46 7.04 4.30 2.16 0.12 8.45 4.42

TO.12 4.68 3.70 3.00 2.39 3.37 2.57 2.38 0.10 3.65 2.97

TO.13 6.04 4.38 4.07 3.21 4.93 3.91 1.74 0.18 4.98 3.88

TO.14 6.56 4.05 4.61 3.30 5.30 4.33 1.68 0.19 5.45 3.94

TO.15 5.80 4.07 5.14 3.44 4.37 3.54 0.98 0.38 5.09 3.68

TO.16 6.84 5.19 4.89 3.90 5.37 4.40 1.32 0.27 5.66 4.52

TO.17 5.32 4.48 4.57 3.54 3.96 3.46 0.81 0.45 4.60 3.82

TO.18 3.72 3.23 3.71 2.57 3.67 2.47 0.00 1.00 3.70 2.73

TO.19 3.44 3.08 3.11 2.36 3.89 3.50 0.47 0.63 3.48 2.99

TO.20 6.68 4.71 4.18 3.40 5.30 4.45 2.34 0.10 5.34 4.28

TO.21 6.00 4.57 4.14 2.99 4.26 3.40 2.06 0.13 4.76 3.73

TO.22 7.28 3.39 6.04 3.49 5.15 3.03 2.71 0.07 6.13 3.38

TO.23 4.56 3.87 3.11 1.99 3.41 2.58 1.84 0.17 3.66 2.91

TO.24 2.00 1.47 1.82 1.12 1.67 0.88 0.52 0.59 1.83 1.17

TO.25 3.00 2.89 2.29 1.38 2.78 2.47 0.67 0.51 2.68 2.30

TO.26 4.52 3.69 4.36 3.14 3.48 2.91 0.78 0.46 4.11 3.24

TO.27 8.12 4.85 6.00 3.93 4.30 3.82 5.37 0.01* 6.09 4.43

TO.28 3.92 2.98 4.00 2.80 3.33 2.90 0.43 0.65 3.75 2.87

TO.29 9.64 3.68 8.07 3.98 8.67 4.12 1.06 0.35 8.76 3.94

TO.30 6.32 3.29 6.32 3.17 6.74 4.18 0.12 0.88 6.46 3.54

TO.31 7.20 4.19 6.00 3.70 5.74 3.13 1.15 0.32 6.29 3.69

TO.32 5.24 4.22 3.71 2.65 3.00 2.79 3.18 0.05 3.95 3.35

TO.33 5.32 3.46 4.71 3.47 4.96 4.37 0.17 0.84 4.99 3.76

* Significant at the 0.05 level

SD: Standard Deviation


52

Appendix 3: Time-overrun Risk Factors’ Ranking Based on Criticality

Risk Factors

Government Eng. Builders/Contractors Consultants Combined

CI Rank CI Rank CI Rank CI Rank

TO.1 7.20 7 6.32 4 5.78 5 6.41 6

TO.2 8.08 5 6.18 6 5.48 7 6.54 4

TO.3 6.44 13 6.14 8 4.11 20 5.55 13

TO.4 9.24 2 8.96 2 5.85 4 8.00 3

TO.5 5.36 20 4.43 21 4.26 18 4.66 21

TO.6 6.64 11 5.46 12 5.22 11 5.75 11

TO.7 6.32 15 4.71 16 4.11 21 5.01 17

TO.8 5.20 24 4.61 18 4.07 22 4.61 22

TO.9 4.72 25 4.86 15 3.19 30 4.25 24

TO.10 6.40 14 6.18 7 4.81 15 5.79 10

TO.11 9.08 3 9.25 1 7.04 2 8.45 2

TO.12 4.68 26 3.00 31 3.37 28 3.65 30

TO.13 6.04 17 4.07 25 4.93 14 4.98 19

TO.14 6.56 12 4.61 19 5.30 9 5.45 14

TO.15 5.80 19 5.14 13 4.37 16 5.09 16

TO.16 6.84 9 4.89 14 5.37 8 5.66 12

TO.17 5.32 21 4.57 20 3.96 23 4.60 23

TO.18 3.72 30 3.71 27 3.67 25 3.70 28

TO.19 3.44 31 3.11 29 3.89 24 3.48 31

TO.20 6.68 10 4.18 23 5.30 10 5.34 15

TO.21 6.00 18 4.14 24 4.26 19 4.76 20

TO.22 7.28 6 6.04 9 5.15 12 6.13 8

TO.23 4.56 27 3.11 30 3.41 27 3.66 29

TO.24 2.00 33 1.82 33 1.67 33 1.83 33

TO.25 3.00 32 2.29 32 2.78 32 2.68 32

TO.26 4.52 28 4.36 22 3.48 26 4.11 25

TO.27 8.12 4 6.00 10 4.30 17 6.09 9

TO.28 3.92 29 4.00 26 3.33 29 3.75 27

TO.29 9.64 1 8.07 3 8.67 1 8.76 1

TO.30 6.32 16 6.32 5 6.74 3 6.46 5

TO.31 7.20 8 6.00 11 5.74 6 6.29 7

TO.32 5.24 23 3.71 28 3.00 31 3.95 26

TO.33 5.32 22 4.71 17 4.96 13 4.99 18


53

28

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Date post:	06-Jul-2015
Category:	Business
Upload:	khalid-yafai
View:	135 times
Download:	4 times