This study investigates the causes of delays on public projects in Jordan and provides quantitative data to aid construction managers in establishing adequate evaluation prior to contract award.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Construction delay:a quantitative analysis Ayman H.Al-Momani Mu'tah University, Civil Engineering Department, Karak, Mu'tah, P.O. Box 7, Jordan Abstract Avoiding construction claims and disputes requires an understanding of the contractualterms and causes of claims.The dual underlying theme of this paper is to investigate the causes of delays on 130 public projects in Jordan and to aid construction managers in establishing adequate evaluation prior to the contract award using quantitative data.Projects investigated in this study included residential,oce and administration buildings,schoolbuildings,medicalcenters and communication facilities. Results ofthis study indicates the main causes ofdelay in construction ofpublic projects relate to designers,user changes, weather,site conditions,late deliveries,economic conditions and increase in quantity.The presence ofthese factors have an impact on the successful completion of the projects at the time contractually speci®ed. The ®ndings suggest that special atte to factors identi®ed in this study willhelp industry practitioners in minimising the risk ofcontractdisputes.#1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved. Keywords:Construction management; Project planning; Construction delay; Dispute 1. Introduction A vitalsection speci®ed in the construction contract is the performance period or time of project execution, which isestablished priorto bidding.The successful execution ofconstruction projectsand keeping them within estimated costand theprescribed schedules depend on a methodology thatrequires sound engin- eering judgment.[1]The construction sector is one of the vitalsectors in the development process of Jordan. The government contributes to the development of the construction industry in severalways.However,there are limitations and even draw backs to these eorts. The time required to complete construction ofpublic projects is frequently greater than the time speci®ed in the contract.These `overruns'ortime extensionsare granted for many reasons,such as designer changes or errors,userchanges,weatherandlatedeliveries. Currentconstructionprojectsarecomplexeorts requiring the supportofthe design and construction profession.Therefore,a realistic time forprojectex- ecutionwilldecreasethepossibilityofdisputes between state agency and the contractors. 1.1. Previous work A greatdealofinformation concerned with project delay and overruns may be found in the literature. The increased interestin construction overrunsisdue,in part,to eorts by the government to reduce construc- tion delays.There has been a considerable and contin- ued interestin the eectofconstruction delays.The information available is diverse and widespread.Many construction managementbooks[2±6]haveminimum coverageonconstructiondelays.Al-Momani[7] describe the various elements ofcostupon individual public projects but does not dealspeci®cally with con- struction delays. Assafand Al-khalil[8]outlinethemain causesof delay in large building projects and their relative im- portance.They found that56 causes ofdelay existin Saudiconstruction projects.According to the contrac- torssurveyed the mostimportantdelay factorswere preparation and approvalof shop drawings,delays in contractor's progress,paymentby owners and design changes.The architects and engineers view were cash problems during construction,the relationship between subcontractors and the slow decision making process International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±59 0263-7863/99/$20.00#1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved. PII:S 0 2 6 3 - 7 8 6 3 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 6 0 - X www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
of the owner.The owners agree that the design errors, labor shortages and inadequate labor skills are import- ant delay factors. Hancher and Rowings,[1] for example, provide a concise summary of the methodologies used by transportation agencies to establish the contract dur- ation used for highway construction projects,and also provides a schedule guide for ®eld engineers during con- struction. Similarly, Chalabi and Camp[10] conducted a review on project delays in developing countries during planning and construction stages.In their study they found that the delay and cost overruns of construction projects are dependent entirely on the very early stages of the project. Fereig and Qaddumi[11] in their study on the construction experience of the Arabian Gulf demon- strate the various components of the planning, control- lingand productivityon construction delay.Their primary purpose is to alert the reader to the deviation from the project plans. Wilson[9]examined the role of the owner and archi- tect/engineer's roles in the prevention and resolution of constructionclaims.Wilsonalsosummarisedthe causesofconstructionclaimswhichinclude:extra work,project delays and acceleration,lack of manage- ment, limited site access and change in work schedule. Despite the necessity forsuch research,little work has been described in the literature concerning public projects,specially in Jordan.The previously proposed factorscontributing to construction delay werefre- quently observed in publicprojects.Theactualfre- quency and magnitude ofthese factors is notknown, which has proven to be a serious and very expensive problem to Jordan's construction industry. 1.2. Research design and objectives The objective of this study is to determine the causes and the leveloftime extension of public projects and to aid construction managers in establishing adequate evaluation prior to the contract award using quantitat- ive data.The key task is to design research so that the information obtained permitsthe assessmentoftheir impact. Therefore,the best approach to assessing these potentials is to adoptrandomly selected samples.The sampling population was established by selecting 130 publicprojectsconstructedindierentregionsof Jordan during the period of1990±97.The data was found in contract®les ofseveralstate agencies.Data collected were of 5 kinds of public projects:residential housesofpublic®gures,oceandadministrative buildings,schoolbuildings,medicalcenters and com- munication facilities.The performance and construc- tionoftheseprojectswererecognisedasbeing unsatisfactory to many ocials,and assented to the study in order to have hard evidence as to the nature of the problems.This study willsummarise the results of this research based on actualconstruction times ex- perienced by public projects.The data collection was to investigate the reasons related to construction delay and overruns: .Planned duration of contract; .Actual completion date; Table 1 Summary of project information Classi®cationPoor design Change orders WeatherSite condition Late delivery Economic condition Increase in quantity No delay Total House4131002314 Oce8542145534 School108654231452 Medical centers6420321220 Communication facilities4210201010 Total32201681081224130 Table 2 Descriptive statistics of the public projects Number ofDuration Project categoriesprojects PlannedActual House14 max.450832 min.7566 mean221.4297.2 SD102.3192.9 Oce and administrative buildings34max.750751 min.10067 mean354.6442.2 SD120.0152.9 School buildings52max.660928 min.150225 mean395.4467.5 SD129.7141.1 Medical centers20max.720904 min.90193 mean313.5444.5 SD162.6231.7 Communication facilities12max.360410 min.195230 mean268.2308.2 SD58.059.9 A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5952
Fig. 1. Causes of delay. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5953
.Design changes; .Disputes; .Noti®cation of extra work; .Date of notice to proceed; .Delay encountered during construction; .Con¯ict of the drawings and speci®cations; .Time extensions; .Late delivery of materials and equipment. 2. Discussions The data were entered into Excel5 where allanaly- sis and diagrams were developed.The ®rst step was to explore the parameters as to causes ofdelay.To this eect,parameterswerede®ned and constructed in Table 1 for public projects.These restrictions create a sample with 130 projects.The table provide frequen- ciesforeach parameterin ®ve dierentconstruction categories.Manyprojectsweredelayedformany reasons.Allextensionsto the planned schedule were considered as delays.The major causes identi®ed were: poordesign,change orders,weather,site conditions, latedelivery,economicconditionsandincreasein quantity.A breakdown ofthe projects by these par- ameters is graphically illustrated in Fig.1.The overall delays were in 106 outof130 (81.5%)projects.The main causes for delays were poor design in 32 projects (24.6%),while the second cause was the change orders in 20 projects(15.4%).Thesiteconditionsand the economic conditions were the least cause of delay and were found in 8 projects. 2.1. Planned and actual duration The mean actualduration for allpublic projects was 426.6 days,and a standard deviation of137 days. While the planned duration for the same projects was 343.1 days in mean, with a standard deviation of 137.4 days.Themean,maximum,minimum and standard deviation for the planned and actualtime were com- puted asshown in Table2 for®veprojectclassi®- cations.It can be noticed that the actualtime for each type of project vary considerably.This is illustrated by large dierences between the means of the planned and Fig. 2. Scatter plot of actual timeYversus planned timeXfor general model of public projects. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5954
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
actualtimes and the high values of standard deviation. For instance,the mean planned time for schoolbuild- ings varied from 395.4 days to an actual of 467.5 days, whiletheoceand adminstrativebuildingsvaried from 354.6 planned days to 442.2 actualdays.The im- plicationistherefore,thatonaverageduringthe sample period,the planned and actualduration was upwardsloping.Standarddeviationarereported which suggestthatthe variance ofthe actualtime is considerably greaterthan thatoftheplanned time, with thevarianceoftheactualtimebeing approxi- mately 29 444.67 days and the variance of the planned time being approximately 18 894 days. A mathematicalstructurewasstudied by dierent functionsthat®tsthe data,which indicated thatthe simplelinearregressionappearstobeappropriate forthistypeofproblem.Thespeci®cation ofour modelisdeterminedbyoneindependentvariable whichsigni®cantlyexplainedvariationsinthere- sponsevariable.Correlationcoecientswereused forscreeningthevariables.Severalstatisticaltests wereconducted.Eachofthesewasperformedat 99% con®dence level.Itwasassumed thatboth the actualand planned timesdistributionswerenormal and independently distributed. 3. Tests and results Simple linearregression developsan equation that describestherelationship between two variables.In this case the equation takes the form of: Yb0b1Xe In this modelYis the dependentvariable,the par- ameters,b0andb1arethecoecientswhichare unknown and are to be estimated.Xis the indepen- dentvariable,andeisa random errorwhich isthe amount of variation inYnot accounted for by the lin- earrelationship.Thetheoreticalmodelsarederived and explained in the following. Fora comparison ofthe actualand planned time distribution,the equation developed for overallpublic projects is: Y82:871:0016x R20:64 D:W:1:58 R0:80 S:E:102:8 Fÿvalue 231:25 1 Fig. 3. Scatter plot of actual time versus planned time of the housing model. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5955
Thecorrelation coecientforthisrelationship is 0.80 indicating thatthe distribution ofplanned time mirrors the actual time with a high degree of accuracy. The calculated F is 231.25,the higher absolute value of the F-statistics reported may re¯ect the observation thatarepowerfulpredictorsofthemeasured data. Therefore, true linearity exists in the developed model. Comparingsamplemeanstotesttheagreement between thetwo distribution wasemployed.In this case thet-statistic is 9.28 which is much larger thant- value of1.97,giving furtherproofofthe agreement between the two distributions.The generalmodelis valuablein thatitprovidesauniversalmodelof phenomena and would primarily be of interest to con- struction ocials.Thepredictiveequation hasbeen developed as an aggregate modelfor actualconstruc- tion time of a public projects. In thissetting,more speci®c modelssuch asEqs. (2)±(6)were developed,which exhibited a reasonable ®tto the data.Figures2±7 give a graphicalview of how wellthe charts relate the actualtime by project type to the planned time.Speci®c models are prefer- able and would be ofparticular interestto construc- tion managers and practitioners ratherthan selection ofthe generalmodel.The ®tted equations are as fol- lows: 3.1. Housing project Y59:051:6X R0:853R2073S:E:104:62 Fÿvalue 32:192 3.2. Oce and administration building Y95:40:97X R0:76R20:59S:E:99:49 Fÿvalue45:943 3.3. School projects Y162:050:77X Fig. 4. Scatter plot of actual time versus planned time of the oce building model. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5956
R0:71R20:51S:E:99:36 Fÿvalue51:974 3.4. Medical centers Y46:91:3X R0:89R20:79S:E:108:4 Fÿvalue68:715 3.5. Communication facilities Y850:84X R0:86R2074S:E:29:27 Fÿvalue22:736 The regression coecients are allsigni®cantly dier- entfrom zero and the expected sign and relationship between the variables is linear.Each ofthe tests con- ducted proved that,the developed equations are stat- istically signi®cant at the 99% levelas indicated by the t-values and appear to explain a high per centofthe variability and able to predictchangesin the actual time.Otherrelevantregression statisticsareshown below theestimates.Overall,theexplanatory power oftheestimated equationsare reasonable,given that theR2for Eq.(1) through Eq.(6) are of a acceptable valueand thecorrespondingF-ratiosindicatevery good modelidenti®cationsand satisfy the diagnostic criteria.Theseequationscan beused by engineers, plannersand construction managersworking in gov- ernmentalagencies to estimate the actualtime for con- struction before awarding contract. 4. Limitation and suggestion for further research While this study is among the ®rst to provide a full test of cause and determinants of construction delay, it is not without limitations.Severalshortcomings in the data can be identi®ed such as the actualcostofcon- struction and construction experience ofthe contrac- tors.The inclusion ofthe construction experience of the contractors as a predictor within the modelunder- lines the importance ofthis extension ofthe analysis into the internalinformation of the ®rms.But this fac- tor can be introduced only when the focus of study is moved from the construction industry to the construc- tion ®rms. Such change of focus is not without dicul- ties.Thecollection ofthecompany speci®cdata is Fig. 5. Scatter plot of actual time versus planned time of the school buildings model. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5957
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
costly compared with thatofpublicly available data. However, the quality of future studies concerning com- pany speci®c data and managerialperceptions are lar- gelydependenton thenatureofthedatathatis available for analysis.The future emphasis should be placed on the collection of the appropriate information and this will be the subject of an additional paper. Projectsinvestigated in this study exhibit a delay.In practice, this phenomena is expected to continue unless management actions are taken to controlthese causes within the planned element of the design and construc- tion works.Thusgood practice in planning,coordi- nation,and the change ofthe controlproceduresof the public institutions needs to be recognised and the implications understood.The modelstillappears ten- able,then it may be applied broadly for guidance and for planning further work and willprove bene®cialin future projects. 5. Conclusion Construction delay and overrun is a criticalfunction in construction of public projects.It has been of great interestto construction researchersbuthasnotbeen wellunderstood in the case of public building projects. A survey of130 projectsindicated thatpoordesign and negligence ofthe owner,change orders,weather condition,site condition,late delivery,economic con- ditions,and increase in quantities are the main causes of delay. In line with the reviewed research, the present investigation providescon®rmation oftheeectof de®ned parameters on construction delays. Practically oriented research is vitalfor proper man- agementofconstruction projects.Reliable prediction ofconstruction duration,and then controllingcost within budget is widely used in decision making and is an essentialpartofsuccessfulmanagement.To test this hypothesis,a simple linear modelwas used to esti- mate the relationship between the actualand planned time.The major implication of the foregoing have im- portant rami®cations for understanding the actual time ofpublic projects.This has been repeatedly stated to the outstanding need ofconstruction in Jordan.The relations obtained have the advantage of relying upon the statisticaltreatment of realdata and could without doubtbe improved by considering a larger sample of projects.Theresearcherbelievesthatthearguments and ®ndingspresented in thisstudy provide a good guidanceformanagerialintervention,andprovide Fig. 6. Scatter plot of actual time versus planned time of the medical centers model. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5958
some guidelines and actionable information that man- agers can utilize to manage their projects. References [1]HancherDE,RowingsJE.Setting highway construction con- tractduration.JournaloftheConstruction Division,ASCE 1981;107(2):169±79. [2]BarrieDS,PaulsonBC.ProfessionalConstruction Management. Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill, 1992. [3]Halpin DW,Woodhead RW.Construction Management.New York: John Wiley, 1980. [4]HarriesF,McCaerR.Modern Construction Management. London, England: Blackwell Science, 1995. [5]OxleyR,PoskitJ.ManagementTechniquesAppliedto Construction Industry. London: Blackwell Science, 1996. [6]Filcher R.Principles ofConstruction Management.Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill, 1992. [7]Al-MomaniA.Construction costprediction forpublic school building in Jordan.Construction Managementand Economics 1996;14:311±7. [8]AssafSA,AlkhalilM,Al-HazmiM.Causes ofdelay in large buildingconstructionprojects.JournalofManagementin Engineering, ASCE 1995;11(2):45±50. [9]Wilson RL.Prevention and resolution ofconstruction claims. Journal of Construction Division 1982;108(CO3):390±405. [10]ChalabiFA,Camp D.Causes ofdelay and overruns ofcon- struction projectsin developingcountries.CIB Proc,W-65 1984;2:273±734. [11]Fereig S,QaddumiN.Construction problemsÐArabian Gulf experience. CIB Proc, W-65 1984;2:753±6. Fig. 7. Scatter plot of actual time versus planned time of the communication facilities model. Dr.Ayman H.Al-Momaniis an associ- ateprofessorofcivilengineeringat Mu'tah University,Jordan.He is also vice dean ofengineering and head of chemicalengineeringdepartment.He served as a chairman and head ofthe civilengineering departmentformany years,and he is in charge ofthe con- struction engineering and management program,where he contributed to and developedpostgraduateandunder- graduate courses in construction man- agement.He has written widely in the ®eldandtaughtcoursesatMu'tah University, University of Jordan, and University of Applied sciences in construction planning and scheduling,construction costestimating, construction management,construction methodsand equipment, quality controlin construction,engineering economy and operation research.Hereceived aBS in civilengineering from Leningrad university,MS in construction managementfrom Oklahoma Uni- versity,MS in industrialengineering from CentralState University, and a Ph.D. from Oklahoma State University, USA. He is a member of national and international associations. A.H. Al-Momani / International Journal of Project Management 18 (2000) 51±5959