Causes of Delays in Construction Projects in Turkey

This study examines the causes of time extensions in the Turkish construction industry and their levels of importance. Factors affecting project duration were evaluated through a questionnaire survey of 71 construction companies. The results show that design and material changes, delay of payments, and cash flow problems are the most predominant factors. Financial factors were found to be the most important group, while environmental factors were the least effective.

426 Copyright © 2012 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU) Press Technika
www.tandfonline.com/TCEM
JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT
ISSN 1392-3730 print/ISSN 1822-3605 online
2012 Volume 18(3): 426–435
doi:10.3846/13923730.2012.698913
CAUSES OF DELAYS IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN TURKEY
Aynur Kazaz1, Serdar Ulubeyli2, Nihan Avcioglu Tuncbilekli3
1, 3
Civil Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Akdeniz University, 07058 Antalya, Turkey
2Civil Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Bulent Ecevit University, 67100 Zonguldak, Turke
E-mails:[e-mail] (corresponding author);[e-mail];
[e-mail]
Received 18 Aug. 2010; accepted 25 Mar. 2011
Abstract. In both developing and industrialized countries, deviation from a planned time schedule is one of the mos
quently encountered problems in construction investments. Various factors faced with during construction period p
systematic flow of work, which causes time-based anomalies as a conclusion. Considering the vital importance of t
struction industry on the macro-economic structure of a country, it is inevitable to be aware of considerable effect
timely completion on the allocated project budget. In this study, causes of time extensions in the Turkish construct
dustry and levels of their importance were examined together. In total, 34 factors affecting project duration were t
to account. A questionnaire survey, including these factors, was then applied to 71 construction companies in Turk
the outcomes were evaluated by means of statistical analyses. According to the results, “design and material chan
found to be the most predominant factor, followed by “delay of payments” and “cash flow problems”. In terms of im
portance levels of factor groups, financial factors were found to be the first group, while environmental factors wer
least effective group. It should be also noted that managerial causes of time extensions are encountered in develo
developing countries, whereas financial causes are experienced in developing countries only.
Keywords: delay, time extension, construction projects, Turkey.
1. Introduction
Time extensions are very serious and chronic problems in
construction projects (Kazaz, Ulubeyli 2009). The late
completion of a project results in the overrun of the con-
struction budget allocated at project inception as well as
the delay of the potential income that could be obtained
with the operation of the constructed facility. Similarly,
the early completion of a project likely causes cost exten-
sion due to complications of overstaffing. Although some
changes in a time schedule can normally be made accord-
ing to client’s demands, construction projects are de-
scribed as “successful” on condition that they are com-
pleted in the planned time, budgeted cost, and specified
quality (Ritz 1994). According to Enshassi et al. (2009),
delays are one of the most important factors affecting
project performance. In practice, total project duration
may potentially go beyond the calculated limits of the
scheduled time because of the owner, contractor, subcon-
tractors, or some technical, legal, and natural difficulties.
As a common problem of the construction domain,
time extensions have been observed in many developed
and developing countries to date (Sullivan, Harris 1986;
Kaming et al. 1997; Long et al. 2004; Lo et al. 2006; Sa-
mbasivan, Soon 2007). Similar to global construction in-
dustries, time-based overruns have been frequently expe-
rienced in the Turkish construction sector as well (Arditi
et al. 1985). Therefore, the objectives of the study are:
− to determine factors that cause time extensions;
− to find out how much important these factors are
in practice;
− to compare, in this respect, the current position of
Turkey with those of other countires around the
world.
2. Methodological background
For this study, related literature was initially reviewed to
expose possible delay factors in construction projects
(Kazaz, Tuncbilekli 2009; Tuncbilekli 2009). In total, 49
factors were gathered. These factors were then investigat
ed by interviewing with representatives of members o
TCA (Turkish Contractors Association) face to face to
reveal whether the factors have been observed in the
Turkish construction sector. This sample group was cho-
sen since it is an accepted list of contractors within
Turkish construction industry. The member firms of TCA
perform approximately 70% of total investments made in
Turkey, and they have undertaken 90% of the work done
abroad in the field of construction. There are 149 contrac-
tor companies, and 71 (47.65%) of them positively re
sponded to the survey request. The number of companies
interviewed (n = 71) is called as “large sample size” and
statistically adequate (n ≥ 30) to represent the whole.
After the first questionnaire survey, a total of 34 fac-
tors remained. In other words, 15 factors were eliminated

Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2012, 18(3): 426–435 427
since each one of them could be represented by a similar
or more comprehensiveone among34 factors.For
example,“heavyrain” and “flooding”were removed
from the factor list in favor of “adverse weather condi-
tions”. At the second round of the questionnaire survey,
importance levels of these 34 factors were asked to the
representatives of 71 contractors. Of these industrial pra-
ctitioners, 55.6% were project managers and 44.4% were
site managers. In terms of their professional backgrounds,
48.9% have experience more than 10 years, 13.3% have
been working for 6−10 years in the industry, 26.7% have
been working for 2−5 years, and 11.1% have experience
less than 2 years. Respondents’titles and work
experiences are critical issues in evaluating outcomes of
this survey, since they directly influence the reliability
and validity of research results.
In the analysis of the data obtained in the second su-
rvey, the relative importance index (RII) technique was
employed. In this method, the following equation was
used:
5
1
5
1
i i
i
i
i
a x
I
x
=
=
⋅
=
∑
∑
,
where: I shows the relative importance index and i indi-
cates the index of answer category, such as 1 (not im-
portant), 2 (somewhat important), 3 (important), 4 (very
important), and 5 (extremely important). In the numera-
tor, ai represents the numerical value of answer of the
related i, changing between 0 and 4 (i = 1 → ai = 0; i = 2
→ ai = 1; i = 3 → ai = 2; i = 4 → ai = 3; i = 5 → ai = 4),
and xi denotes the frequency of the related answer of i in
total answers given to i. The concluding intervals of nu-
merical values obtained in the analysis are presented in
Table 1.
Table 1. Resultant index intervals
Not
important
Somewhat
important Important Very
important
Extremely
important
0.00−0.800.81−1.601.61−2.402.41−3.203.21−4.00
3. Research findings
In this study, 34 factors that cause time overruns in con-
struction projects were gathered under 7 factor groups.
These were classified as follows.
Environmental factors:
− adverse weather conditions;
− geological problems;
− site location and layout;
− work accidents.
Financial factors:
− cash flow problems;
− contractor’s financial problems;
− delay of payments;
− fluctuation in material prices;
− inflation.
Labor-based factors:
− construction defects;
− poor labor productivity;
− shortage of skilled workers.
Managerial factors:
− conflicts between the parties in site;
− contract related disputes;
− contractor’s excessive work load;
− design and material changes;
− estimation problems;
− lack of contractor’s experience;
− manager-worker relations;
− poor coordination between the parties in site;
− poor quality control;
− poor site management.
Owner-based factors:
− bureaucracy;
− management faults.
Project-based factors:
− lack of feasibility studies;
− old construction methods;
− poor maintenanceof works, materials,and
equipment;
− project scale;
− rarely used construction methods.
Resource-based factors:
− improper material selection;
− material storage problems;
− poor material management;
− poor resource productivity;
− transportation problems of resources.
Considering the views of participants, the most pre-
dominant ten causes of time overruns out of 34 facto
were determined as can be seen in Table 2. The first five
factors were described as “very important”, alerting t
industry considerably against to the time extension threat
Three of them belong to financial factors, and this shows
that the main notion behind the endemic timing problem
in the sector depends largely on economic conditions of
ownersand contractors.Overall,the most significant
factor was found to be “design and material changes
followed by “delay of payments”, “cash flow problems”,
“contractor’sfinancial problems”,and “poor labor
productivity”, respectively.
Financial factors include five items of which rela-
tive importance values are shown in Fig. 1. Among them,
“delay of payments”, “cash flow problems”, “contractor’s
financial problems”, and “fluctuation in material prices”
were ranked second, third, fourth, and tenth in the genera
standing, respectively. Although “inflation” is the 16th
factor, it was also described as “important”, such as “fluc-
tuation in material prices”. The first three factors wer
found out as “very important” causes of time overrun
and are closely connected with each other. Cash flow
problem of an owner may probably cause delay of month-
ly progress payments that will be made to the main con-
tractor. Thus, this owner-basedmonetaryproblem

A. Kazaz et al. Causes of delays in construction projects in Turkey428
Table 2. The top ten causes of time extensions
Factor Groups Factors Rank Importance Level
Managerial factors Design and material changes 1 Very important
Financial factors Delay of payments 2 Very important
Financial factors Cash flow problems 3 Very important
Financial factors Contractor’s financial problems 4 Very important
Labor-based factors Poor labor productivity 5 Very important
Managerial factors Estimation problems 6 Important
Project-based factors Lack of feasibility studies 7 Important
Labor-based factors Construction defects 8 Important
Labor-based factors Unbalanced number of workers 9 Important
Financial factors Fluctuation in material prices 10 Important
directly and negativelyaffects contractors’financial
strengths. Similarly, inflation and the constant increase of
material prices are the other two factors having a close
relationship. This connection can be explained by the fact
that unstable inflation likely has a great effect on material
prices. In reality, the first three factors in this group indi-
cate budget problems in the project-level, whereas the last
two factors denote financial matters in the country-level.
However, it is evident that overrun-based financial prob-
lems in construction projects essentially arise from pri-
vate owners and public institutions, and to some extent,
from general contractors. It can also be claimed that a
country’s financial atmosphere has indirect impact on the
time extension issue of a construction investment. These
arguments clearly point out that a sound time planning
and projection is not made by the parties in a project, and
that owners are not utilized professional project manage-
ment services and consultants.
There are three labor-based factors, and their index
values and importance levels are illustrated in Fig. 2.
“Poor labor productivity”,“constructiondefects”,and
“unbalanced number of workers” were located in the
fifth, eighth, and ninth rank of the general standing, re-
spectively. Of them, the first one was called “very im-
portant”, while the others were “important” causes of
time overruns. Considering that the entire constuction
trades are almost totally performed by workers during the
erection phase, it is obvious how much important labor
productivity, the number of workers, and the quality of
workmanship are. A low level of worker productivity
may probably result in activity-based time extension, and
thus, delay of total project duration. In addition, lack of
concentration of workforce can lead to the defected and
poor quality production. Defected works, in turn, cause
rework and the loss of time, money, and motivation. On
the other hand, the number of workers is essential to bal-
ance the capacity allocated for the project. Sudden and
large variations in this capacity can have negative effects
on the adaptation process of crews to each other, and
thereby on their productivities. In this context, labor-
based factors such as poor productivity, poor workman-
ship, and poor human resources planning can be per-
ceived as bad signs of the Turkish construction sector.
Fig. 1. Relative importance of financial factors
Fig. 2. Relative importance of labor-based factors
Fig. 3. Relative importance of managerial factors
As can be seen in Fig. 3, “design and material chang-
es” was found to be the most significant factor both in ten
managerial factors and in the general ranking. It is also th

Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2012, 18(3): 426–435 429
unique factor that has “very important” impact on time
overruns in this group. Among all, “estimation problems”
are the top ranked sixth factor and defined as “important”.
Importance ranks of the remaining factors are as follows in
descending order: “poor site management” (11th), “poor
coordination between the parties in site” (14th), “lack of
contractor’sexperience”(15th),“poor qualitycontrol”
(19th), “conflicts between the parties in site” (21st), “con-
tractor’s excessive work load” (22nd), “contract related
disputes” (26th), and “manager-worker relations” (27th).
Except the last one, they are “important” factors. Only
“manager-worker relations” were described as “somewhat
important”. Changes in design drawings and material types
have strong power to affect (i) activity-specific feasibility
studies, (ii) material procurement, (iii) scheduling, and (iv)
coordination. In case of these changes during construction,
some deviations in cost and time schedules can occur.
Also, Enshassi et al. (2010) state that variation orders re-
sult in time delay. Similarly, lack of a competent planning
department makes the construction process a complicated
issue. In fact, the first two factors in the group prove that
contractors do not attach the required importance to the
planning and estimating throughout the project. Not only
planning engineers but also site managers and site engi-
neers are significant figures for the management of a pro-
ject. Incapable managers in a job-site also lead to failures
in coordination and in quality audits, disputes between
parties, and poor communication between them and work-
ers. In this point, it is vital to select a suitable contractor for
an owner. A main contractor that has inadequate experi-
ence in the related field of construction and that has been
simultaneously executing a large amount of works can be
accepted as a symptom of a potentially unsuccussful pro-
ject. Besides following an attentive process for contractor
selection, agreeing on a well-established contract also min-
imizes or totally removes most of the possible conflicts
that can be arisen for both parties during construction.
Among others, the owner-based group comprises
two “important” factors, as shown in Fig. 4. “Bureaucra-
cy”, one of these factors, was ranked 13th, while “man-
agement faults” were calculated to be in the 24th place.
Especially in developing countries, public construction
projects usually encounter various bureaucratic barriers,
and thus delays in executing the works due to the lack of
required approvals of public institutions. Poor manage-
ment skill of an owner is another drawback for the health
of a construction project. Public institution in a public
project or enterprising company’s board of directors in a
private project may suffer from lack of management abil-
ity as a client while applying basic administrative princi-
ples. In summary, both factors point out that public insti-
tutions and private companies that make construction
investments in Turkey do not have established sound
management structure, and ignore professional decision-
making process to some extent.
Project-based factor group is composed of five fac-
tors. In Fig. 5, their numerical index values and corre-
sponding verbal intervals are shown. “Lack of feasibility
studies”, the seventh in the general order, is the single
project-based factor among the top ten factors. It is
Fig. 4. Relative importance of owner-based factors
Fig. 5. Relative importance of project-based factors
respectively followed by “poor maintenance of works,
materials, and equipment” (17th), “project scale” (23rd),
“rarely used construction methods” (25th), and “old con-
struction methods” (32nd). Only “old construction meth-
ods” were described as “somewhat important” by re-
spondents,while the remainingfour factors were
“important”. If contractors do not pay the required atten-
tion to detailed feasibility studies before the construction
stage, many planning and structural problems may proba-
bly appear, causing delays in time schedule and product
defects after construction. “Poor maintenance of work
materials, and equipment” may similarly result in re-
works and delays. Although “project scale” does not have
a relatively great index value, it can affect project dura-
tion since the larger the scale, the more the number and
the complexity of tasks and the harder the management.
In this group, “rarely used construction methods” and
“old construction methods” are the least important fa
tors, which indicate that estimators can foresee reasona-
ble time schedules in accordance with the constructio
method chosen at project inception.
As can be seenin Fig. 6, resource-basedfactor
group consists of five items. Considering these factors
“poor material management” was found to be in the 12th
order, followed by “poor resource productivity” (18th),
“improper material selection” (20th), “material storage
problems” (28th), and “transportation problems of re-
sources” (31st). In the group, the first three factors a
“important” causes of time overruns, while the last tw
are “somewhat important” factors. Since material is one
of the three main inputs of a construction process, p
management of them directly and considerably influence
the time schedule. In this group, poor productivity of
resources such as material and equipment was denoted a
another dominating cause of time extensions because of

A. Kazaz et al. Causes of delays in construction projects in Turkey430
the close relationship between productivity and time in
terms of old types of construction machines as well as the
long distance between the job-site and material quarries.
Moreover, ill-matched characteristics of materials can be
the hidden cause of poor quality products, reworks, and
also interruption of project activities. The least significant
factor in the group was found to be “transportation prob-
lems of resources”. This is because transportation is a
minor or secondary issue in today’s fast communicating
and globalizing world.
Environmental factor group is made up by four fac-
tors, as can be seen in Fig. 7. In this group, factors are
successively ranked in the general standing as follows:
“adverse weather conditions” (29th), “site location and
layout” (30th), “geological problems” (33rd), and “work
accidents” (34th). At the same time, each of these factors
was described as “somewhat important” by participants.
Since weather conditions can be estimated in a monthly
or yearly basis by means of effective communication with
local meteorological offices, it does not have great poten-
tial to lead to serious scheduling problems. Because of
the fact that location and layout of a construction site are
among primary inputs in estimating and planning, they
are carefully taken into account in small- and large-scale
projects. Although the geological condition of a site has
also utmost importance in terms of structural safety and
there are numerous negative instances in this respect, it is
still ignored by owners and contractors during feasibility
studies. The “work accidents” factor possesses the lowest
index value in the group and in the general ranking list.
Although occupational accidents frequently occur in the
construction sector and this has serious complications on
projects, participants did not give sufficient importance to
this factor due to the fact that this type of accidents has
been either ignored or concealed in many instances.
Importance levels of seven factor groups are shown
in Fig. 8. According to the surveyed participants, the
“financial factors” group is the most significant (1st)
among others. This group was followed by “labor-based
factors” (2nd), “managerial factors” (3rd), “owner-based
factors” (4th), “project-based factors” (5th), “resource-
based factors” (6th), and “environmental factors” (7th),
respectively. Here, “financial factors” were defined “very
important” and “environmental factors” were determined
as “somewhat important”, while the other five groups
were included in the interval of “important”. As an ex-
pected finding, monetary matters have vital aspect in
delay analysis owing to the direct interaction between
cost and time in construction projects. The industry suf-
fers from subsequent five groups in terms of time exten-
sions as well. On the other hand, the relatively low index
value of the last group may be connected with the poor or
light perception of the construction sector concerning
environment-based delay factors.
4. Comparison with other countries
In many construction industries around the world, time-
based overruns are regarded as one of the most critical
project delivery problems. Numerous research studies on
this particular domain of the construction management
Fig. 6. Relative importance of resource-based factors
Fig. 7. Relative importance of environmental factors
Fig. 8. Relative importance of factor groups
literature have been carried out to date. In Tables 3 and 4
findings of these previous articles are presented. In total,
there are 17 papers that were carried out in 17 different
countries. Of them, the UK and the US can be categ
rized under developed countries, while the remaining can
be accepted as developing countries. As shown in Ta
bles 3 and 4, top delay factors found in these countr
were marked with a tick. Frequency counts of each ticked
factor were expressed as a percentage of total number of
factors identified by in the literature (Fig. 9).
Considering all of the 16 countries except Turkey,
“owner-based factors” seem to be the most frequentl
encountered group of overruns. This can be because bu-
reaucratic processes and management faults are two
demic problems of owners or owner companies. In addi-
tion to this argument, since respondents in this study were
contractors, they could have charged the other contra
side (that is, owner) with the source of time extensio
problem, seeing them the main decision-maker of con
struction investments. Generally speaking, 46.88% of this
type of factors is among the top causes of time overruns.

Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2012, 18(3): 426–435 431
Fig. 9. Percentages of factor groups in top delay factors in 16
countries
This rate is 35.00% for “managerial factors”, 33.33% for
“labor-basedfactors”,31.25%for “financialfactors”,
16.25% for “resource-based factors”, 14.06% for “envi-
ronmental factors”, and 13.75% for “project-based fac-
tors”. It should be carefully noted that financial causes are
the single group that has not been experienced in devel-
oped countries such as the UK and the US. In fact, this is
an expected finding for this type of countries. On the other
hand, managerial causes of overruns have absolutely been
met in all of 16 countries. This output indicates that mana-
gerial abilities of contracting firms should be improved
against potential problems by employing well-educated
and experienced technical personnel and by making peri-
odic meetings in which all parties come together.
Considering the current construction athmosphere in
Turkey in this respect, 40% of top rated factors belong to
“financial factors”, while 30% of them are of “labor-
based factors”, 20% are of “managerial factors”, and 10%
are of “project-based factors”. When the fact that con
tracting companies including main contractors and sub
contractors suffer from monetary issues in public invest-
ments and in private sector projects is taken into account,
this numerical outcome (40%) can be supposed to be
normal. If Turkey is compared with the total of 16 coun-
tries, it was seen that “labor-based factors” and “manage-
rial factors”are commonand take part in top three
groups. Besides managerial features, especially produc
tivity and skill-based characteristics of workforce are also
common drawbacks in construction industries.
When the trend in the position of Turkey in the time
period of 25 years is investigated, it is evident that owner-
based causes of overruns have been eliminated signifi
cantly. In reality, Turkish governments have made con
siderable improvements to overcome bureaucratic barr
ers by means of a number of legislative actions. However,
there has been an increase in the number of financia
causes because the size of the domestic construction sec-
tor has lessened in the cited period due to financial diffi-
culties in the macro level. In terms of other five groups,
any major change has not been observed.
Table 3. Causes of construction time overruns in 8 countries around the world
Factors causing time
overruns
Turkey
(Current
study)
Turkey
(Arditi
et al.
1985)
Egypt
(El-Razek
et al.
2008)
Ghana
(Frimpong
et al.
2003)
Hong
Kong
(Lo et al.
2006)
Indonesia
(Kaming
et al.
1997)
Jordan
(Sweis
et al.
2008)
Kuwait
(Koushki
et al.
2005)
Lebanon
(Mezher,
Tawil
1998)
Financial factors
Delay of payments √ √ √ √ √
Cash flow problems √ √ √ √ √
Contractor’s financial
problems √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Fluctuation in material
prices √ √ √
Inflation √
Environmental factors
Adverse weather
conditions √
Site location and layout √ √
Geological problems √
Work accidents
Managerial factors
Design and material
changes √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Estimation problems √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Poor site management √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Poor coordination be-
tween the parties in site √ √ √
Lack of contractor’s
experience √ √
Poor quality control √
Conflicts between the
parties in site √ √
Contractor’s excessive
work load
Contract related disputes
Manager-worker relations

A. Kazaz et al. Causes of delays in construction projects in Turkey432
End of Table 3
Factors causing time
overruns
Turkey
(Current
study)
Turkey
(Arditi
et al.
1985)
Egypt
(El-Razek
et al.
2008)
Ghana
(Frimpong
et al.
2003)
Hong
Kong
(Lo et al.
2006)
Indonesia
(Kaming
et al.
1997)
Jordan
(Sweis
et al.
2008)
Kuwait
(Koushki
et al.
2005)
Lebanon
(Mezher,
Tawil
1998)
Labor-based factors
Poor labor productivity √ √
Construction defects √ √
Shortage of skilled
workers √ √ √ √
Resource-based factors
Poor material manage-
ment √ √ √
Poor resource producti-
vity √
Improper material selec-
tion
Material storage prob-
lems
Transportation problems
of resources √
Owner-based factors
Bureaucracy √ √ √ √
Management faults √ √ √ √ √
Project-based factors
Lack of feasibility
studies √ √ √ √ √
Poor maintenance of
works, materials, and
equipment
Project scale
Rarely used construction
methods
Old construction methods
Table 4. Causes of construction time overruns in another 9 countries around the world
Factors causing time
overruns
Malaysia
(Samba-
sivan, Soon
2007)
Nigeria
(Aibinu,
Odeyinka
2006)
Saudi Arabia
(Al-Kharashi,
Skitmore
2009)
Thailand
(Toor,
Ogunlana
2008)
UAE
(Faridi, El-
Sayegh
2006)
UK
(Sullivan,
Harris
1986)
US
(Baldwin
et al.
1971)
Vietnam
(Long
et al.
2004)
Zambia
(Kaliba
et al.
2009)
Financial factors
Delay of payments √
Cash flow problems √ √ √
Contractor’s financial
problems √ √ √ √ √
Fluctuation in material
prices
Inflation √
Environmental factors
Adverse weather condi-
tions √ √
Site location and layout √
Geological problems √ √
Work accidents
Managerial factors
Design and material
changes √ √ √ √
Estimation problems √ √ √ √ √
Poor site management √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Poor coordination be-
tween the parties in site √ √ √
Lack of contractor’s
experience √ √ √ √

Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2012, 18(3): 426–435 433
End of Table 4
Factors causing time
overruns
Malaysia
(Samba-
sivan, Soon
2007)
Nigeria
(Aibinu,
Odeyinka
2006)
Saudi Arabia
(Al-Kharashi,
Skitmore
2009)
Thailand
(Toor,
Ogunlana
2008)
UAE
(Faridi,
El-Sayegh
2006)
UK
(Sullivan,
Harris
1986)
US
(Baldwin
et al.
1971)
Vietnam
(Long
et al.
2004)
Zambia
(Kaliba
et al.
2009)
Poor quality control √ √ √
Conflicts between the
parties in site √
Contractor’s excessive
work load
Contract related disputes √ √ √
Manager-worker relations
Labor-based factors
Poor labor productivity √ √
Construction defects √ √ √ √ √
Shortage of skilled
workers √ √ √ √ √ √
Resource-based factors
Poor material manage-
ment √ √ √
Poor resource productivity√
Improper material selec-
tion
Material storage
problems
Transportation problems
of resources √ √ √ √ √
Owner-based factors
Bureaucracy √ √ √ √ √
Management faults √ √ √
Project-based factors
Lack of feasibility studies √ √ √ √ √
Poor maintenance of
works, materials, and
equipment
√
Project scale
Rarely used construction
methods
Old construction methods √
5. Conclusions
In this study, answers of the following three questions
were investigated: (i) which factors are basic causes of
time overruns in Turkish construction industry, (ii) how
much important are these factors that have been met to
date, and (iii) what are the positions of other countries in
this regard? According to the results, “design and materi-
al changes” was determined as the most significant factor,
followed by “delay of payments” and “cash flow prob-
lems”. “Contractor’s financial problems” and “poor labor
productivity” were subsequent factors in the general rank-
ing. Taking into consideration the factor groups, financial
factors and labor-based factors were found to be the first
two groups, while the least effective one was the group of
environmentalfactors.Specificallyspeaking,financial
problems arise from owners and main contractors. Espe-
cially, the macro-economic atmosphere has considerable
influence on delays of construction investments in Tur-
key. As most of large scale and high-budget construction
projects are public-based investments, public institutions
(i.e., owners) could likely have difficulties in paying pro-
gress payments on time, and this in turn means that main
contractors make late payments to their in-house staff
subcontractors, and suppliers. In terms of labor-based
factors, (i) poor productivity, (ii) poor workmanship, and
(iii) poor human resources planning seems to be alarming
signals of the domestic construction sector in Turkey. In
fact, there are numerous productive labor-only subcon
tractors in the Turkish construction industry. However,
Turkish general contractors undertake many projects i
foreign markets, and these subcontractors’ high-quality
and skilled workers are employed in high-paying and
referencing international projects. Considering manageri-
al factors, main contractors ignore the planning and esti-
mating tasks because project management departments i
Turkish construction firms are newly established excep
some well-known companies and still gaining importance
gradually. Therefore, it is important to select a profes
sional contractor for clients. Also, signing a problem-free
contract will reduce many potential disputes during th
construction period. Here, it is clear that owners in Tur-
key do not utilize modern management principles. In the
project-level, contractors do not attach the required atten

A. Kazaz et al. Causes of delays in construction projects in Turkey434
tion to feasibility studies before construction, resulting in
time extensions and product defects. When the resource
input are the point in question, some factors such as poor
management of materials, poor productivity of resources,
and poor characteristics of materials should be rehabili-
tated in order not to face with project delays. In terms of
environmental issues, itwas observed that geological
conditions are still ignored by owners and contractors at
project inception, and that the industry does not attach
sufficient importance to occupational accidents because
of the lack of a strong social security system in Turkey.
As the more reliable the security system in Turkey owing
to adaptation of related European Union regulations, the
smaller the number of work accidents will be.
When delay groups in 16 countries except Turkey
are investigated by reviewing literature, “owner-based
factors” are ranked first, among others. Furthermore, it
was found out that financial causes have not been experi-
enced in developed countries to date andmanagerial
causes of time extensions have been encountered in 16
countries. In Turkey, however, “financial factors” are the
primary group that should be taken into account. When
Turkey is compared with 16 countries, it is seen that la-
bor-based and managerial factors are common problems.
Observing the position of Turkey throughout the last 25
years, it was exposed that owner-based causes of over-
runs have been almost eliminated and that there has been
an increase in the number of financial causes. Naturally,
both private entrepreneurs and public institutions (namely
owners) in the construction industry have been improving
their working customs towards a professional understand-
ing in time. In terms of monetary causes, the present in-
stableeconomicenvironmentof the countryand the
world at the last decade seems to be the main reason be-
hind the increasing trend of financial delay factors.
In Turkey, the slow pace of development in modern
site management methods as well as hard acceptance and
negligence of modern construction planning techniques
by the industry leads to both financial problems and fre-
quent changes in estimated time schedules. All of the
factors except uncontrollable environmental items can be
best minimizedby meansof sufficientfinancialre-
sources, successful and competent site/project manage-
ment, and skilled and experienced technical practitioners.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the numerous chair-
persons,managers,and other technical/administrative
staff of the surveyed companies for their generous col-
laboration and contributions. The authors also thank the
anonymousrefereesfor their constructivecomments
which have helped in improving the paper. Finally, the
authors would like to thank the financial support provided
by the Committee on Research Grants of Akdeniz Uni-
versity.
References
Aibinu, A. A.; Odeyinka, H. A. 2006. Construction delays and
their causative factors in Nigeria, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management ASCE 132(7): 667–677.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:
7(667)
Al-Kharashi, A.; Skitmore, M. 2009. Causes of delays in Saudi
Arabian public sector construction projects, Construction
Management and Economics 27(1): 3–23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446190802541457
Arditi, D.; Akan, G. T.; Gurdamar, S. 1985. Reasons for delays
in public projects in Turkey, Construction Management
and Economics 3(2): 171–181.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446198500000013
Baldwin, J. R.; Manthei, J. M.; Rothbart, H.; Harris, R. B. 1971.
Causes of delay in the construction industry, Journal o
the Construction Engineering Division ASCE 97(2): 177–
187.
El-Razek, M. E. A.; Bassioni, H. A.; Mobarak, A. M. 2008.
Causesof delay in buildingconstructionprojectsin
Egypt, Journal of Construction Engineering and Mana-
gement ASCE 134(11): 831–841.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:
11(831)
Enshassi, A.; Arain, F.; Al-Raee, S. 2010. Causes of variation
orders in construction projects in the Gaza Strip, Journal
of Civil Engineering and Management 16(4): 540–551.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2010.60
Enshassi, A.; Mohamed, S.; Abushaban, S. 2009. Factors affect-
ing the performance of construction projects in the Gaza
strip, Journal of Civil Engineeringand Management
15(3): 269–280. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1392-3730.
2009.15.269-280
Faridi, A. S.; El-Sayegh, S. M. 2006. Significant factors causing
delayin the UAE constructionindustry,Construction
Management and Economics 24(11): 1167–1176.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446190600827033
Frimpong, Y.; Oluwoye, J.; Crawford, L. 2003. Causes of delay
and cost overruns in construction of groundwater projects
in a developing countries: Ghana as a case study, Interna-
tional Journal of Project Management 21(5): 321–326.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00055-8
Kaliba, C.; Muya, M.; Mumba, K. 2009. Cost escalation and
schedule delays in road construction projects in Zambia
International Journal of Project Management 27(5): 522–
531.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.07.003
Kaming, P. F.; Olomolaiye, P. O.; Holt, G. D.; Harris, F. C.
1997. Factors influencing construction time and cost over-
runs on high-riseprojectsin Indonesia,Construction
Management and Economics 15(1): 83–94.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014461997373132
Kazaz, A.; Tuncbilekli, N. A. 2009. Factors affecting project
cost and time in construction, in Proc. of the 5th Interna-
tional Conference on Construction in the 21st Century
(CITC-V), Collaboration and Integration in Engineering,
Management, and Technology, 20–22 May, 2009, Istan-
bul, Turkey, 92–98.
Kazaz, A.; Ulubeyli, S. 2009. Cost and time focused risk analy-
sis in the Turkish construction industry, in Proc. of the 5th
InternationalConferenceon Constructionin the 21st
Century (CITC-V), Collaboration and Integration in En-
gineering, Management, and Technology, 20–22 May, Is-
tanbul, Turkey, 340–347.

Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2012, 18(3): 426–435 435
Koushki, P. A.; Al-Rashid, K.; Kartam, N. 2005. Delays and
cost increases in the construction of private residential
projects in Kuwait, Construction Management and Eco-
nomics 23(3): 285–294.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144619042000326710
Lo, T. Y.; Fung, I. W. H.; Tung, K. C. F. 2006. Construction
delays in Hong Kong civil engineering projects, Journal
of ConstructionEngineeringand ManagementASCE
132(6): 636–649.http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9364(2006)132:6(636)
Long, N. D.; Ogunlana, S.; Quang, T.; Lam, K. C. 2004. Large
construction projects in developing countries: a case study
from Vietnam, International Journal of Project Manage-
ment 22(7): 553–561.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.03.004
Mezher, T. M.; Tawil, W. 1998. Causes of delays in the con-
struction industry in Lebanon, Engineering, Construction
and Architectural Management 5(3): 252–260.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb021079
Ritz, G. J. 1994. Total construction project management. New
York: McGraw-Hill. 448 p.
Sambasivan, M.; Soon, Y. W. 2007. Causes and effects of de-
lays in Malaysianconstructionindustry,International
Journal of Project Management 25(5): 517–526.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.11.007
Sullivan, A.; Harris, F. C. 1986. Delays on large constructio
projects, International Journal of Operations & Produc-
tion Management 6(1): 25–33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb054752
Sweis, G.; Sweis, R.; Abu Hammad, A.; Shboul, A. 2008. De-
lays in construction projects: the case of Jordan, Interna-
tional Journal of Project Management 26(6): 665–674.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.09.009
Toor, S.-U.-R.; Ogunlana, S. O. 2008. Problems causing delays
in major construction projects in Thailand, Construction
Management and Economics 26(4): 395–408.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01446190801905406
Tuncbilekli, N. A. 2009. Factors causing cost and time over
runs in construction projects. M.Sc. thesis. Antalya: Ak-
deniz University, Turkey.
Aynur KAZAZ. Associate Professor of Construction Management Division in Civil Engineering Department at Akdeni
University, Turkey. Her areas of academic expertise include construction management, total quality management,
productivity, project management, and construction economy. Author of many papers published in professional jou
and conference proceedings.
Serdar ULUBEYLI. Assistant Professor of Construction Management Division in Civil Engineering Department at Bu-
lent Ecevit University, Turkey. His areas of academic research interests include subcontracting, international const
labour productivity, total quality management, and project management. He has published many papers in various
tific journals and proceedings.
Nihan Avcioglu TUNCBILEKLI. She holds a Master’s degree in science by the Construction Management Programme
at Akdeniz University. Her current research interests include construction management and project management.