Critical factors to be monitored for successful completion of construction projects.
Divakar, K. ; Subramanian, K.
Introduction
Project schedules are invariably dynamic and uncertain. Various
controllable and uncontrollable factors can adversely affect the project
schedule and cause delays. Contractors and owners are prone to view most
delays as the responsibility of the other person concerned.
Consequently, delays may lead to some form of disputes In terms of
responsibility, delays can be classified as owner caused, contractor
caused or third party caused delays. As their names suggest, an
owner-caused or contractor-caused delay is within their control. The
third party caused delay is attributable to neither the owner nor
contractor.
Delay in a particular item due to unexpected events puts the
contractor in jeopardy. Delayed completion an activity due to various
factors may cause delays in succeeding activities in a collection of
activities. Construction planners determine the sequence of activities
necessary to complete a project. They identify critical activities that
are to be completed in time and activities which have flexibility in
time of completion.
The project managers are however responsible for the overall
success of the project. They have to develop a plan for directing and
controlling resources in a coordinated and timely fashion so as to
deliver a project within limited and available time. This has
limitations in that there is no certainty in factors causing delay and
that only certain variables are being monitored (Jeffrey et. al. 1997).
As a result, the identification of factors causing delays becomes
essential. They are however, onerous tasks.
Critical factors are those few key areas of activity in which
favourable results are absolutely necessary for a particular project
participant to achieve the target (Rockart 1982). Another perspective
for critical factor is that those fundamental issues inherent in the
project, that requires day-today attention and operate throughout the
life of the project.
Schultz et al. (1987) classified critical success factors in to two
groups which affect project performances at different phases of
implementation. The first group is referred to as the strategic group
that consists of factors like project mission, top management support,
and project scheduling. The other group is the tactical group, which
consists of factors like client consultation and personnel selection and
training.
Pinto and Slevin (1989) through a study identified, project
mission; top management support; project schedule-plans; client
consultation; personnel; technical tasks; client acceptance; monitoring
and feedback; communication; and trouble-shooting as factors influencing
the success of a project .
Chan et al. (2001) investigated the project success factors for
design and build projects and identified six project success factors.
These are project team commitment; client's competencies;
contractor's competencies; risk and liability assessment; End
users' needs; and constraints imposed by end-users.
Iyer and Jha (2002) identified critical success factors and failure
factors and highlighted the essential role of project managers,
client's and builder's responsibility to highly influence the
project success.
Critical activities identified through scheduling and evaluation
techniques such as PERT and CPM involve identification of an activity as
a whole to be critical. Even the literature studies referred identify
the critical factors in a different perspective. There are involved in
the completion of each and every activity whether it is critical or
otherwise. Completion of each and every activity is influenced by many
underlying factors not only during the course of the activity but also
by certain other factors right from the tendering stage of the project.
All aspects or factors that are involved in the project right from
the tendering stage, through planning and execution stage are to be
studied and the construction planning and scheduling should be done
accordingly. Failure to do so at the appropriate stage may finally lead
to disputes resulting in the suspension of works or termination of
contract.
It is in this context identification of critical factors causing
the delay of an activity and hence the project, becomes essential. These
factors should be the actual real-time difficulties faced by the project
engineers, project managers and builders in the field at the time of
execution of the works. The factors so identified should be given high
priority at various stages of a project.
Methodology of the Study
The study was taken up in two phases. The first phase involved in
the identification of various factors that are likely to cause delay of
various activities involved in the project. This was done through
personal discussions with various project participants--consultants,
builders, project engineers and project managers. About 106 factors were
identified in these stages. These factors were analysed and classified
under 5 aspects and grouped under 2 stages. The stages considered were:
(1) Pre-tendering Stage and (2) Post-tendering Stage.
About 23 factors were classified as Project Background Aspects in
the Pretendering Stage. In the Post-tendering Stage four aspects were
identified: (a) Planning/Scheduling Aspects consisting of 14 factors,
(b) Technical Aspects consisting of 20 factors, (c) Execution Aspects
consisting of 30 factors and (d) Management Aspects consisting of 19
factors.
The second phase involved in the identification of the most
critical factors which has high influence in causing the delay of the
project and that requires the most critical attention at various stages
in the real-time monitoring of a construction project. This was done
through a questionnaire, circulated to 250 project participants. The
respondents were requested to rate each factor on a four point scale
indicating the effect it has in the delay of an activity. The ratings
are 1--No Effect, 2--Marginal Effect (The delay caused can be fully
revived), 3--Significant Effect (the delay caused can be partially
revived), 4--Adverse Effect (the delay caused is beyond revival).
Background information about the respondents, consisting of their role
in construction field, their experience in construction and the size of
the projects they are involved were collected. It was decided to study
each aspect separately so that the significance of important factors may
not be lost. The study about the Technical Aspects of the project is
dealt in this paper. About 20 factors identified under this aspect are
given in Table 1.
About 60 responses were received. The responses received in the
form of ratings on a 4 point Lickert Scale was studied carefully. The
respondents included Project Engineers, Project Managers, Builders,
Consultants and also Engineers from Government Departments.
Descriptive Statistics of the responses were studied. Ranking of
the factors based on the mean of the responses through descriptive
statistics was done. A mean value of 2.5 was selected as the base and
the factors with a mean of more than 2.5 were identified as critical.
The criteria for selecting mean value is that, it is necessary to
identify those factors which has significant and adverse effect on the
completion of the project.
Test of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was done to study the
difference in the perception of the importance of these factors by the
three group of respondents, namely Project Managers/Engineers,
Consultants and Builders. Factors with less than 5% significance is said
to have a different perception among the respondents. The results of the
ANOVA test are given in Table 3.
To study which group of the respondents perceived differently, Post
Hoc (Tukey's B) test was conducted for the factors whose
significance value is less than 5%. The test compares the means of the
group of respondents. The result of the Post Hoc test is shown in Table
4.
Factor Analysis by Principal Component Analysis Method was done to
extract the critical underlying factors. For this purpose the factor
with highest mean value of response and less significance in the
perception of the respondents was selected as the dependant variable.
Oblique rotation of the reference axes called Varimax Rotation with
Kaiser Normalization Criterion was done since the initial factors were
initially orthogonal. Factors with Eigen value greater than or equal to
1 were extracted and the initial 20 factors were grouped under the
extracted factors based on their loading and the variance explained by
each of them. The extracted underlying factors were given a common
explanatory name.
The underlying factors extracted were subjected to Stepwise Linear
Multiple Regression in order to find out the extent of cause and effect
of these factors on the dependent variable.
Results
Descriptive statistics identified 9 factors to have a mean value of
more than 2.5. These factors are ranked according to their means and are
shown in Table 2.
The ANOVA test indicated that only one factor, Factor No C14--Site
area restrictions for fabrication works, storage of building materials
and form work and scaffolding materials--was said to have different
perception by the respondents. The results of the Test of ANOVA for
these factors are given in Table 3.
Post Hoc test indicated that the Consultants perceive the factor
differently. The reason may be that they are not experiencing this
problem at site as they are not always present at the site during the
execution of the works. The result of the Post Hoc test is given in
Table 4.
Factor analysis with Varimax Rotation with Kaiser Normalization
Criterion, revealed that the 19 independent factors under the Technical
Aspects of a construction project identified in this study can be
grouped under FOUR underlying factors. The factor C02--Frequent changes
in plan, designs and working drawings was selected as dependent
variable. The summary of the results of the Factor Analysis is shown in
Table 5.
The underlying factors extracted were named as: (1) Utility,
Specifications and Technical Details, (2) Role of Consultants, (3)
Technical Aspects in respect of Execution (4) Unexpected Changes during
Execution. The initial factors grouped under the extracted factors are
shown in Table 6.
Linear Multiple Regression of these factors with the dependent
factor Frequent Changes in plans, designs and working drawings, revealed
that the underlying factor Role of Consultants was said to have a more
cause and effect on the dependent variable Frequent changes in plan,
designs and working drawings. The summary of the regression with
coefficients for the regression model is shown in Table 7.
A regression model equation which is not a functional equation but
a cause and effect model was written as follows.
Frequent changes in plan designs and working drawings = 0.010
(constant) + 1.118 (Role of Consultants)
The initial factors which are included under the underlying factor
Role of Consultants are, Timely availability of working drawings, Timely
feed back from quality control reports, Finalization of working drawings
based on field conditions, Changes in techniques as per
architects/consultants instructions.
Discussions
The critical factors included in the underlying factor Role of
Consultants which was identified by the factor analysis and hence
multiple regressions are discussed below.
Timely availability of working drawings
It is the responsibility of the consultant to see that the working
drawings are made available considerably in advance. This will enable
the builder to plan and mobilize the resources required at the
appropriate time.
Timely feed back from quality control reports
Periodic quality control tests are inevitable in large and
important infrastructure projects. The reports should be studied by the
consultants and the feed back should be given without delay so that the
work proceeds without any delay.
Finalization of working drawings based on field conditions
All field data in respect of topography, borehole tests etc should
be studied well in advance and the working drawings are finalized. This
will avoid any changes in the construction at the later stage.
Change in techniques as per architects/consultants instructions
The changes in techniques suggested or insisted by the consultants
frequently will cause re-work or an additional burden on the builder.
The reason is that he is not prepared for or he has not anticipated it.
The consultant should finalize it before the work commences.
Conclusion
Technical aspects of the project play a very important role in the
successful completion of a construction project. The Role of Project
Consultant is vital in this regard. Finalizing the techniques to be
adopted in construction, collecting all necessary details of the site
and the problems at the site and suitably finalizing the design and the
working drawings is the main and important role of the consultant. As
each and every activity is to go on as per the instructions and guidance
of the consultant, the role of the consultant is vital in the successful
completion of the construction project.
Hence the consultant should make sure that the finalized working
drawings are made available to the builders in time, avoid frequent
changes in the techniques and give timely feed back for the quality
control reports.
References
[1] Chan, A. P. C., Ho, D. C. K., and Tam, C. M., 2001.
"Design and build project success factors: Multivariate
analysis." J. Construction Engineering and Management, 127(2),
93--100.
[2] Jeffrey, S. R., Edward, J. J., and Samuel, P. L
"Continuous Assessment of Project Performance" Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, 123(1), 64--71.
[3] Pinto, J. K., and Slevin, D. P., 1989. "Critical success
factors in R&D projects." Res. Technol. Manage., 32(1), 31--35.
[4] Rockart, J. F., 1982. "The changing role of the
information systems executive: A critical success factors
perspective." Sloan Manage. Rev., Fall, 3--13
[5] Schultz, R. L., Slevin, D. P., and Pinto, J. K., 1987.
"Strategy and tactics in a process model of project
implementation." Interfaces, 17(3), 34--46.
Divakar, K (1) and Dr. Subramanian, K (2)
(1) Corresponding Author, Research Scholar and Senior Lecturer in
Civil Engineering, Coimbatore Institute of Technology, Coimbatore--641
014, India. Mobile: +91 94433 39279 Email: kdcitce@yahoo.co.in (2)
Supervisor, Professor and Head of Civil Engineering Coimbatore Institute
of Technology, Coimbatore--641 014, India. Mobile: +91 94434 81681
Email: drkscit@rediffmail.com
Table 1: List of Factors included under Technical Aspects
Factor No. Factor Name
C01 Timely availability of working drawings
C02 Frequent changes in plan, designs and working drawings
C03 Changes in techniques as per architects/consultants
instructions
C04 Timely feed back from quality control reports
C05 Variations/ Difficulties at site in respect of planned
details
C06 Change or re work due to mistakes
C07 Deviations or changes in the utility of the building
C08 Changes in design and method of execution due to the
usage of alternate materials or equipments
C09 Implementation of alternate technology to reduce time
and cost
C10 Finalization of working drawings based on field
conditions
C11 Changes in planning and designing due to failure in
obtaining more accurate information regarding site
conditions
C12 Delay in decisions of location of special equipments
and necessary constructional details and working
drawings
C13 Site compatibility of certain equipments which was not
accounted for at planning stage
C14 Site area restrictions for fabrication works, storage
of building materials and form work and scaffolding
materials
C15 Site area restrictions for erecting scaffolding and
lifts for material handling
C16 Selection of right skilled worker
C17 Disputes in specifications
C18 Coordination/ Sequence among activities
C19 Implementation of new technologies
C20 Problems in the site such as foundation shoring,
shifting of pipe lines, power lines etc.
Table 2: Ranking of Critical factors identified through
Descriptive Statistics
Factor Factor Mean Std.
No. Deviation
C02 Frequent changes in plan, designs and 2.72 0.993
working drawings
C12 Delay in decisions of location of 2.67 0.951
special equipments and necessary
constructional details and working
drawings
C11 Changes in planning and designing due to 2.62 0.922
failure in obtaining more accurate
information regarding site conditions
C06 Change or re-work due to mistakes 2.6 0.960
C20 Problems in the site such as foundation 2.6 0.764
shoring, shifting of pipe lines, power
lines etc.
C16 Selection of right skilled worker 2.58 1.03
C03 Changes in techniques as per 2.55 0.91
architects/consultants instructions
C13 Site compatibility of certain equipments 2.53 0.873
which was not accounted for at
planning stage
C07 Deviations or changes in the utility of 2.52 0.93
the building
Table 3: Results of ANOVA for the Background Information--Role
in the Construction Field
Factor Factor Significance
No.
C01 Timely availability of working drawings 0.50
C02 Frequent changes in plan, designs and 0.30
working drawings
C03 Changes in techniques as per architects/ 0.86
consultants instructions
C04 Timely feed back from quality control 0.87
reports
C05 Variations/ Difficulties at site in respect 0.85
of planned details
C06 Change or re-work due to mistakes 0.21
C07 Deviations or changes in the utility of the 0.07
building
C08 Changes in design and method of execution 0.79
due to the usage of alternate materials
or equipments
C09 Implementation of alternate technology to 0.52
reduce time and cost
C10 Finalization of working drawings based on 0.30
field conditions
C11 Changes in planning and designing due to 0.96
failure in obtaining more accurate
information regarding site conditions
C12 Delay in decisions of location of special 0.98
equipments and necessary constructional
details and working drawings
C13 Site compatibility of certain equipments 0.10
which was not accounted for at planning
stage
C14 Site area restrictions for fabrication 0.03
works, storage of building materials and
form work and scaffolding materials
C15 Site area restrictions for erecting 0.47
scaffolding and lifts for material
handling
C16 Selection of right skilled worker 0.56
C17 Disputes in specifications 0.37
C18 Coordination/ Sequence among activities 0.67
C19 Implementation of new technologies 0.06
C20 Problems in the site such as foundation 0.89
shoring, shifting of pipe lines, power
lines etc.
Table 4: Results of the Post Hoc (Tukey's B) Test
Factor Name : Site area restrictions for fabrication works,
storage of building materials and form work and scaffolding
materials
Respondent Group N Subset for alpha = 0.05
1 2
Consultants and Others 18 1.83
Project Managers/Engineers 20 2.45
Builders 22 2.5
Table 5: Summary of the Results of Factor Analysis
Extracted Factor Name Percentage of Cumulative
Variance Percentage of
Explained Variance Explained
Utility, Specifications and 50.30 50.30
Technical Details
Role of consultants 7.25 57.55
Technical Aspects in respect 6.80 64.35
of Execution
Unexpected Changes during 5.98 70.33
Execution
Table 6: List of Initial Factors included under Underlying
Extracted Factor
Extracted Factor Initial Factors Included
Name
Utility, Specifications Deviations or changes in the utility of
and Technical Details the building
Delay in decisions of location of special
equipments and necessary constructional
details and working drawings
Site area restrictions for fabrication
works, storage of building materials and
form work and scaffolding materials
Disputes in specifications
Changes in design and method of execution
due to the usage of alternate materials
or equipments
Site area restrictions for erecting
scaffolding and lifts for material
handling
Implementation of new technologies
Role of Consultants Timely availability of working drawings
Timely feed back from quality control
reports
Finalization of working drawings based
on field conditions
Changes in techniques as per architects/
consultants instructions
Technical Aspects in Problems in the site such as foundation
respect of Execution shoring, shifting of pipe lines, power
lines etc.
Implementation of alternate technology to
reduce time and cost
Coordination/ Sequence among activities
Table 7: Coefficients for Regression Model
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Std.
Model B Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 0.010 0.296 0.034 0.973
Role of Consultants 1.118 0.118 0.780 9.490 0.000
