Fluent Essays

Write a 3 page review of the attached journal article. The review should contain the journal article title, authors name and year of publication. Your paper should contain the following headings: Introduction Summary of the article Relevant points made by the author Critique of the article Application of the concepts in the articleYou are going to review a single journal article, therefore your reference page should only contain the information from the article you reviewed. There is no need to introduce other journals into this paper. p_delays_in_project_managemen.pdf Unformatted Attachment Preview The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0969-9988.htm ECAM 25,1 4P delays in project management Richard Hannis Ansah and Shahryar Sorooshian Faculty of Industrial Management, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Gambang, Malaysia 62 Abstract Received 2 September 2016 Revised 30 January 2017 5 May 2017 15 August 2017 Accepted 16 September 2017 Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management Vol. 25 No. 1, 2018 pp. 62-76 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0969-9988 DOI 10.1108/ECAM-09-2016-0199 Purpose – As a result of the increasing challenges of time overrun, several companies regularly set up delay assessment procedures for performance improvement and profit maximization. In the construction industry, projects are enormously complicated and involve significant budgets, and therefore optimizing project performance through the root cause analysis should be imperative for every project manager. Typically issues of delays in projects are generally discussed and problematized separately, yet a comprehensive framework for systematic analysis and grouping of delays is rarely contended. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the 4P concept (project related, practices, participants, and procurement) for identifying, analyzing, and classifying delays in the internal environment of the project development process. Design/methodology/approach – The 4P conceptual framework was validated through the synthesis of the existing literature. Findings – Interestingly, despite the increasing concerns about delays in the construction industry, most research on delays are project and/or country specific, thus no consensus about the sources of delays. The application of the proposed concept as a theoretical framework would provide an understanding of the available delay sources, their risks and use for project delay assessment and classification. Research limitations/implications – This study grouped delays based on the shared characteristics and four main sources were identified and analyzed. There may be other sources or factors, yet would be dependent or aspect of the 4P. Practical implications – The study informs project teams to reduce delays in the construction industry. Originality/value – The paper is an application of risk assessment tool to conceptualize delays in the internal project environment. Keywords Construction, Risk management, Project management Paper type Conceptual paper Introduction Delay is often described as the time overrun beyond a project completion date. It could be said to be a failure of a project to be completed within the agreed schedule. Even though the magnitude level varies considerably across projects and geographical boundaries (Sambasivan and Soon, 2007; Shehu et al., 2014; Sorooshian, 2014), projects undertaking in the construction industry experience some form of delay (Ansah et al., 2016a; Ansah and Sorooshian, 2017; Norzima et al., 2011). Meanwhile, these delays occur at different stages, from project conception through completion to maintenance; yet, most delays occur at the execution phase (Norzima et al., 2011; Sorooshian et al., 2010). Delays can create a huge cost and serious problems to all the concerned parties and even the health of the economy (Sambasivan et al., 2017; Shehu et al., 2014). In this regard, it is very essential for project managers and professionals to recognize the need to understand the main sources of delays in order to deploy practical strategies to mitigate and reduce the effects and risks resulting from delays (Ansah and Sorooshian, 2017). Time and cost are the two main concerns (Elbeltagi et al., 2016), with cost often seen as an outcome of the time (Manley and Chen, 2016). Minimizing cost and time overruns could effectively be achieved through identification and classification of the real causal factors of delays in the construction industry (Ansah et al., 2017; Norzima et al., 2011; PMI, 2004; Sorooshian, 2014). Also, the parties that are responsible for such delays ought to be identified in order to This project is financially supported by the University of Malaysia Pahang, under the FRGS Research Grant No. RDU140107. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. trace delay sources at different phases of the project and within any of the project parties so that issues relating to responsibility and its necessary measures could be effected. Projects are enormously complicated in nature and often involve significant budgets, and therefore reducing delays in the project development cycle should be imperative for every project manager (Sambasivan et al., 2017). According to Bing et al. (2005) and Patel et al. (2013), project involves different interested groups and parties who have expertise, different stake and value system, and desired outcome and therefore requires critical assessment to avoid projects failures (Aziz, 2013; Norzima et al., 2011; Sorooshian et al., 2010; Sorooshian, 2014, 2015). Many organizations have turned out to be more proactive and aware of utilizing delay or risk analyses techniques as a part of project development strategy (Hwang et al., 2016; Hwang et al., 2017). In like manner, delay assessment and control have become a timely issue generally discussed across organizations. In any case, this is different with respect to the construction sector (Klemetti, 2006). This contradicts the fact that the sector is endeavoring to be more time and cost efficient and at the same time have more projects under control. Although several techniques and methods for identifying, analyzing, and classifying delays in projects have been developed and generally discussed among researchers and across organizations, a comprehensive framework for systematic analysis and grouping of delays in construction projects is rarely contended. Among the concept which is broadly used for delay/risk management is risk management process which comprises of four primary steps: identification, assessment, action, and monitoring. There are various techniques and methods in each of these steps, which facilitate handling of the risks and its resultant delays (Cooper et al., 2005; Ansah et al., 2016a, b, c). Other methods for analyzing delays in projects include critical success factors (CSFs) analysis (Saqib et al., 2008; Salleh, 2009), scheduling impact analysis or time impact analysis (Arcuri et al., 2007), etc. These techniques are worthwhile, yet, there seems to be a gap with respect to delay assessment and management techniques in construction projects. This paucity relates to the fact that there has been surprisingly little academic and empirical research on the area discussed in this paper and much of what have been written about construction project delays are project or country specific, or description of risks, or few causal factors of delays, without a comprehensive technique for overall delay identification and groupings. In essence, despite the scientific progress in the understanding of delay sources, there is a scarcity of empirical study on its identification, classification, and assessment in the project development cycle. The stimulating point here is that without a comprehensive understanding and systematic analysis of delay sources and their individual risks, reducing delays, and optimizing the performance of projects will be complicated. Also, there seems to be a lack of consensus among researchers and industrial practitioners about delay sources and its groupings (Norzima et al., 2011; Sorooshian, 2014). In filling this gap, this paper validates a systematic conceptual technique known as the “4P concept” (project related, practices, participants, and procurement) to identify, analyze, and categorize delay sources in the internal environment of the project development process. The conceptual technique validated in this paper is intended to offer an understanding and provide valuable insights for researchers and stakeholders on the delay sources and its categories. Thus, this would help project parties appreciate delay sources and devise strategies to mitigate them, thereby, leading to a significant process for project objectives achievement, in terms of time, cost, quality, and minimize the percentage of the failure in construction projects. Explicitly, the knowledge gained from this study would equip stakeholders, improve project delivery, and if well understood, would lead to a better performance and contribute to the knowledge and practice of delay control in the project environment as a whole. 4P delays in project management 63 ECAM 25,1 64 The remaining sections are organized as follows: the next sections focus on the research method/approach and sources of delays, and this is followed by the types of delays. The other sections present the concept of the 4P, assessment of 4P, and the types of delays and conclusions, respectively. Research method/approach The 4P conceptual framework was validated through the synthesis of the existing literature. In order to identify the relevant articles for this framework, we conducted a systematic analysis of project development factors that influence time overruns. The study followed the systematic method introduced by van de Vijver (2009), including journal/article selection and reference search. First, data from medium to large projects were gathered from peer-reviewed journals, conferences, and other databases within the civil engineering, construction management, project management, technology management, architectural management, built environment, etc. Although there are wide and varied views about medium or large projects and most definitions are organization or country specific, medium or large projects have normally been defined based on the complexity of the project. The complexity assessment takes into account all the conventional project management areas (schedule, scope, quality, budget, resources (human and equipment), risks, etc.) (Haider and Haider, 2012). The researchers considered four factors and these included time, budget, requirements, and flexibility. Hence, a medium project is defined as project with three to six months schedule, $250,000-750, 000 budget, schedule flexibility, clear requirements, etc., while as a large project is defined as project with more than six months schedule, more than $750,000 budget, aggressive schedule, undefined requirements, etc. (Haider and Haider, 2012; Hass, 2010). Gathering such information from both public and private sectors’ projects (PPP) or collaborative projects required due diligence and lots of circumspection because the existing literature on delay analysis are often project specific or country specific. Next, we analyzed the titles, table of contents, and the content by examining the abstract or introduction, the scope or method, the conclusion or sometimes discussion sections (Bemelmans et al., 2012; Spina et al., 2013, 2016). It is contended that the real contributions would probably be found in the leading journals and to identify relevant articles, it is key to examine the table of contents of the journal (Bemelmans et al., 2012; Spina et al., 2013, 2016; van de Vijver, 2009). Also, to ensure the comprehensiveness of the concept, this study examined the references made by the authors to determine if those articles have relevant contributions (van de Vijver, 2009). Similarly, this study examined the impacts of the selected journals (prior to 2016). Emphatically, 17 ISI (Web of Science), 28 Scopus, and other individual articles or books with impacts (citations) relevant to the study were selected. By doing this, we could recognize the originality, contribution, and the domain-specific works. This resulted in the selection of 73 articles relevant to the study (see reference list). Finally, the study identified the sources of the delays and then further identified the individual risks associated with the sources. The risks or delay factors were then categorized into main sources based on shared characteristics. The review and synthesis are limited to relevant literature within the context of delays assessment methods in the internal environment of construction projects. The internal sources of delays The frequency of the ability or the inability of construction projects to be completed on time and within budget mainly rest on the project parties. This is because successful construction projects are the result of multiple effective and quality decisions made by contrasting team members (Ansah et al., 2016a). Project teams and their decision-making processes, operations, administrative processes, experiences, skills, and employed tools must be assessed to improve the likelihood of projects succeeding. Industry studies have revealed that meeting client’s requirements are firmly impacted by the effectiveness of the project team. The internal sources of delays occur due to the malfunctions of any of the project parties including the designers, architects, client, contractor, and other parties that provide labors, materials, or services. For instance, the main sources of delays related to the client in Saudi Arabia included factors such as work suspension, financial problems, change orders, material approvals delays, slow decision making, and low technical submittals. Also, delays related to the contractor comprised less qualified and inexperienced technical staff, problems associated with financing projects, inter-party conflicts, etc. More also, delays related to consultants included inexperienced and lack of staff for design documents review. Material-related delays included unavailability of materials and poor procurement systems. Furthermore, labor-related delays comprised of unavailability of manpower and low level of skills. Lastly, unrealistic timeframe was identified as the root source of contractual relationship and contract disputes (Al-Kharashi and Skitmore, 2009; Mpofu et al., 2017). The survey reports by Abd El-Razek et al. (2008) in the Egyptian building construction industry indicated that the overall important factors causing delays included contractor’s financial difficulties, delays in payment or partial payment, changes in design by the owner or his representative, and ineffective construction/contracts management. Also, from the studies of Mamman and Omozokpia (2014), unavailability of experienced and qualified personnel, poor quality of raw materials and equipment, non-conformance to specification and timeline, unavailability of resources, average delays by owners in making payment, poor information coordination among clients and project parties, and high cost of material and equipment were among the causal factors adversely influencing construction projects performance in Niger State, Nigeria. Similarly, lack of funds, changes in drawings, inadequate information from consultant, slow decision-making process by the client, ineffective communication among project parties, inconsistencies and mistakes in contract documents, nonpayment of completed works, fluctuations of building material prices were found among the factors causing delays in construction projects delivery time in Nigeria (Owalabi et al., 2014). In South Africa, it has been contended that the key significant factors hampering the success of project delivery are quality and attitude to service (Mbachu and Nkado, 2007). Frimpong et al. (2003) undertook a survey on time and cost overruns of Ghanaian groundwater projects and their findings concluded that inefficient management of contract, low technical competence, and escalation of material prices as the major factors causing the overruns. The findings from Iyer and Jha (2006) found among other factors including project participants interactions, competency of owners, inter-project participants conflicts, social and economic hostilities, conditions of the weather, unawareness, and lack of information, and aggressive competition at the tender stage as factors affecting the performance quality of projects in India. However, in 2013, the survey by Megha and Rajiv (2013) revealed a new trend in the factors causing delays in India. Out of the 59 factors causing delays identified under nine major groups, the results indicated a total of ten main factors; out of which five were ranked as being common by the methods used for ranking (i.e. relative index for importance and index for importance which was based on the level of severity and the level of frequency). These five included: short contract duration, unavailability of labors, material delivery delays, low level of labors’ productivity, and delays by the owners in progressive payments. A survey conducted by Salunkhe and Patil (2014) on large construction projects in India sought the views of project implementing agencies, clients, contractors, and consultants. Delays associated with the project implementing agencies included land acquisition delays, contractor’s mobilization delays, specification revision delays, problems with funding; 4P delays in project management 65 ECAM 25,1 66 among others. Delays associated with the client were changes in the scope of work, payment issues for completed works, low technical capabilities, and others. The delays caused by contractors were poor scheduling and planning, low level of experience and poor making decisions, etc. Likewise, delays caused by consultants comprised of specification revision delays, low level of coordination between consultants and contractors, among others. In Jordan, 130 public projects including school buildings, administration and office buildings, communication facilities, and medical centers were examined by Al-Momani (2000). The findings concluded that changes made by users, adverse climate, poor site conditions, delays in deliveries, and poor economic conditions were among the factors causing delays in the Jordanian’s construction projects. It was also observed that there was a strong correlation between the delay factors and contractor’s failure and ineffectiveness in performance. Ogunlana et al. (1996) carried out a comparative study in Bangkok, Thailand on time and cost overruns. It was confirmed that in developing nations the problems faced by the construction industry can be clustered into three layers; shortages of resource supply, problems with clients and his representative(s) (consultant), and contractor’s incompetence. A report by Saqib et al. (2008) ranked 77 variables influencing project implementation success in Pakistan. The report listed CSFs including timely and effective decision making, project manager’s experience, contractors’ cash flow, the experience of contractors, supervision, and management of site, prior experience of the project manager, client’s decision-making capabilities. Nonetheless, Haseeb et al. (2011) reported that in Pakistan, problems in payments and finance, poor site planning and management, material and equipment shortages were most general factors causing delays. It was indicated that in Singapore, the Housing and Development Board for the past two years has given time extension to about 36 failed projects. The reasons for such projects delays were design changes, shortage of foreign labors, among the other issues (Ansah et al., 2016b). Also, reports on government contract projects in Malaysia confirmed that about 17.3 percent of 417 projects were considered sick with more than three months delays or abandoned (Shehu et al., 2014). A review conducted on the Bakun hydro project revealed an unsatisfactory performance following a one- to three-time extension ranging from 555 days to 1,403 days given to the contractor (Othman and Ismail, 2014). Furthermore, according to Othman and Ismail (2014), the Refinery and Petrochemical Integrated Development which is expected to start operation in 2016 would only be operative in 2017 as a res ... Purchase answer to see full attachment