Phase-based analysis of key cost and schedule performance causes and preventive strategies

Abstract

Purpose It is estimated that more than half of the construction industry’s projects encounter significant cost overruns and major delays, resulting in the industry having a tarnished reputation. Therefore, it is crucial to identify key project cost and schedule performance factors. However, despite the attempts of numerous researchers, their results have been inconsistent. Most of the literature has focused solely on the construction phase budget and time overruns; the engineering/design and procurement phase costs and schedule performances have been rarely studied. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The objective of this study was primarily to identify and prioritize engineering, procurement and construction key performance factors (KPFs) and to strategize ways to prevent performance delays and cost overruns. To achieve these objectives, more than 200 peer-reviewed journal papers, conference proceedings and other scholarly publications were studied and categorized based on industry type, physical location, data collection and analysis methods. Findings It was concluded that both the time required to complete engineering/construction phases and the cost of completing them can be significantly affected by design changes. The two main causes of delays and cost overruns in the procurement phase are construction material shortages and price fluctuations. Other factors affecting all phases of the project are poor economic condition, equipment and labor shortages, delays in owners’ timely decision making, poor communication between stakeholders, poor site management and supervision, clients’ financial issues and severe weather conditions. A list of phase-based strategies which address the issue of time/cost overruns is presented herein. Originality/value The findings of this study address the potential confusion of the industry’s practitioners related to the inconsistent list of potential KPFs and their preventive measurements, and pave the way for the construction research community to conduct future performance-related studies.

Schedule Performance Analysis of Infrastructure Reconstruction Projects Due to Extreme Events

“…In 1987 [28], Pinto and Slevin espoused that a project can be considered successful if it is completed on time, on budget, meets all its objectives, and satisfies the client. Various studies have been conducted on successful construction projects, using their definition [29,30,31,32,33,34,35]. Almost all researchers believe that staying within the budget, adhering to the schedule, and achieving a quality project performance, referred to as "the iron triangle" by Atkinson [36] is necessary for the success of a construction project [37,38,39,40].…”

Identifying and Measuring Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) Key Performance Indicators and Management Strategies

“…These changes in construction projects are almost inevitable, and they usually bring excessive claims, disputes, additional work, and duplication of efforts contributing a project to experience a delay [30,31]. Similarly, Habibi & Kermanshachi [32] concluded that design changes are often responsible for deferring time completion and adding cost in both the engineering and construction phases [33]. Not only can any modifications be attributed to the design changes, but also any additions or deletions to the scope of the work can change the agreed framework in the contract.…”

BIM-based life-cycle environmental assessment of prefabricated buildings

“…The construction industry has been considered a key contributor to economic growth in many nations, playing a significant role in sustainable development (Ofori, 2015; Oesterreich and Teuteberg, 2016; Habibi and Kermanshachi, 2018). The adoption of new technological advancements in this industry is a path toward achieving project success.…”