Jepson, J; Kirytopoulos, K and London, K (2020) Insights into the application of risk tools and techniques by construction project managers. International Journal of Construction Management, 20(8), pp. 848-866. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
This study analyses the practical application of risk management tools by project managers in their construction projects. Using a grounded theory approach we applied purposive sampling to select 25 Australian construction project managers to identify tools utilised to analyse risk and tool preferences. Themes were developed though analysis of the in-depth interviews using QSR-NVivo11. The results indicate that the most common methods are within the look-up and supporting methods categories, followed by the evaluation and scenario methods. There is poor utilisation of statistical methods, due to the uniqueness of projects, the lack of data and time pressure on projects. The results were consistent across project managers; irrespective of project size, type of organisation or experience. However, more experienced project managers rely less on evaluation tools. The research provides evidence that many of the tools promoted by the risk standards/associations do not seem to reflect current project manager practice. The implication is that more effort should be given to appreciating the risk tools that are appropriate for projects and the importance of transferring and spreading experience among PMs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; grounded theory; risk management; tools and techniques |
| Index terms: | interview, manager, construction project, evidence, preference, project manager, grounded theory, risk management, statistical method, evaluation tool, purposive sampling, risk management tool |
| Subjects: | research methods, decision-making and reasoning, theoretical framing, financial risk, production management, statistical analysis, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, profession, risk assessment, practitioner |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Roles and Professions, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here