Lindhard, S M; Neve, H; Terje Kalsaas, B; Møller, D E and Wandahl, S (2022) Ranking and comparing key factors causing time-overruns in on-site construction. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(14), pp. 2724-2730. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
For years, the construction industry has looked for ways to avoid time-overruns in construction. Despite previous research mapping the factors affecting time performance, site-managers have difficulties in reducing the time-overrun. In order to create a clearer guidance on how to control time-performance, this study investigates the resource related factors because they are within the site-manager’s control. Three Case studies were followed and a survey including 36 participants where conducted. Both investigated and ranked the likelihood of delay due to the seven different resource factors. The ranking of the resource factors was identified as: (1) Construction design, (2) Connecting works, (3) External conditions, (4) Work force, (5) Components and materials, (6) Space, (7) Equipment and machinery. The site-manager’s focus should be avoiding the factors that most often is found to cause time-overrun, which are construction design and connecting work that constitute about 60% of the time-overruns. The comparison of the studies revealed that construction professionals were unable to distinguish between the less and the low frequent factors causing time-overrun. Future survey studies should take into consideration that construction professionals' preserved reality does not always correspond to the observed reality. Indicators include low variation between factors and limited use of the scale.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | delay; key factors; lean; preconditions; productivity; scheduling |
| Index terms: | time performance, variation, mapping, manager, scheduling, survey, overrun, construction professional, construction industry, case study, productivity |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, operations research, contractual condition, professional development, management, spatial and geospatial analysis, industry analysis, project controls |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Time Control, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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