A framework to standardize causes of construction delay

Amarkhil, Q; Elwakil, E; Hubbard, B and Byrd, V L (2023) A framework to standardize causes of construction delay. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(11), pp. 1791-1804. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

Available literature shows no standard method or framework to identify critical causes of delay and assess its impact on the construction project. The use of ambiguous phrases and unstructured identification of causes has resulted in the ineffectiveness of the study findings. Therefore, this study has developed a framework to identify critical causes of delay through a systematic approach. This systematic approach helps to identify critical causes of delay in a standardized format. The framework categorically sequences causes of delay and connects them to the responsible party. From the obtained data, three hundred thirty-five critical causes of delay were extracted, categorized into 14 groups, and summarized into 48 major critical causes presented in tables. This study provides a comprehensive list and reference of the critical causes identified in the past 10 years. The study also quantitatively analysed the collected data presented in tables. The developed framework and approach minimize alternate and ambiguous phrasing, enhance study findings application in practice, and increases the research outcome’s consistency.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: causes of delay; critical causes of delay; framework; standardized format
Index terms: construction project, causes of delay, construction delay
Subjects: production management, project controls
Topics: Project Management, Time Control
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

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