Jarkas, A M and Haupt, T C (2015) Major construction risk factors considered by general contractors in Qatar. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 13(1), pp. 165-194.
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify, explore, rank the relative importance and determine the prevalent allocation response trends of the major construction risk factors considered by general contractors operating in the State of Qatar. Design/methodology/approach – A structured questionnaire survey comprising 37 potential risk factors was distributed to a statistically representative sample of contractors. The influence ranks of the factors explored were determined using the “Relative Importance Index (RII)” technique, whereas the prevalent trend of contractors' attitudes toward risk allocation of each factor investigated was quantified and expressed as a percentage, based on the number of respondents who selected a specific option, in relation to the total number of respondents. Findings – The results obtained indicate that risks related to the “client” group are perceived as most critical, followed by the “consultant”, “contractor” and “exogenous” group-related factors, respectively. The outcomes further show that the “transfer” option is the contractors' prevalent response to “client” and “consultant”-related risks, while the “retention” decision is the principal pattern linked to “contractor” and “exogenous” group-related risk factors. Research limitations/implications – The dominant respondents' perception that the crucial construction risks are related to clients and consultants suggests that these two parties have an essential role in controlling the negative ramifications of the associated factors. Practical implications – The findings suggest that increasing designers' awareness of the significant effect of applying the constructability concept can considerably help reducing the risks concomitant of the construction operation. Policy makers may contribute, moreover, in alleviating the risk of incompetent technical staff and operatives' employment by controlling the migration of inexperienced and unskilled construction workforce into the State. Originality/value – Given the knowledge gap for the major construction risk factors considered by general contractors in Qatar, the results reported in this study can provide clients, industry practitioners and policy makers with guidance to effectively manage the significant risks determined, which can further assist in achieving a reasonable level of competitiveness and cost-effective operation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | risk management; construction project management; Qatar; contractors; risk factors |
| Index terms: | survey, general contractor, relative importance index, relative importance, practitioner, questionnaire, methodology, designer, construction operation, migration, employment, retention, operative, option, Qatar, constructability, risk factor, risk allocation, competitiveness, construction project management, risk management |
| Subjects: | management, research methods, construction integration, Geography, financial risk, project management theory and practice, market analysis, demography, decision analysis, environmental hazards, profession, risk assessment, data collection methods, practitioner, construction operations |
| Topics: | Site Management, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Sustainability, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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