Adedokun, O A; Egbelakin, T; Adedokun, D O and Adafin, J (2023) Success criteria-based impacts of risk factors on education building projects in Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 21(6), pp. 1901-1924. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: Despite the huge capital outlay in tertiary education building projects (TEBP), these projects undoubtedly failed in meeting the set objectives of cost, time and quality, among others. Therefore, rather than the impacts of risks on the overall project performance, which is common in the construction management literature, the purpose of this study is to assess the impacts of risk factors on the criteria for measuring the success of public TEBP. Design/methodology/approach: The paper adopted a quantitative research method where the data collection was via a questionnaire survey. The researcher administered 452 questionnaires to the client representatives, consultants and contractors involved in building projects across five public tertiary education institutions in Ondo State, Nigeria. Of 452 questionnaires, 279 were retrieved and suitable for the analysis, translating to a 61.73% response rate. The reliability analysis of the research instrument showed 0.965 and 0.807, via Cronbach’s alpha test, indicating high reliability of the instrument used for data collection. Findings: The study found different risk factors affecting the criteria for measuring the success of TEBP. For instance, the environmental risk factor significantly impacted completion to cost, while financial and political risk factors significantly impacted completion to time. In addition, while environmental, legal and management risks significantly impacted end-user satisfaction, safety performance was significantly impacted by logistic, legal, design, construction, political and management risks. Besides, the logistic, legal, design, construction, financial, political and management risk factors impacted profit. However, despite profit being one of the criteria for measuring the success of building projects, it recorded the highest risk impacts amounting to 41% variance. Research limitations/implications: The findings are limited to the public tertiary education building projects procured via competitive tendering; therefore, the results might differ when considering other procurement methods. Practical implications: The practical implication is that rather than focusing on all risk factors, the project stakeholders could give adequate attention to the significant risk factors impacting each of the parameters for measuring the success of education building projects. Originality/value: The study revealed specific risk factors impacting the criteria for measuring the success of TEBP, which extend beyond the use of the overall project performance approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building projects; education building projects; Nigeria; risk factors; tertiary institutions |
| Index terms: | management risk, quantitative research, user satisfaction, tertiary, competitive tendering, survey, environmental risk, variance, methodology, project stakeholder, risk impact, safety performance, reliability analysis, procurement method, profit, questionnaire, project performance, education institution, Nigeria, risk factor, success criteria |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, curriculum development, measurement and scaling, sociology, Geography, economic analysis, research methods, tendering, environmental hazards, educational institutions, assessment methods, reliability engineering, project management theory and practice, contractual arrangements, client relations, data collection methods, financial risk, occupational health and safety management |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Geographical Context, Education, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Procurement |
| 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