Abubaker, A E; Greenwood, D and Osborne, A (2008) A study of project planning on Libyan construction projects. In: Dainty, A (ed.) Proceedings of 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK.
Abstract
Construction projects are regularly faced by scheduling problems causing the projects to finish beyond their predetermined due date; this is a global phenomenon. The main purpose of this study is to consider the problems associated with project planning generally, with specific reference to construction projects in Libya. This study is unique in two respects. First, despite the recent high volume of infrastructure work in the country, there have been few investigations into construction delays in Libya. Secondly, earlier studies have considered the causes or the effects of project delays, whereas the present aim is to evaluate the potential of applying a planning and scheduling technique that is entirely novel in the Libyan context. The paper reports the results of Phase I of this research.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | delays; innovation; Libya; project planning; scheduling tools |
| Index terms: | construction project, construction delay, project planning, scheduling, Libya, project delay, investigation |
| Subjects: | production management, project controls, data collection methods, control systems, Geography, operations research |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Time Control, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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