A comprehensive review of delay analysis techniques for solving concurrent delays

Vo, H M; Yang, J B and Rangasamy, V (2025) A comprehensive review of delay analysis techniques for solving concurrent delays. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(5), pp. 3495-3521. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose: Construction projects commonly encounter complicated delay problems. Over the past few decades, numerous delay analysis methods (DAMs) have been developed. There is no consensus on whether existing DAMs effectively resolve delays, particularly in the case of complex concurrent delays. Thus, the primary objective of this study is to undertake a comprehensive and systematic literature review on concurrent delays, aiming to answer the following research question: Do existing delay analysis techniques deal with concurrent delays well? Design/methodology/approach: This study conducts a comprehensive review of concurrent delays by both bibliometric and systematic analysis of research publications published between 1982 and 2022 in the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases. For quantitative analysis, a bibliometric mapping tool, the VOSviewer, was employed to analyze 68 selected publications to explore the co-occurrence of keywords, co-authorship and direct citation. Additionally, we conducted a qualitative analysis to answer the targeted research question, identify academic knowledge gaps and explore potential research directions for solving the theoretical and practical problems of concurrent delays. Findings: Concurrent delays are a critical aspect of delay claims. Despite DAMs developed by a limited number of research teams to tackle issues like concurrence, float consumption and the critical path in concurrent delay resolution, practitioners continue to face significant challenges. This study has successfully identified knowledge gaps in defining, identifying, analyzing and allocating liability for concurrent delays while offering promising directions for further research. These findings reveal the incompleteness of available DAMs for solving concurrent delays. Practical implications: The outcomes of this study are highly beneficial for practitioners and researchers. For practitioners, the discussions on the resolution process of concurrent delays in terms of identification, analysis and apportionment enable them to proactively address concurrent delays and lay the groundwork for preventing and resolving such issues in their construction projects. For researchers, five research directions, including advanced DAMs capable of solving concurrent delays, are proposed for reference. Originality/value: Existing research on DAMs lacks comprehensive coverage of concurrent delays. Through a scientometric review, it is evident that current DAMs do not deal with concurrent delays well. This review identifies critical knowledge gaps and offers insights into potential directions for future research.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: concurrent delays; construction projects; delay analysis methods; delay claims; technical and legal perspectives
Index terms: resolution, construction project, quantitative analysis, practitioner, mapping, publication, critical path, consumption, systematic literature review, face, database, methodology, science, liability, delay analysis, qualitative analysis
Subjects: production management, research dissemination and communication, spatial and geospatial analysis, research evaluation and metrics, psychology, project controls, data management, liability law, operations research, conflict resolution, practitioner, specialized education, consumer economics, research methods, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics
Topics: Time Control, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Project Management, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Education, Information Management, Digital Applications
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