Perrenoud, A; Short, E and Cowan, D (2023) Development and validation of elements for the construction risk maturity assessment (CRMA). International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 19(1), pp. 42-60. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Construction organizations should always look for areas of improvement. Managing risk effectively on construction projects demonstrates expertise, improves customer satisfaction, and increases the likelihood for future work with the client. Construction organizations can improve risk management by measuring their perceptions and practices with identifying, analyzing, and managing risk, also known as risk maturity. Effective measurements will lead to the identification of strengths and weaknesses and can lead to improved performance. Risk Maturity Models (RMM) have been developed in the past to measure risk management practices and perceptions. These previous RMMs were developed in industries outside of construction management. This study aimed to validate the necessary elements for measuring construction risk maturity with industry risk management experts. A three-round Delphi method study was conducted with 28 construction risk management practitioners. The study resulted in a consensus of the key elements for measuring risk maturity. Twenty-five elements were identified and ranked in order of importance. New elements with risk maturity were identified in this study that were not observed in previous RMMs and are unique to the construction industry. All elements were combined to develop the Construction Risk Maturity Assessment (CRMA) for measuring and improving risk maturity in construction organizations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | project risk management; risk maturity; risk maturity model |
| Index terms: | validation, practitioner, construction project, construction industry, risk management, customer satisfaction, project risk management, maturity model, construction organization, Delphi method |
| Subjects: | evaluation, financial risk, production management, organization, practitioner, professional development, service delivery, industry analysis, data collection methods, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Project Management, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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