Zhang, H and Alhashedi, E (2025) Propagation analysis and assessment for the risks in EPC projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 151(12): 04025209, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The general contractor is solely responsible for executing the integrated and overlapping phases of the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) project. This delivery approach fosters intricate propagation of diverse risks across the project lifecycle, which warrants deeper investigation to support successful project delivery. This study aimed to investigate the causal interdependencies among the risks and their propagation in the EPC project and develop an effective model for assessing the EPC risks. The risks and their causal interdependencies across the three phases of the EPC project were identified and analyzed, and then the risk propagation networks were constructed, based on content analysis of literature and insights from domain experts. An innovative Noisy-MAX Bayesian model (NMBM) was developed to assess the risks in the EPC project by integrating Bayesian networks (BNs) with the Noisy-MAX model and a knowledge-based parameter elicitation framework. The NMBM was applied and validated to demonstrate its practicality, effectiveness, and stability. This study provides valuable insights into the propagation and interdependencies of the risks in the EPC project, and presents an effective methodology for assessing the EPC risks by capturing the interdependencies of the risks and inherent uncertainties using minimal parameters. The study also contributes to the knowledge domain of risk management for the EPC project from the perspective of the general contractor.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Bayesian networks; EPC project; noisy-max model; risk assessment; risk interdependencies; risk propagation |
| Index terms: | project delivery, propagation, risk assessment, effectiveness, risk management, investigation, project lifecycle, bayesian network, methodology, general contractor, content analysis, stability |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, research methods, financial risk, project completion, practitioner, performance management, probabilistic model, data collection methods, risk assessment, engineering process, data analysis and analytics, project delivery |
| Topics: | Procurement, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Cost Management, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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