Improving project management "closeout" phase outcomes: Evidence from a large general contractor in Iran using "x-inefficiency theory"

Mirzaee, A M and Martek, I (2025) Improving project management "closeout" phase outcomes: Evidence from a large general contractor in Iran using "x-inefficiency theory". Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 32(8), pp. 5253-5271. ISSN 0969-9988

Abstract

Purpose – Optimal clean-up procedures lie at the heart of the closeout phase of construction projects under contract law. However, due to its complexity involving multiple issues, potentially unfulfilled contractual obligations, performance claims and counter-claims, combined with consequently deteriorating stakeholder relationships, the management of closeouts is fraught with difficulties leading to suboptimal outcomes. This is particularly true where general contractor (GC) organizations do not have a claims management office (CMO) dedicated to improving such suboptimal clean-up outcomes. Thus, this study aims to develop a model by which CMOs' may effectively manage the clean-up phase in an environment of closeout claims. Design/methodology/approach – X-inefficiency theory was utilized as the theoretical lens guiding this study. The theory helps identify closeout strategies implemented by a GC, which manages completion claims through a CMO. Data were received and analyzed from a large GC, which served as the firm case study. In this case, managing the closeout completion claims was the main function of the CMO. Findings – The average delay of closeout completion was four times greater than construction phase delays. The GC results highlighted the "economic destruction tsunami of projects, " as a root cause for these completion delays. Wrap-up activities under contract law are identified, including within the domains of statements of completion, project handover and debt settlement. Behavior strategies are also defined, including relational and contractual approaches. Moreover, a process for improving closeout claim performance is described, comprising project closeout identification, rational intra-firm behavior, closeout completion and program closeout practice. Originality/value – Findings from this work can significantly contribute in X-inefficiency theory in relation to how a decrease of X-inefficiency will lead to better closeout claim performance. It also offers practical insights into how best to minimize delayed closeout completion while providing valuable lessons for stakeholders in complex infrastructure projects. Further, a model is developed that may be utilized by owners, consultancies, designers and other contractor organizations in an effort to improve closeout claim performance.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: claim management; closeout phase; construction delivery methods; contract law; program closeout; x-inefficiency theory
Index terms: evidence, program, construction project, methodology, consultancy, complexity, strategy, general contractor, tsunami, claim management, project closeout, project management, construction phase, infrastructure project, heart, contractor organization, case study, contract law, designer, delivery method, owner
Subjects: delivery method, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, management, software systems, contract law, contractual condition, project management theory and practice, project delivery, data collection methods, profession, environmental hazards, medical science and clinical practice, research methods, production management, operations management, evaluation and assessment methods, organization, practitioner
Topics: Procurement, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, 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