Al Jashaami, Mohammed Ahmed Mohammed (2021) Improving delay management of construction projects by creating a systematic scoring scale to minimise/avoid delays. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
This thesis is a study of the worldwide problem of construction project delays. Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology and content analysis of previous studies were used to acquire a systematic and holistic understanding of construction delays, which revealed that the futile thinking of management teams plays a vital role in the occurrence of delays. This finding was incorporated into a questionnaire survey of 130 engineers working for contractors, consultants and project management companies in the UAE to help identify the sub and super structural elements involved, and ultimately develop a systematic scoring scale to minimise or avoid delays.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Skitmore, Martin and Lamari, Fiona |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction projects; delays; futile thinking; mental models; soft systems methodology |
| Index terms: | construction delay, construction project, questionnaire, content analysis, survey, soft systems methodology, project management, engineer, mental model |
| Subjects: | cognitive psychology, research methods, production management, project controls, project management theory and practice, data analysis and analytics, profession, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Time Control, Project Management |
| 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