Nguyen, T P and Chileshe, N (2015) Revisiting the construction project failure factors in Vietnam. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 5(4), pp. 398-416. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose - The Vietnam construction industry has considerably developed since 1986 as a result of “Doi Moi” or all-round renovation process. However, despite the pace of economic reforms, a number of challenges continue to plague the construction industry. The purpose of this paper is to revisit the factors causing construction project failure in Vietnam. Some of the selected best practices from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) and China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey, South Africa (CIVETS) are discussed. Design/methodology/approach - Using a mixed method approach, data were collected from construction stakeholders in Vietnam using a postal survey questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The quantitative data were subjected to descriptive statistics using ranking and frequencies analysis, and qualitative data employed content analysis. Findings - Despite the lack of systematic approach to managing projects risks, there is a high level of acknowledgement regarding the importance of risk management practices. The highly ranked critical factors still causing construction project failure in Vietnam are: disregard of the significance of project planning process and project planning; lack of experience in executing complicated project; poor design capacity and frequent design changes; lack of knowledge and ability in managing construction projects; lack of financial capacity of owner; poor performance of contractors; lack of a systematic approach to managing the project and entire organisation; corruption and bribery in construction projects; the delays in payment; and economic volatility and high inflation. Practical implications - The identified and revisited project failure factors could be used as a “road map” for the revaluation, and development of appropriate project management practices. Originality/value - The construction sector has undergone through significant structural changes following “Doi Moi”. This study provides the opportunity to realign the strategies for addressing project failure factors and learning from comparative studies in BRICS and CIVETS countries.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | performance; Vietnam; construction industry; critical factors; risk management; project management; project failure |
| Index terms: | critical factor, survey, design change, content analysis, strategy, Brazil, owner, mixed method, project failure, Turkey, failure factor, project management practice, interview, Vietnam, Indonesia, project management, project planning, statistics, Egypt, South Africa, India, construction sector, China, construction industry, risk management, questionnaire, corruption, construction project, renovation, inflation, methodology, best practice, comparative study |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, project completion, business, mathematical modelling, risk assessment, data collection methods, control systems, sociology, industry analysis, professional ethics, research methods, renovation and retrofit, management, project management theory and practice, Geography, production management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Legal Issues |
| 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