Wiguna, I P A and Scott, S (2006) Relating risk to project performance in Indonesian building contracts. Construction Management and Economics, 24(11), pp. 1125-1135. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
A construction project is unique, specific and dynamic, and therefore projects have different levels and combinations of risks, different responses are taken to minimise those risks and different consequences affect project performance. The primary aim of this study was to analyse the impacts of perceived project risk on project performance. A path model was developed and path analysis was used to determine the relationships between risk and performance. The main survey was predominantly based on a series of interviews with project managers. A total of 22 building projects under construction were surveyed; however, only 13 projects used an 'S' curve to monitor their project performance. The study focused on these 13 projects and found that perceived project risk had a direct negative effect on monthly progress achievement, while monthly progress had a direct positive impact on schedule performance. Although project risk had no direct effect on schedule performance, this was influenced indirectly with monthly progress as the mediator between them. These findings indicate that the higher the project risk in a project, the greater the negative impact on monthly progress, and consequently the worse the schedule performance will be.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building project; path analysis; project delay; project performance; risk management |
| Index terms: | project performance, risk management, path analysis, mediator, direct effect, project manager, building contract, construction project, project delay, interview, schedule performance, survey |
| Subjects: | factor and component analysis, production management, project management theory and practice, project controls, statistical analysis, profession, risk assessment, data collection methods, contract type, dispute resolution |
| Topics: | Time Control, Legal Issues, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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