Viles, E; Rudeli, N C and Santilli, A (2020) Causes of delay in construction projects: A quantitative analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(4), pp. 917-935. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to perform a quantitative analysis of the literature in order to determine the main causes of delay in construction projects. Design/methodology/approach: A set of 47 articles from the literature were analyzed, yielding 1,057 different causes of delay. In order to analyze and compare the main causes of delay, their degree of impact was studied statistically. Next, a mention count method was used to determine the primary causes of construction project delays and through the use of Pareto diagrams, the main causes of delays in construction projects were determined. Findings: It was determined that the three main causes of construction project delay are problems that occur during execution, administrative problems and labor conflicts; together they account for almost 80 percent of the causes found in the literature. Moreover, it was deduced that problems during execution are based on unpredictable events, while administrative problems are rooted in poor cash flow management. In addition, seven sub-groups of delay causes were identified as being major due to the number of mentions detected. These were “Changes during construction,” “Poor construction management,” “Construction errors,” “Economic/Financial,” “Conflict/Relationship” and “Lack of experience.” Practical implications: This study provides a unique classification method, which was successfully validated, for the causes of construction project delay. Thanks to the classification, designers may use this information as a starting point for designing future construction projects, thereby minimizing the appearance of unforeseen events during construction. Moreover, the results of this study will help project managers be aware of the possible causes of delay that may affect their construction projects. This understanding can help them identify potential risks in the initial phases of the project and allow decisions to be made early before problems arise or the consequences of the deviations become irreparable. The results can also serve as input for the development of future management improvement methodologies that are aimed at reducing costs and ensuring that deadlines are met. Social implications: Identifying the factors and causes of the delays will allow mitigation actions to be taken in order to avoid delays, which will ultimately allow homes, schools, hospitals and other necessary infrastructure to be delivered on time or even before the planned date. Originality/value: This study provides a unique classification method that was successfully validated. Thanks to the classification, designers may use this information as a starting point for designing future construction projects, thereby minimizing unforeseen events during construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction planning; design management; scheduling |
| Index terms: | methodology, design management, construction project, mitigation, quantitative analysis, scheduling, causes of delay, construction planning, project manager, cash flow management, deviation, designer |
| Subjects: | financial management, research methods, production management, design process, financial risk, project controls, profession, operations research, data analysis and analytics, financial and cost management, construction planning |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Site Management, Time Control, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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