Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dayang Sabriah Safri MFKA2009
Dayang Sabriah Safri MFKA2009
NOVEMBER, 2009
iii
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Praise to the Almighty Allah the God of the Universe who gave me strength to
complete this thesis. This piece of work would not become possible without His bless.
Greatest thanks to all respondents in Johor and Sabah, who participated in this
questionnaire survey and patient enough to spent their precious time in replying the
questionnaires, and my colleagues in faculty who assist me during the data distribution.
Your kind and generous help will always be in my mind.
Deepest thanks to my family especially my beloved father and mother, Mr. Hj.
Safri Idris and Mrs. Mary Ambrose Anjun, and my siblings, Dayang Marina Sabrina and
Dayang Safwan, for their constant support and prayers throughout the process of
producing this project report. I would like to take this opportunity to express my
appreciation to my friends. My special thanks to Jumaydin Jum, Rohaida, Jahara, Nadia,
Maria, Adilah and Ewi for their valuable advice, support and assistance throughout the
period of my project.
Finally, I would also like to acknowledge each and every person who has
contributed their effort in this study by whatever means directly or indirectly. Without
the contribution of all those mentioned above, this work would not have been possible,
thank you to all of you.
ABSTRACT
vi
ABSTRAK
Penyiapan projek pembinaan yang mengikut masa adalah kriteria penting dalam
menentukan kejayaan sesebuah projek. Kegagalan menyiapkan projek mengikut masa
akan mengakibatkan kelewatan dalam projek pembinaan. Keperluan untuk mengawal
punca-punca kelewatan semasa proses pembinaan timbul apabila jumlah projek-projek
yang mengalami kelewatan telah meningkat dari semasa ke semasa. Oleh itu, ianya
penting untuk mengenalpasti punca-punca masalah ini pada permulaan projek
pembinaan. Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji punca-punca kelewatan
berdasarkan kekerapan dan tahap kesannya, dan akhir sekali untuk mengenalpasti
kaedah mengurangkan kelewatan dalam projek pembinaan. Kajian mengunakan borang
soal selidik telah dijalankan untuk mengenalpasti punca-punca utama kelewatan dalam
usaha mengurangkan impak negatif terhadap projek pembinaan. Perspektif kontraktor,
konsultan dan klien telah dianalisis dan diranking berdasarkan Relative Important Index
(RII). Perbandingan di antara kekerapan dan tahap kesan terhadap punca-punca
kelewatan projek telah dilakukan di antara Johor dan Sabah.
Keputusan kajian
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
TITLE
PAGE
TITLE OF PROJECT
DECLARATION
ii
DEDICATION
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
ABSTRACT
ABSTRAK
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii
LIST OF TABLES
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
xv
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
1.2
Problem Statement
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Research Methodology
1.7
Chapters Organization
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Introduction
12
viii
2.2
Definition of Delays
13
2.3
Types of Delay
14
2.3.1
Excusable Delays
15
16
16
2.3.2
Non-Excusable Delays
17
2.3.3
Concurrent Delays
19
2.4
Causes of Delays
21
2.5
24
2.6
25
2.6.1
Client-related factors
26
2.6.2
Consultant-related factors
27
2.6.3
Contractor-related factors
28
2.6.4
Materials-related factors
29
2.6.5
Labour-related factors
29
2.6.6
30
2.6.7
31
2.6.8
External factors
32
2.7
Delay Responsibility
32
2.8
33
2.9
Documentation of Delays
35
2.10
Summary
35
Introduction
36
3.2
37
3.3
39
3.4
Summary
42
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1
Introduction
43
4.2
Data Collection
43
ix
4.2.1
Literature Review
44
4.2.2
Development of Questionnaire
44
4.2.2.1 Section A
45
4.2.2.2 Section B
46
4.2.2.3 Sections C
47
4.3
Questionnaire Distribution
47
4.4
Data Analysis
48
4.5
Summary
50
Introduction
51
5.2
Data Collection
51
5.3
Questionnaire Response
52
5.3.1
Respondents Position
52
5.3.2
53
5.3.3
5.3.4
55
Introduction
6.2
56
Causes of Delays
56
6.2.1
57
6.2.2
58
6.2.3
59
6.2.4
61
6.2.5
61
6.2.6
62
6.2.7
63
6.2.8
64
6.2.9
65
67
x
6.3
6.4
6.5
69
6.3.1
69
6.3.2
74
76
6.4.1
77
Summary
79
Introduction
80
7.2
80
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.2.3
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
81
7.3
81
Recommendations
82
83
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES NO
TITTLE
PAGE
1.1
Research methodology
2.1
25
2.2
34
3.1
41
4.1
4.2
46
46
4.3
47
5.1
52
5.2
53
5.3
54
5.4
54
5.5
6.1
58
6.2
59
6.3
60
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES NO
TITTLE
PAGE
6.4
61
6.5
62
6.6
63
6.7
63
6.8
64
6.9
66
6.10
66
6.11
68
6.12
68
6.13
69
6.14
71
6.15
74
6.16
78
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO
TITTLE
PAGE
1.1
Research Methodology
2.1
18
2.2
20
2.3
26
2.4
27
2.5
28
2.6
29
2.7
30
2.8
31
2.9
31
2.10
32
3.1
38
6.1
75
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
BNM
CIDB
EOT
Extension of Time
GDP
SCL
SDC
PGA
Pasukan Gerakan Am
PWD
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
TITTLE
PAGES
Cover Letter
93
Questionnaire Form
94
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Introduction
Many problems may arise during construction project implementation; one main
concern is delay. Delay is the time overrun either beyond completion date specified in a
contract, or beyond the date that the parties agreed upon for delivery of a project (Assaf
and Al-Hejji, 2006). There are many reasons that cause delays. According to Ogunlana
(2008), although the principle reasons for delays are comparable across developing
countries, several factors pertaining to local industry, social-economic, cultural issues
and project characteristics also contribute to delays. Delays may occur as a result of the
actions or inaction on the part of owner, contractor, subcontractors, consultants or the
government. In addition, delays are always interrelated which led to the more
complicated situation.
Delays in construction projects are considered one of the most common problems
causing a multitude of negative effects on the project and its participating parties. Along
with delay, the frequently faced consequences are project failure, reduction of profit
margin, and loss of belief of citizen in government funded projects, etc. When delays do
2
occur, they are either accelerated or have their duration extended beyond the scheduled
completion date. These are not without some cost consequences. Delays also give rise to
disruption of work and loss of productivity, late completion of project increased time
related costs, third party claims, abandonment and termination of contract (AbdulRahman H., 2006).
There is a room for improvement in present practices for keeping track of delays.
This research is carried out to study the causes and the severity effects on the delay
causes arising during construction phase of projects. In addition, the result of this
research would lead to recommendations aimed at reducing the impact of delay. If
construction delays can be avoided or mitigated, there could be substantial financial
savings on projects.
1.2
Problem Statement
Johor, for instance, is known as one of the developed state in Malaysia and
among the three main urban centers on the Peninsular Malaysia. It is a main contributor
of the national GDP in the country after Selangor and WP Kuala Lumpur (Department
of Statistics Malaysia, 2009). With a population of approximately 500,000 in the city, it
is an important industrial, tourism and commercial hub for Southern Malaysia and is part
of Southeast Asia's most populous urban areas. Tourism is a significant contributor to
the state's economy, as it receives 60% of the country's annual 16 million foreign tourists
via its bridges and road links to Singapore. Johor is expected to be the top economic
contributor to the country particularly after the completion of Iskandar Malaysia (The
Star, 2008).
4
Despite of their developments, delay becomes a problem that associates in the
construction project. The need to control the factors of delays during the construction
process comes out when the number of delays project have been increase from time to
time. Malaysian Treasury Secretary-general, Dr Wan Abdul Aziz stated that projects
with 30% or three months behind schedule are categorized as sick project (The Star,
2007). When a delay can no longer be absorbed by the client, it will lead in the project
being abandoned. According to numbers released by Ministry of Housing and Local
Government, about 115 abandoned housing projects are recorded since 1990 until June
2008 (Ministry of Housing and Local Government, 2008).
In Sabah, the most notable delay projects include the Kota Kinabalu International
Airport (KKIA) expansion project, road project from Kalabakan to Sapulut, Kinarut
PGA project and Karamunsing flyover (Daily Express, 2007). Similarly, in Johor, about
23 abandoned housing projects have been recorded until 30 June 2008 (Ministry of
Housing and Local Government, 2008). This record is excluded other types of project,
for example school building and infrastructure projects. In fact, the total number
reported by the Ministry also does not include projects undertaken by independent
contractors, cooperatives and others who are not under the purview of Housing
Development Act (Control and Licensing) 1966 (Act 118) (Bernama, 2008). If these
unrecorded projects are taken into considered, the actual figure of delays must be
enormous.
5
domestic economic activities and in enhancing economic growth in view of its linkages
to construction-related industries.
Chang (2002) suggested that identifying factors is usually the first step when
addressing a problem and then corrective actions can be taken. Hence, it is essential to
identify the causes of this problem in early stages of construction project. This research
will diagnose the main causes and effects of delays. The researcher will make a
comparison between two regions according to the scope. This is because the principle
reasons for delays may diverse at different places (Ogunlana and Prokuntong 2008).
6
1.3
The aim of this research are to study and evaluate issues related to the major
causes of construction project delays in Sabah and Johor region through a survey. In
achieving this aim, it is necessary to thoroughly review the existing literature and
researchs findings. Therefore, the objectives of this study are as follows:
i.
1.4
ii.
iii.
i.
ii.
7
1.5
There are several valuable benefits expected by implementing this study. The
significance of establishing the issues related to the construction project delays was to
provide a greater insight and understanding on the causes of delays particularly among
the main project players: contractors, client and consultants. This can be achieved by
applying theoretical concepts discussed in many literatures into practice in real projects.
It is hoped that these findings will guide efforts to improve the performance of the
construction industry and will be useful to the construction players. Therefore, these
findings might encourage the practitioner to focus on delay problem that might have
existed in their present or future projects. Other than that, this study is expected to
provide a better ways and methods in delivering construction projects by minimize the
major causes of delays.
1.6
Research Methodology
Literature review
Main survey
Analysis Data
Conclusion
Main Survey
(Structured Questions)
To obtain sample data of the
objectives no. 1, 2 and 3
Recommendation
Conclusion
Relative Importance
Index (RII)
Suggest methods to
mitigate delays based
on finding
After that, main survey questionnaires are prepared. The designed questionnaire
will be distributed to three principal construction parties namely; owner, consultant and
contractor. Upon the completion of the data analysis, discussion of these findings,
conclusions and recommendations will be presented.
1.6
Chapters Organization
The followings are the summary for each chapter on this research project paper.
This project paper organized into six chapters which can be summarized as follow:
a) Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter presents the background and general information which comprises
of introduction, issues and problem statements, research objectives, research
scopes, research significance, research methodology and chapters organization.
10
b) Chapter 2: Concept and Causes of Construction Delays
From the available literature, this chapter composed an overview of the
definition and various types of delay encountered in a project. It also includes the
overall delays concept along with the causes and further classification of delays,
responsibilities that the parties have in a delay, procedure taken when delays and
the documentation of delays.
11
Analysis and discussion in this chapter is carried out with regards to fulfilling the
objectives of the research.
CHAPTER 2
2.1
Introduction
Many factors relate to delay are vary along with types of project, locations, sizes,
and scopes. Some projects are only a few days behind the schedule, but some are
delayed over a year. Construction projects with their features of complexity and capital
requirement have resulted interest to many researchers. Therefore, it is necessary to
define the actual causes of delay in order to minimize the delays in construction projects.
13
This chapter explores the findings on the literature search. Before focusing on the
specific issue, the concepts of delays were explored including the definition and types of
delays. Subsequently, researcher presents the review of the groups causes and the factors
identified for each group causes. Most of materials that obtained from the literature are
cited in the references.
2.2
Definition of Delays
In the study of Assaf et al. (1995) construction delay was defined as the time
overrun either beyond completion date specified in a contract, or beyond the date that
the parties agreed upon for delivery of a project. Abd. Majid (1997) defined delays as
the time overrun beyond the contract date or beyond the date that the critical activities
have been delayed.
14
Delay, from the view of Bartholomew (1998) is slowing down of a work without
stopping it entirely. It is different from suspension, which means stoppage of work
directed to the contractor by a formal form from client. Aibinu and Jagboro (2002)
described delay as a situation when the contractor and the project owner jointly or
severally contribute to the non-completion of the project within the original or the
stipulated or agreed contract period.
Delay was also defined as an act or event which extends required time to perform
or complete work of the contract manifests itself as additional days of work (Zack,
2003). Majid I.A. (2006) interprets delay as a loss of time. Time refers to the duration
for completing the construction project. When the project period is delayed, it means the
project cannot be completed within original schedule.
2.3
Types of Delay
There are two main types of delay that occur on construction project, namely
excusable and non-excusable delays (Alkass et al., 1996). In actual practice, delays are
frequently difficult to sort out, separate and accurately access particularly in term of
claim process (Yates and Epstein, 2006). The terms of excusable and non excusable are
come from the perspective of contractor. A delay that is compensable is compensable to
the contractor but non-excusable to the employer. On the other part, a delay deemed as
non-excusable is compensable to the employer because it results in levying of liquidated
damages.
15
Delays that excuse a contractor from performing within the contract period and
justify an extension of time (EOT) to perform are excusable. According to Alkass et al.
(1996), excusable delays are those not attributable to the contractors actions or inactions
and typically include unforeseen events. These events are beyond the contractors
control and are without fault or negligence on his part. This type of delays can have an
impact on non-critical activities which need a more detailed analysis to determine
whether additional time extension is warranted, or if the reduction of float time can be
justified (Alkass et al. 1996). However, whether the delays are excusable is depends on
contract provision. Excusable delays can be further classified into delays with
compensation and without compensation. Figure 2.1 show the types of delay in
construction project.
A delay is deemed compensable to the contractor when its cause is within the
control of, is the fault of, or is due to the negligence of the project owner (Sweet 1977).
According to Alkass et al, (1996), contractors are entitled to a time extension as well as
monetary compensation due to this type of delays. However, the contractor must show
that the delay was "unreasonable" and prove the extent of the additional expense
involved (Clough, 1975). These delays result from circumstances such as:
1)
Failure of the owner to have the work site available to the contractor in a timely
manner;
2)
3)
16
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
Non-compensable excusable delays are result by the factors that beyond of the
contractors reasonable control and not attributable to the Contractors fault or
negligence (Ahmed et al., 2002). In Public Work Department (PWD) 203A standard
form of contract, this type of delays contain in a clause called the force majeure. When
this type of delay is encountered, the contractor will not receive any compensation for
the cost of delay, but he will be entitled only for an extension of time (EOT) to complete
the work and relieved from any contractually imposed liquidated damages for the period
of delay.
In order for delay to warrant an extension of contract time, the delay must affect
the completion of the project. This provides the basis for the high importance attached to
the use of critical path method (CPM) of scheduling for proving or disproving time
related claims such as extension of time and prolongation cost (Bramble and Callahan,
17
1992 ). The major elements that represent of non-compensable excusable delays include
events such as following (Sweet 1977):
1)
2)
Events beyond the contractor's control. These are cases in which work on the
project is impossible.
3)
Events without fault or negligence. Such events are those in which the contractor
is blameless, such as acts of god and labor or material shortages beyond what
was expected at the time the contract was made
In this category, the contractor's own actions or inactions have caused the delay.
It is a delay on which the contractor could have foreseen or prevented, but failed to do so
(Last, 1997). Consequently, this type of delay presents no entitlement to a time
extension or delay damages for the contractor, if the delay can be proved to have
affected the whole project. The owner, however, could be entitled to liquidated damages
(Alkass et al., 1996).
18
Owner-initiated changes
Late contract award
Differing site condition
With Compensation
Design problems
Suspension of work
Incomplete drawings or specifications
Excusable Delay
Acts of God
Unprovoked strikes
Without Compensation
Unusually severe weather
Unforeseen events
Types of Delay
Contractors management
Materials
Manpower
Non-Excusable Delay
Equipment
Sub-contractor
Improper planning
Financial difficulties
Poor coordination
Inadequate supervision
Improper construction method
Poor contract management
Lack of competence and skill
Materials shortages
Late delivery material delivery
Damages goods
Labour shortage
Poor workmanship
Slow mobilization of workers
Low productivity
Equipment shortages
Equipment breakdown
Low efficiency
Improper selection of equipments /tools
Sub-contractor delays
Sub-contractor interference
19
On the other hand, when two or more separate delay events occur during the
same time period, which affects the completion date experienced on a project are often
termed concurrent delays (Reynolds and Revay, 2001). If the delays are inextricably
intertwined, neither the contractor can be held responsible for the delay or recover the
delay damages from the owner (Ahmed et al, 2002).
DELAY
CLASSIFICATION
RESPONSIBILITIES
Neither Party
Owner
TYPES OF DELAYS
Excusable
Non-Excusable
Compensable
Liquidated
(Prolonged Cost +
Ascertained Damages
Extension of Time)
(LAD)
TIMING AND
DURATION OF DELAYS
Concurrent
Nonconcurrent
Serial
Independent
Non-Compensable
(Extension of Time)
Contractor
21
2.4
Causes of Delay
Bramble and Callahan (1992) cited a project may be delayed as a result of the
direct action of major parties, or of their failure to act especially if they have a duty to
act in the circumstances. The outside forces also could intervene to delay a project.
Hence, it is important to describe the causes of delay by looking at factors relating to
actions and inactions of project participants.
Naha, Norelina (2008) studied the causes of delay in building projects limited in
in Johor Bahru only. The study found that (1) contractors financial prolems, (2)
shortage in material, (3) fluctuation of materials price, (4) poor management and
planning, (5) poor subcontractor performance, (6) inclement weather, (7) inadequate of
contractors experience, (8) construction mistake and (9) poor monitoring and
controlling were the major causes of delays at the time.
22
contractors improper planning, (2) contractors poor site management, (3) inadequate
contractor experience, (4) inadequate clients finance and payments for completed work,
(5) problems with subcontractors, (6) shortage in material, (7) labour supply, (8)
equipment availability and failure, (9) lack of communication between parties, and (10)
mistakes during the construction stage.
Majid, I.A. (2006) carried out a study on causes and effect of construction
project delays in Acheh Indonesia. Contractor-related delays was ranked the most
significant groups that cause delays, followed by equipment-related delay, client-related
delays, material-related delays, finance related delays, consultant-related delays,
external-related delays, and labour related delays.
Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) have assesses the causes of delays in Nigeria. They
have analyzed quantitative data from completed building projects to assess the extent of
delays factors contributed to overall delays on a project. By using a Pareto analysis, they
revealed that 88% of the factors (representing 39 highest priority factors) were
responsible for 90% of the overall delays. The result of the study indicated that financing
projects in Nigeria continue to be one of the major sources of project delays and of poor
time performance.
23
productivity, slow decision making, improper planning, and subcontractors were among
the top ten most important factors.
Mezher and Tawil (1998) carried out a study on causes of delays in Lebanon
from the viewpoint of owners, contractors and architectural/engineering firms. It was
found that owners had more concerns with regard to financial issues, contractors
regarded contractual relationships the most important, while consultants considered
project management issues to be the most important causes of delays.
Assaf et al. (1995) have addressed 56 main causes of delay in Saudi Arabia large
building construction projects and their relative importance. Based on the contractors
24
surveyed the most important delay factors were: preparation and approval of shop
drawings, delays in contractors progress, payment by owners and design changes. From
the view of the architects and engineers the cash problems during construction, the
relationship between subcontractors and the slow decision making process of the owner
were the main causes of delay. However, the owners agreed that the design errors,
labour shortages and inadequate labour skills were important delay factors.
There were many possible causes that contribute to construction project delay.
However, according to Ogunlana (2008), although the principle reasons for delays are
comparable across developing countries, several factors pertaining to local industry,
social-economic and cultural issues and project characteristics also contribute to delays.
2.5
Moreover, it is essential to determine the correct factors that cause the problem
in order to establish appropriate permanent corrective actions (Abd. Majid, 1997).
Therefore, the groups of causes by previous researchers are used as to provide a basis in
establishing the groups of delays causes with parallel to these research objectives.
25
Table 2.1: Group causes of delays
Group Causes of Delays
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Act of God,
Design-related
Construction-related
Financial/Economical
Management/
Administrative
6. Code related
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Client-related
Contractor-related
Surveyor-related
Architect-related
Structural engineer related
Services engineer-related
Supplier-related
Subcontractor-related
External causes
2.6
For the purpose of this research, the causes of delay that been established by
Chan and Kumarasamy (1997); Odeh and Battaineh (2002); Sambasivam and Soon
26
(2006); Long et al. (2008) are used. Following are the classification, the sources of
delays that arise from each of these factor categories were identified from literature. All
of these will be used in designing the questionnaire as to achieve the objectives of this
research.
Several studies identified the factors of client related delays. Chan and
Kumarasamy (1997) in their study have listed the client characteristic, project financing,
client variation and interim payment to contractor. Sambasivam and Soon (2006)
identified the factor of interference, slow decision making and unrealistic contract
duration. Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) have added the factors of late contract award by
client. Based on the literature review, there are eight factors of client related delays were
identified as shown in Figure 2.2.
Change order
Financial difficulties
Uncooperative client
Client interference
Slow decision making
27
2.6.2 Consultant-related factors
Previous researchers have used this group of factors in their study. Chan and
Kumarasamy (1997) used the term of design team related factors. They elaborate the
factors into three: inadequate experience, project complexity and mistake in design.
Similarly, Ahmed S.M., et al. (2002) identified the factors of design development,
change order, changes in drawing and specifications, and incomplete document as
contributors to this group of delays. They grouped these factors into design related.
Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) separated the consultant related factors into each
design team participant: architect, structural engineer, services engineer and quantity
surveyor. They added the factors of late valuation work, late preparation of interim
valuation, inadequate supervision, late issuance of instruction and delay work approval.
Therefore, researcher concludes the consultant-related factors as in Figure 2.4.
Defects in design
Changes in drawings and specification
Mistake in design
Incomplete document/drawing
Consultant
related delay
28
Construction mistakes
Inadequate experience
Defective of works
Poor subcontractor performance
Improper planning
29
For this group cause, Chan and Sambasivam (1997) established the root causes
such as shortages, materials changes, delay in procurement and proportion of off-site
prefabrication. Other causes of delay are attributed to material-related factors include:
poor quality, damages materials, late delivery and shortage (Abd. Majid, 1997;
Sambasivam and Soon, 2006). Based on the previous literature review, researcher
decides to establish six factors of material-related delays as shown in Figure 2.6.
Shortage of materials
Materials
related delay
Several studies identified the factors of labour related delay. Sambasivam and
Soon (2006) in their study combined the labour factors and equipment related factor.
They identified the factors of labour supply, low productivity, equipment availability
and equipment failure. Chan and Kumarasamy (1997) identified the factors of low skill
30
level and weak motivation. Abd. Majid (1997) identified the factors of strike, poor
labour planning, slow mobilization, absenteeism and low morale. Based on the literature
review, there are seven factors of labour related delays were identified as shown in
Figure 2.7.
Unskilled labour
Low productivity
Shortage of manpower
Labour injuries/accident in site
Absenteeism
31
Equipment shortage
Wrong selection
Plant/Equipment
related delay
Low efficiency
Equipment breakdown and maintenance problem
Equipment delivery problem
Inadequate skill of operators
Sambasivam and Soon (2006) in their study established the contract relationship
related delay. They identified the factors of dispute and negotiation, inappropriate
organizational structure linking to the project and lack of communication. Not many
previous studies have focused to this group of causes. Researcher found that this factor
is essential to be considered. Therefore, the delay factors related to contract relationship
were listed as shown in Figure 2.9.
32
Delay that not caused by project participants are demarcated as external causes.
Following are the identified factors that arise from the external factors, particularly from
the work of Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006), Sambasivam and Soon (2006) and Chan and
Kumarasamy (1997). The external factors were listed as shown in Figure 2.10.
Government regulation
Problem with neighbour
Unforeseen site condition
Civil disturbance
2.7
Delay Responsibility
33
1)
Owner Responsible (or Agent): Contractor will be granted time extension and
additional costs (indirect), where warranted.
2)
3)
4)
Both Parties Responsible: Contractor will receive additional time to complete the
project but no costs will be granted and no damages/penalties assessed.
2.8
With time being the essence in most of the construction standard form of
contracts and with the project duration clearly defined, it is also important to follow the
procedures when delays occur. Table 2.2 indicates the procedure for an extension of
time under PAM 98 and PWD 203A standard form of contract.
PWD 203A
Clause
Contractors Obligations
Clause
3.1
43
23.4
Clause
Clause
23.2
43
23.1
23.3
23.3
23.5
43
Contractors Obligations
Upon it becoming reasonably apparent that the progress
of the works is delayed, forthwith give written notice of
delay to the S.O.
Constantly use his best endeavours to prevent delay.
35
2.6
Documentation of Delays
2.7
Summary
CHAPTER 3
3.1
Introduction
The latter effect will only occur when the delay lies on the critical path of the
programme. This chapter is a continuation of the findings on the literature search. It is
focusing on the review of delays effects that been identified by previous researchers. In
addition, it explored widely the methods of mitigation of delays recommended by
several researchers.
37
3.2
Abd. Majid (1997) state that delay may lead to disputes, low productivity and
increases in cost. Alkass et al. (1994) addressed that delay are costly and often result in
prolonged litigation by the parties. Additionally, associated delay problems can also
result in total abandonment of project (Aibinu and Jagboro, 2001).
Abdul-Rahman H. et al. (2006) in their study found that delays effect to the
disruption of work, loss of productivity, late completion of project, increased time
related costs, third party claims and termination of contract. Li et al. (2000) have shown
that additional costs, decline in quality and rework, are three possible situations due to
the delay.
Some extent the contract parties through claims usually agree upon the extra cost
and time elongation associated with delay. This has in many cases given rise to heated
arguments between the owner and contractor. Thus, delay could generate distrust and
create tension between the contractor, owner and the owners project management team
(Aibinu, 2009). It reduces the ability of the parties to resolve the claims expeditiously
due to delay. These have a debilitating effect on clients, contractors, and consultants in
terms of growth in adversarial relationships, mistrust, arbitration, cash-flow problems,
and a general feeling of trepidation towards each other (Ahmed, et al., 2002).
38
Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) added that processing time and cost related claims
associated with delays always generate dispute and further delays. Disputes may arise
from questions relating to causal factors, contract interpretation, and quantum of the
claims. In some instances delays occur that are neither the fault of the owner, nor their
consultants or contractors, or that may have concurrent or multiple causes which have to
be carefully analyzed in order to properly assess responsibility (Yates and Epstein,
2006). Enormous amounts of time and energy are expended to resolve issues related to
the causes of delays.
Time overrun
Cost Overrun
Major Effect
of Delays
Dispute
Arbitration
Litigation
Abandonment
Termination of Contract
39
3.3
Aibinu and Jagboro (2002) conducted a study on the effect of delays on project
delivery in Nigeria. They identified two methods to minimize or if possible eliminate
time overrun. There were acceleration of site activities and contingency allowance.
Odeh and Battaineh (2002) recommended the following to improve the delays
situation in Jordan: enforcing liquidated damage clauses; offering incentives for early
completion; developing human resources through proper training and classifying of
craftsmen; adopting a new approach to contract award procedure by giving less weight
to prices and more weight to the capabilities and past performance of contractors; and
adopting new approaches to contracting, such as design-build and construction
management types of contracts.
Ahmed S.M. et al. (2002) in their study of delays in Florida have recommended
streamlining the Buildings Permit Approval Process as much as possible. The issues
such as changes in drawings, incomplete and faulty specifications and change orders
must be controlled with proper design process management and timely decision making.
40
Majid, I.A. (2006) has conducted study of delays in Acheh Indonesia. He listed a
total of thirty five methods in order to minimize construction delays as shown in the
following.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
41
Kaliba, Muya and Mumba (2009) studied the schedule delays in road
construction projects in Zambia. They suggest the following recommendation to
minimize the causes and effect of schedule delays: project timing and scheduling; well
defined scope; accurate cost estimate; availability fund for project; effective
communication; deliberate scheme to build capacity building; and legislation and good
corporate government.
Methods
Utilization of the latest construction technology method
Frequent site meeting with all functional parties
Not awarding contract based on the lowest bid
Increase productivity by working overtime, shift, etc
Offer incentive for early project completion
Ask for extension of time
Execute delayed activities by subcontractors
Promote team working among project participants
Developing human resources management (training, day courses, etc)
Timely decision making by all functional group
Proper project planning and scheduling
Developing appropriate communication system linking to all functional group
Early in obtaining permit and approval from relevent authority
Thorough project feasibility study and site investigation
Accurate initial project cost estimation
Hire experience personnel for project implementation
Build a systematic project control and monitoring mechanism
Absence of bureaucracy
Proper emphasis on past experience of project parties
Accurate initial time estimation
42
21
22
23
3.4
Summary
CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1
Introduction
4.2
Data Collection
Data collection is the most critical part since the accuracy of the data obtained
will determine the success or failure of this research. The data of this research were
collect through the literature review and survey questionnaires.
44
The questions were designed related to the research objectives especially on the
causes of delays and proposed methods to minimize delays. Before designing the
questionnaire, there a very important point that needs to be considered. The questions
have to be short and precise without touching any sensitive or confidential issues as
reject may be offended (Taylor S, 2005). The purpose is to facilitate the respondents
understanding. Subsequently, the questionnaires were sent to 90 respondents (clients,
consultants and contractors) with the proportion of 50:50 in Johor and Sabah.
45
correction and reasonable amendment. After the form had been approved, it is made into
a numbers of copies and ready to be distributed.
The questionnaires were divided into three main sections. The respondents were
first asked about their personal and organization background in section A. Subsequently
in section B, the respondents were asked to state the frequency and severity effects on
the fifty six delay causes, according to their local working experience in construction
industry. Section C is about the methods that minimize construction project delays.
Respondent were required to give their opinion regarding the effectiveness of
minimizing delays method. In addition, respondents were also encouraged to cite
additional causes thought to extend the construction duration project by overall.
4.2.2.1 Section A
The organization or respondents name and official stamp are essential as to prove
that the questionnaire form was answered by respondent. In addition, it is to ease
researcher to contact the respondent for any clarification or follow-up questions purpose.
46
4.2.2.2 Section B
The questionnaire is based on Likert Scale of five ordinal measures from one (1)
to five (5) according to level contributing. According to John F. (2001), Likert Scale is
easier to use for respondent to express their level of opinion. For the frequency of
causes occurrence, each scale represents the rating as shown in Table 4.1. In a
meanwhile, Table 4.2 shows the rating for the severity of effects for the causes.
Table 4.1: Likert scale for frequency of occurrence of related delay causes.
Category
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Greatly often
Rating
Table 4.2: Likert scale for the severity of effects of related delay causes.
Category
Not affect
Slightly
affect
Moderate
affect
Great
affect
Very great
affect
Rating
47
4.2.2.3 Sections C
Table 4.3: Rating Scale for the proposed methods that minimize delays
Categories
Rating
Not effective
Low effective
Moderate effective
High effective
The respondents involved in this research were the clients, consultants and
contractors respectively in Johor and Sabah. According to Paul Cozby (2003) a large
sample data can give more accurate result. Therefore, researcher had distributed about
fifteen sets of the questionnaire form to each party in Johor and Sabah with the total is
ninety sets. The respondent is randomly selected, but for the contractor party, only grade
7 and 6 were been anticipated.
48
There were two main method been used for the purpose of this questionnaire
distribution; via mail delivery and by hand method. Even though there were another
alternatives that can be applied, but due to the time limited the researcher think that it is
reasonable to use those mention methods to fulfill the objectives.
According to Odeh and Battaineh (2002), Relative Importance Index (RII) is the
appropriate method in determining the ranking of different factors from the different
group of respondents. Since in this research need to rank the frequency of occurrence
and severity effect, therefore, to avert any confusion, RII in this context is named as
Frequency Index (F.I.) and Severity Index (S.I) as adopted from Lee et al., (2008).
Lee et al. (2008) used the frequency and severity index method to determine
the frequency of occurrence and level of severity effects on the delay causes. Five-point
scale ranged from 1 (Never) to 5 (Greatly Often) was adopted and transformed to
frequency index. Frequency index or F.I. expresses occurrence frequency of factor
responsible for delay and cost overruns. It is computed as shown in equation (1). Where:
49
a = constant expressing the weight assigned to each responses (ranges from 1 for Never
to 5 for Greatly Often), n = frequency of each response, N = total number of responses.
. .=
. (1)
The same procedure was adopted for ranking the severity of effect on the delay
causes. Severity index or S.I. is an index expresses severity of factor that caused delay
and cost overruns. The indices were evaluated using the similar expression, shown in
equation (2). Where: a = constant expressing the weight assigned to each responses
(ranges from 1 for Not Affect to 5 for very Great Affect), n = frequency of each response,
N = total number of responses.
. .=
. (2)
. = . x .
. (3)
50
4.2.5 Summary
In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the research methodology has
been established. This study was carried out based on literature review and questionnaire
survey. Next chapter would be the analysis and discussion for the research findings.
CHAPTER 5
5.1
Introduction
This chapter is presents in detail on the data collected and the analysis carried out
based on the methodology described in chapter 4. The analysis performs on the
information obtained through questionnaire survey. This chapter discusses the outcome
of the survey.
5.2
Data Collection
52
5.3
Questionnaire Response
Table 5.1: Statistical results for the respondents feedback in Johor and Sabah
Johor
Sabah
Group of
Respondents
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
Total
Percentage
Clients /Owners
Consultants
Contractors
Total
8
9
11
28
28.57
32.14
39.29
100.0
8
9
11
28
28.57
32.14
39.29
100.00
28.57
32.14
39.29
100.0
Table 5.2 represent for the distribution of the respondents by type of positions.
The highest percentage of respondents are consist of 39.29 percent engineers, 32.14
percent project manager, 14.29 percent quantity surveyor, 1.79 percent site manager and
the remaining are from types of others; town planners, development manager and site
officer. Thus, the respondents are eligible person to giving this researchs data.
53
Sabah
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
Total
Percentage
12
1
9
1
5
28
42.9
3.6
32.1
3.6
17.8
100.0
10
7
9
1
1
28
35.7
25.0
32.1
3.6
3.6
100.00
39.3
14.3
32.1
3.6
10.7
100.0
54
Sabah
Years working
experience
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
Total
Percentage
6
14
8
28
21.4
50.0
28.6
100.0
4
18
6
28
14.3
64.3
21.4
100.0
17.9
57.1
25.0
100.0
Sabah
Years working
experience
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
Total
Percentage
3
10
15
28
10.7
35.7
53.6
100.0
4
11
13
28
14.3
39.3
46.4
100.0
12.5
37.5
50.0
100.0
55
5.3.4 Respondents Most Delayed Project
Table 5.4 represents the results for the most delayed project by respondents. The
highest rate of 46.4 percent of the respondents having 3 to 6 month late, 33.95 percent of
having less than 3 month late and 19.65 percent of more than 6 month late for the actual
time spent for the most delayed project. This is important to ensure they are well
qualified to offer reliable opinions on the questionnaire.
Table 5.5: Statistical results for the most delayed project by respondents
Range of delay
duration
Less than 3 month
3 to 6 month late
More than 6 month
Total
Johor
Sabah
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
Total
Percentage
11
12
5
28
39.3
42.8
17.9
100.0
8
14
6
28
28.6
50.0
21.4
100.0
34.0
46.4
19.6
100.0
CHAPTER 6
6.1
Introduction
This chapter is presents the outcomes of the analysis on the data collected
through questionnaire survey. The analysis on the data and information gathered will be
based on the objectives to achieve the pre determined objectives of the study. This
chapter is divided under several headings. Under the heading, there would be sub
headings to ensure analysis and discussion is carried out in detail and specifically.
6.2
57
related,
consultant-related,
material-related,
contract-relationship
related,
plant
6.2.1
There are eight delay causes related to contractor were identified and ranked
from the viewpoint of respondents in Johor and Sabah. Table 6.1 shows the results of
survey analysis on the causes of contractors related delays. These causes were ranked
based on frequency and severity index between group of client, contractor and
consultant.
According to Table 6.1, financial difficulties was ranked as the most frequent
factor in Johor. This is followed by poor site management and supervision and poor
subcontractor performance. In term of its severity of effect to the project, financial
58
difficulties and poor site management and supervision remain the first and second
causes among the category of contractor-related delay. However, improper planning
which is at the sixth rank in frequency, has been ranked 3 in severity index. Contrarily in
Sabah, the top frequent causes of delay are poor site management, financial
difficulties and improper planning. Meanwhile, the top severity indexes are financial
difficulties, poor site management and supervision and improper planning.
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
0.6786
0.6857
0.6857
0.7143
Financial difficulties
0.7214
0.7929
0.6286
0.7143
Unsuitable construction
method
0.5500
0.5714
0.5143
0.5429
0.5143
0.5786
0.4571
0.5500
Inadequate contractor
experience
0.6071
0.6500
0.5000
0.5714
Defective of works
0.5786
0.6429
0.5357
0.5413
Poor subcontractor
performance
0.6786
0.7429
0.5571
0.6214
Improper planning
0.5643
0.7214
0.6286
0.6714
Table 6.2 represents the results of survey analysis on the causes of clients
related delays. Slow payment of completed work is the factor that always happens in
59
Johor, followed by financial difficulties of client and client interferences. However,
the severity effects of these causes were ranked at first, second and fifth respectively.
Differently in Sabah, slow decision making is the most frequent factor of delay with
the highest frequency index of 0.6929. This factor is underlying at rank 2 in term of its
severity effect to the project. The most severe cause is slow payment of completed
work.
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Client interference
0.6214
0.6071
0.5357
0.6000
0.5929
0.5786
0.6929
0.6857
Contract modification
0.5357
0.5786
0.5357
0.5929
Change order
0.6143
0.6643
0.5929
0.6000
0.6357
0.6429
0.4929
0.6429
Uncooperative client
0.5643
0.6000
0.4857
0.5929
0.6643
0.6714
0.6071
0.7786
0.5429
0.6429
0.4357
0.5357
There are ten causes of consultant related delays that been ranked by respondents
in Johor and Sabah as shown in Table 6.3. Among the causes in this group, late issue of
instruction is the frequent delay factor in Johor. However, this factor brings less severe
impact to project (rank 6). Similarly for the changes in drawings/specification,
whereby its severity is at the rank 7.
60
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Mistake in Design
0.5357
0.6286
0.4357
0.5643
Changes in drawings
/specifications
0.6071
0.6071
0.6286
0.6500
Incomplete
documents/drawing
0.5500
0.6286
0.5714
0.6071
Defects in design
0.5500
0.6071
0.4143
10
0.5500
Inadequate supervision to
contractor
0.6071
0.6643
0.5000
0.5500
0.5000
0.6429
0.5500
0.6429
0.6143
0.6071
0.5929
0.6500
0.5714
0.6000
0.4714
0.5214
0.5500
0.5786
0.5429
0.6286
0.4929
10
0.5143
10
0.4500
0.5071
10
61
6.2.4 Causes of Material Related Delays
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Shortage of material
0.6357
0.6929
0.4929
0.6286
Material procurement
problem
0.5500
0.6929
0.4857
0.5643
0.5857
0.5857
0.4714
0.5786
0.5071
0.5929
0.4786
0.5857
0.5857
0.6000
0.4857
0.6143
Noncompliance of material to
specification
0.5714
0.6214
0.4571
0.6071
Table 6.5 highlights the responses of survey expressed in frequency and the
severity indices for the plant/equipment related delays. Both respondents in Johor and
62
Sabah agreed that equipment breakdown and maintenance problem is the frequent
factors in their project. In term of severity, the similar factor shows the highest ranking
for both regions.
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Equipment shortage
0.5500
0.6214
0.4214
0.5214
Wrong selection
0.5214
0.5286
0.3857
0.5000
Low efficiency
0.5000
0.5143
0.4000
0.5214
0.5143
0.5786
0.4071
0.5357
0.4929
0.5571
0.4357
0.5429
0.6143
0.6143
0.4714
0.5500
Table 6.5 presents the result of contract-relationship related delays. It can be seen
that lack of communication is always happen in Johor, followed by coordination
problem and conflict between parties. Likewise, in Sabah, the similar factor; lack of
communication, is the most often factor that contribute to project delay. This factor also
brings severe impact since the severity index is higher than frequency index.
63
Table 6.6: The result of contract-relationship related delays
Johor
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
0.5500
0.5500
0.5071
0.6357
Difficulties of coordination
between parties
0.5714
0.5571
0.5000
0.5786
Lack of communication
between parties
0.5786
0.5286
0.5214
0.6071
Table 6.7 shows the result of labour related delays in Johor and Sabah. In Johor,
it can be seen that the top in ranking are shortage of manpower, followed by low
productivity and lack of skilled labour, for the both frequency and severity index.
However, the severity indices are higher than frequency indices for these causes.
Differently in Sabah, the most frequent factor is the shortage of manpower, lack of
skilled labour and low productivity. However, it brings less impact to the project.
Respondents in Sabah agreed that shortage of manpower can bring the biggest impact
to project.
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Labour disputes/strikes
0.4857
0.5786
0.3500
0.5286
Weak motivation
0.5071
0.5786
0.4000
0.5214
0.5714
0.6071
0.5071
0.5429
Low productivity
0.5929
0.6429
0.5357
0.5143
Shortage of manpower
0.6500
0.7214
0.5214
0.7000
64
Labour injuries/accident in
site
0.4571
0.4857
0.3714
0.4714
Absenteeism
0.4714
0.5214
0.4071
0.6000
There are eight factors of external related delays that contribute to construction
project delays, have been ranked by the respondents in Johor and Sabah as shown in
Table 6.8 Inclement weather condition was ranked as the most frequent and severe to
the construction project by respondents from both regions. The causes that less happen
in term of ranking in Johor and Sabah are civil disturbance, price fluctuation and act
of God. In both regions, there have similarity in ranking order for the severe delay
causes. They are unforeseen site condition, bad weather, act of God and price
fluctuation.
Sabah
Causes
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
F.I
Rank
S.I
Rank
Act of God
0.4929
0.5786
0.4643
0.6357
0.5857
0.6143
0.6214
0.6643
Price fluctuation
0.4929
0.5786
0.4643
0.6357
Government regulation
0.5143
0.5643
0.5286
0.6071
0.5571
0.5786
0.5714
0.6286
0.5429
0.6429
0.5286
0.7000
Civil disturbance
0.4500
0.4714
0.4286
0.5571
0.5357
0.5214
0.5286
0.6214
65
Previous section is the brief description on the result and analysis for the
objective 1. The result and analysis are based on the group causes respectively. This
section will be the analysis of delay causes based on overall fifty six causes. Table 6.9
and Table 6.10 were highlights the ranking of frequency of occurrence for the causes of
delays by overall. Top ten frequent causes of delays have been listed.
From table 6.9, the result reveals that contractor in Johor often encounter
financial problem during the construction phase. Poor site management/supervision,
poor subcontractor performance, slow payment of completed work and shortage of
manpower were ranked as the main problems. Two of them are related to incompetence
of managerial and operational problem in construction project. Slow payment by client
was affect to the contractor financial problem. Shortage of manpower, shortage of
materials and equipment breakdown problem represent as a sole factor from the group
of labour related, material related and equipment related delays. Overall, it was observed
that the top ten frequent causes were contributed from the group of client and contractor
related delays.
Table 6.10 shows the ranking of top ten causes based on its frequency of
occurrence. Contractor related, client related and consultant related delays were equally
the main group causes of delay in Sabah construction industry. . These group causes
contribute three factors from each group respectively. The causes with higher in
occurrence was led by slow decision making, poor site management and supervision
and changes in drawing and specification Inclement weather condition was the sole
factors represent from the group of external factor.
66
Group
F.I.
Rank
0.7214
Financial difficulties
Contractor
Contractor
10
0.6786
Contractor
12
12
0.6786
Client
0.6643
Shortage of manpower
Labour
10
0.6500
Material
0.6357
Client
0.6357
Client interference
Client
14
0.6214
Change order
Client
11
0.6143
Equipment
12
0.6143
10
F.I.
Rank
0.6929
Shortage of material
Group
Client
Contractor
11
0.6857
Changes in drawings/specifications
Consultant
0.6286
Financial difficulties
Contractor
0.6286
Improper planning
Contractor
0.6286
External
14
0.6214
Client
0.6071
Consultant
14
0.5929
Client
10
0.5929
Consultant
11
0.5714
10
67
Previously is the brief description on the result and analysis for the frequency of
occurrence. This section will be the analysis of the severity effect on the delay causes
based on overall fifty six causes. Top ten frequent causes of delays have been listed.
Table 6.11 and table 6.12 were highlights the ranking of severity effect for the
causes of delays by overall. In table 6.11, respondent in Johor agreed that contractors
financial problem, poor subcontractor performance, improper planning, shortage of
manpower and shortage of material are ranked as the main causes that bring severe
effect to the project. By overall, the causes from the contractor related category were
ranked as the severe causes to construction project. Shortage of manpower was among
the most severe factor in delay causes. It is quite difficult to prevent the movement of
these laborers from one construction company to another causing disruption of work.
Meanwhile, table 6.12 shows the ranking of severity effect for Sabah
construction project. Problems ranking from one to ten are mainly contributed by
contractors. The results indicate that there has linkage between the slow payment of
work by client and the financial difficulties of contractor. Both of these factors were
ranked at first and second. The contractors blame clients inability to pay for the
completed work. These causes can be attributed to the contractors financial position and
improper planning.
68
Group
S.I.
Rank
0.7929
Financial difficulties
Contractor
Contractor
11
0.7429
Improper planning
Contractor
0.7214
Shortage of manpower
Equipment
10
10
0.7214
Shortage of material
Material
10
0.6929
Material
0.6929
Contractor
10
0.6857
Client
0.6714
Change order
Client
0.6643
Consultant
10
11
0.6643
10
S.I.
Rank
0.7786
Group
Client
Financial difficulties
Contractor
0.7143
Contractor
11
10
0.7143
Labour
10
10
0.7000
External
12
0.7000
Client
13
0.6857
Contractor
13
0.6714
External
15
0.6643
Labour
0.6571
Consultant
11
0.6500
10
Shortage of manpower
Unforeseen site condition
Slow decision making
Improper planning
Inclement weather condition
Low productivity
Changes in drawings/specifications
69
6.3
In this section, the importance index (IMP.I) from all causes of delays in Johor
and Sabah were compared. A top twenty significant causes have been point out for this
comparison purpose as shown in Table 6.13.
Causes
Contractor
Financial difficulties
Poor subcontractor performance
Poor site management
Improper planning
Inadequate contractor
experience
Defective of works
Client
Group of Causes
Causes
Consultant
Inadequate supervision to
contractor
Late issue of instruction
Incomplete documents/drawing
Delay of work approval
Material
Shortage of material
Labour
Shortage of manpower
External
70
In Table 6.13 shows the comparison of importance index (IMP.I.) and ranking
between Johor and Sabah. There are no similarities either in ranking order or the
importance indices between Johor and Sabah. Few significant causes of delay in Johor
are found to be insignificant in Sabah construction industry and vice versa.
The top causes with highest difference of IMP.I between Johor and Sabah were
poor subcontractors performance (0.1579), slow decision making by client (0.1321),
shortage of materials (0.1307), inadequate supervision to the contractor (0.1283) and
financial difficulties of contractors (0.1230). The facts indicate that construction work
culture was different between these regions.
Table 6.14 shows the financing projects in Johor construction industry become a
top major source of project delays. It is followed by poor subcontractor performance
and poor site management/supervision. The respondents in Sabah have opposite view
about financial issue. The difference of IMP.I.for this factor is 0.1230. It indicates that
financial difficulties is not a significant factor in Sabah. Contractors poor site
management is the most significant causes in causing the construction project delays in
Sabah.
This result indicates that local contractors in the Sabah face problem in site
planning, implementation and controls of project. The highest differences of IMP.I.
among this group causes is poor subcontractors performance. This factor is more
significant in Johor but less important in Sabah. The capability of a subcontractor is
essential to complete a project on time. High degree of subcontracting in Malaysia often
leads to the risk of delays (Sambasivam and Soon, 2007).
71
Group
Johor
IMP.I
Rank
Sabah
IMP.I
Rank
Financial difficulties
Contractor
0.5720
0.4490
Contractor
0.5041
0.3462
14
Labour
0.4689
0.3650
Contractor
0.4653
0.4898
Client
0.4460
0.4727
Material
0.4405
0.3098
17
Client
0.4087
0.3168
16
Change order
Client
0.4081
0.3557
11
Improper planning
Contractor
0.4071
0.4220
Consultant
0.4033
10
0.2750
20
Contractor
0.3946
11
0.2857
19
Client
0.3773
12
0.3214
15
Consultant
0.3730
13
0.3854
Defective of works
Contractor
0.3719
14
0.2900
18
External
0.3598
15
0.4128
External
0.3490
16
0.3700
Consultant
0.3457
17
0.3469
13
Client
0.3430
18
0.4751
External
0.3223
19
0.3592
10
Consultant
0.3214
20
0.3536
12
Shortage of manpower
Shortage of material
Client interference
Incomplete documents/drawing
Slow decision making
The analysis of the significant causes revealed that slow payment of completed
work is at rank 5 in Johor. Differently in Sabah, slowness of decision making is the
second major source of delay in client related category. The highest difference of IMP.I
is 0.1321, underlie at slowness of decision making by client. It is significant in Sabah
but less important in Johor. Poor site management and supervision was ranked at one
in Sabah. Ineffective management of the site operations can be due to a lack of
experience and training at both the technical and the managerial level.
72
Clients are taking the leading roles in the development of construction industry.
If their action is slow, it can retard the construction teams works. Slow payment of
completed works is a common complaint among contractors, particularly in government
funded project. The progress of works can be delayed due to the late payments because
of scarcity cash flow in contractors financial. Slowness of decision making by client
have caused schedule and expenditure increase from the side of contractors. This
problem is due to the heavy workload of the persons, especially who handle the project
from the side of client. Several numbers of projects handled by one person are resulting
slow decision making to the project.
In Johor, inadequate supervision to contractor was at the rank 5 for the most
significant factor in construction project. The factor with highest difference of IMP.I is
inadequate supervision, whereby it is very significant in Johor but not as much of
imperative in Sabah. Monitoring for workmanship quality during construction phase is
one of the major tasks for the consultants. On other part, main contractor are required to
report on the design and supervision works directly to client team on a regular interval.
Failure to make a proper supervision on the contractors work can lead to deficiency in
the quality of construction. Rework might be order during the final inspection. This
leads to the incomplete project as planned schedule.
73
cement, steel, bricks and so on. This result is similar in term of significant causes in
previous research by Naha, Norelina (2008).
acquisition of foreign workers in Johor. The illegal workers are frequently caught by the
Malaysian immigrant officials and deported and this results shortage of labour pool in
the industry market. Differently in Sabah, the flooding of illegal workers particularly
from Philippine is no-end issue and become the national problem. Workers are plenty
available for construction projects
74
There are many reasons may consequence to project delay during the
construction phase. In this research, based on data analyzed earlier, fifty six causes of
delays were grouped into eight in local construction project. In order to make a
comparison results between data from Johor and Sabah, the group of delay causes was
ranked based on the average of importance index between two group of respondent;
Johor and Sabah as shown in Table 6.15. The following is a brief discussion of the
groups to causes of delays according to the ranking of major delays groups.
Johor
Sabah
Mean
Rank
0.3530
1
Mean
0.4159
Rank
1
0.3726
0.3476
0.3620
0.2855
0.3397
0.3058
0.3199
0.2470
Contract-relationship Related
0.3089
0.3094
Plant/Equipment Related
0.3040
0.2225
External Factors
0.2979
0.3276
As shown in Figure 6.15, contractor related delays ranked as the most critical
category followed by client related delay in both regions. Subsequently, in Johor, rank 3
was lead by material related, consultant related, labour related, contract-relationship
related, plant/equipment related and external factors. In Sabah, the next important
category of delay causes were external factors, contract-relationship related, consultant
related, material related, labour Related and plant/equipment related. Figure 6.1
illustrates the comparison of major group of causes for these regions.
75
Based on Figure 6.1, the highest differences of mean index between these two
regions were underlie at plant/equipment related (0.0815), materials related (0.0765),
labour related (0.0729) and contractor related (0.0629). The categories of contractrelationship related almost reach similar mean index with difference of mean index is
0.0005.
0.4500
Mean of RII
0.4000
0.4159
0.3530
0.3500
0.3726
0.3476 0.3397
0.3058
0.3000
0.3620
0.2855
0.3094
0.3089 0.3040
0.3199
0.3276
0.2979
0.2470
0.2500
0.2225
0.2000
0.1500
Johor
0.1000
Sabah
Group of Causes
The group of contractor related delays and client related delays were ranked
among top group of causes. From a total of eights causes in contractor-related group,
there are six causes include in the top twenty most important factors that causes of
project delays. It is indicates that contractors plays key roles to determine the success of
project completion on time.
76
Poor site management and supervision, improper project planning, financial
difficulties, inadequate experience in construction, defective of works and poor
performance were the causes lead to project delays. The client related group was ranked
as the most important group mainly due to changes orders, which are considered very
intricacy among project team. By referring to Table 6.13, there are five of eight causes
of client related delays were among the top twenty most important.
Additionally, slowness in making decision from client side have give affect to
project team. This is because in certain cases the client has no priority/urgency to
complete the project. This issue can be controlled with proper process management and
timely decision making. It is a well know fact that decisions made early in the life of a
project have the most profound effect on the projects objectives of delivering a safe,
quality project within the time and budget allocated.
6.4
77
Project delays have been a topic of concern in the construction industry. Delays
can be minimized only when their causes are identified. Knowing the cause of any
particular delay in a construction project would help avoiding the effects. In Table 6.16
shows ranking of the top fifteen effective methods of minimizing construction delays
from the viewpoint of respondents in Johor and Sabah.
These methods were ranked based on the relative importance index as mention in
chapter 4. There have a closer consensus between respondents in Johor and Sabah. Both
are agreed that emphasize on the availability of resources, proper project planning and
scheduling and hire competent project manager are among top 5 effective methods to
mitigate delays. The availability and competency of resources (money, workmen,
materials, equipment, etc) are very essential parts to ensure the construction projects run
smoothly.
On the other part, Johor respondents suggest the incentive for early project
completion is the most effective methods since this is one type of motivation to the
construction team as encouraging them to expedite works and complete project on time.
Contrarily in Sabah, the respondents agreed that the better method to avert delays is the
competency of project manager. A competent project manager possibly can handle well
his project from time overrun.
78
Sabah
Proposed Method
RII
Rank
RII
Rank
0.7500
0.6929
0.7000
10
0.6500
10
0.7929
0.6643
0.7000
10
0.6714
0.7714
0.7286
0.7214
0.7357
0.7214
0.7000
0.7143
0.6357
11
0.7357
0.6357
0.7571
0.6929
0.7429
0.7071
0.7000
10
0.6929
0.7857
0.7429
0.7714
0.7857
0.7571
0.7786
79
6.5
Summary
Thus, the following chapter, which is the final chapter, will comprise of
conclusion, and recommendation for this study, and recommendation for further
research on this topic. Problems that exist during the study and the limitation will also be
described in the following chapter.
CHAPTER 7
7.1
Introduction
From the previous chapter analysis and discussions, it is seen that the
objectives of this study are achieved. Therefore, in this final chapter of the research
project paper, the overall conclusion and summary of the study will be made. Along
with that, any recommendation for this study as well as recommendation for pursuing
this study will also be described in this chapter.
7.2
The followings are the conclusions derived from the literature study and questionnaire
survey conducted.
81
First objective has been achieved through literature review. From the
literature review, about fifty six causes of delay in local construction market have
been identified. The delay causes were grouped into eight; Contractor related, Client
related, Consultant related, Material related, Plant/equipment related, Labour related,
contract-relationship related and External factors. All these causes of delay are
shown in chapter 2. The results for the objective 1 are shown in Table 6.9, Table
6.10, Table 6.11 and Table 6.12.
In Johor, the results for the frequency of occurrence based on priority are:
Contractors financial difficulties, Poor site management/supervision, Poor
subcontractor performance, Slow payment of completed work and Shortage of
manpower. Subsequently, the causes with highest severity effect to construction
project are: Contractors financial difficulties, Poor subcontractor performance,
Improper planning, Shortage of manpower and Shortage of material.
Meanwhile, the most frequent in occurrence for delay causes in Sabah are:
Slow decision making, Poor site management/supervision, Changes in
drawings/specifications,
Contractors
financial
difficulties
and
Improper
planning. Causes of delay that bring severely impact to project are: Slow payment
of
completed
work,
Contractors
financial
difficulties,
Poor
site
7.2.2 Objective 2: To compare the significant causes of delays in Johor and Sabah
To acquire the most significant causes among the fifty six delay causes, the
Importance index are computed based on both frequency and severity indices.
Comparison results between Johor and Sabah were made into two ways; comparing
the overall causes and comparing according to the group of causes.
82
The most significant delay causes in Johor are based on priority are:
Contractor financial difficulties, Poor subcontractor performance, Shortage of
manpower, Poor site management/supervision and Slow payment of completed
work. Contrarily in Sabah, the important causes of delay are lead by Poor site
management/supervision, Low speed of decision making by client, Slow payment
of completed work, Contractor financial difficulties and improper planning of
works by contractor.
For the comparison of group causes, Johor has higher mean of importance
index for six groups of delay causes than Sabah. There are: contractor related delay,
client related delay, consultant related delay, materials related delay, plant/equipment
related delay and labour related delay.
The third and last objective was achieved through questionnaire survey. A
total of thirty three methods of minimizing delays were identified. The most effective
methods proposed by respondents in Johor include: incentive offer for early project
completion; proper project planning and scheduling; hire experience personnel for
83
project implementation; emphasizing on the availability of resource and hire
competent project manager.
7.3
Recommendations
i.
Contractor related delays have contributed a large part for significant causes
of delay. The result of the study indicated that financing projects is one of the
major sources of project delays. Therefore, contractor selection stage must
receive more serious consideration. It is essential to choose a contractor with
strong financial background. Apart from that, the selected contractor must
have sufficient experience, technical capability, and sufficient manpower to
execute the works. A mechanism that closely stipulates feasibility study,
contractor selection must have to strictly apply. Any red tape during the
tender bidding should be removed to improve the local construction industry.
ii.
Poor site management is one of the most significant causes in causing the
construction delays in Sabah. This factor is responding to the issues that arise
at the site and causes negative impact on the overall work progress. This
84
failure is interconnected with lack of systematic site management and
inadequate contractors experience towards the projects. It is important to
early recognize the need for better site management and supervision by
contractors to meet the needs of more efficient and timely completion of
projects. The knowledge of constructability should be possessed by
contractor to achieve a better site management.
iii.
iv.
Client related delay also contribute a large portion among these twenty
significant causes of delay. Clients must make quick decisions regarding any
matter that arise during the project execution. Low speed of decision is due to
incompetent person who handle the project from the side of client. In
addition, the person might be having too much project to be handled in at the
same time. Therefore, government should establish a standard number of
projects to be handled in one time. One staff should handle appropriate
number of project. Sufficient number of professionals should be provided in
client part. Hence, this can avert the slowness of decision making made by
client.
v.
85
require a competent and experience personnel. Where possible, project
managers need to have experience and qualifications in project or
construction management so that they can effectively utilize well the project
management tools that are available (project planning and scheduling tools).
vi.
vii.
86
REFERENCES
Ahmed, S.M., Azhar, S., Castillo, M. and Kappagantula, P. (2002). Construction Delays
in Florida: An Empirical Study. Department of Construction Management, Florida
International University of Miami.
Aibinu A.A. and Jagboro G.O. (2002). The effects of construction delays on project
delivery in Nigerian construction industry: International Journal of Project
Management. (20): 593-599.
Aibinu A.A. and Odeyinka H.A. (2006). Construction Delays and Their causative
Factors in Nigeria. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 132(7):
667-677
Aibinu A.A. (2009) Avoiding and Mitigating Delay and Disruption Claims Conflict:
Role of Precontract Negotiation, Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution
in Engineering and Construction, Vol. 1(1): 47-58.
87
Akinsola A.O. (1996) Neural network model for predicting building projects
contingency, ARCOM 96, Sheffield Hallam University, England, 1113 September
1996. pp. 507-16.
Alkass S., Mazerolle M. and Harris F. (1996). Construction Delay Analysis Techniques:
Journal Construction Management and Economic. 14(5): 375-394.
Assaf S.A. Al-Khalil M. and Al-Hazmi M. (1995). Causes of Delay in Large Building
Construction Projects: Journal of Management in Engineering ASCE. 11 (2): 4550.
Assaf, S. A, and Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of delay in large construction
projects.International Journal of Project. Management. 24(4): 349-357.
Bernama (Nov, 2008). Review Needed To Avoid Abandoned Housing Projects. http://
www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/bm. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Braimah N. (2008). An investigation into the use of Construction Delay and Distruption
Analysis Methodologies. University of Wolverhampton. PhD. Thesis.
Bramble B.B. and Callahan M.T. (1992). Construction delay claims, 2nd Edition.,
Wiley, New York.
88
Chang, A. S. (2002). Reasons for cost and schedule increase for engineering design
projects. Journal of Management and Engineering, 18(1): 29-36.
Kaliba, C. Muya M. and Mumba K. (2009). Cost escalation and schedule delays in road
construction projects in Zambia. International Journal of Project Management
Vol. 27: 522531
Last W.C. (1997). Can you recover for construction delays?. http://library.findlaw.com
/2000/May/1/128355.html. As retrieved on 31.06.2009
Lee J.Y., Lee Y.D. and Hoai L.L. (2008). Delay and Cost Overrun in Vietnam Large
Construction Projects: A Comparison with other Countries. Korean Society of
Civil Engineering. Journal of Civil Engineering (2008) 12 (6):367-377.
89
Li, H., Love, P.E.D. and Drew, D.S. (2000), Effects of overtime work and additional
resources on project cost and quality, Journal of Engineering, Construction,
Architecture and Management, 7(3): 211-220.
Majid, Ibnu Abbas (2006). Causes and Effect of Delays in Acheh Construction Industry.
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Master Thesis.
Mezher T.M. and Tawil, W. (1998). Causes of delays in the construction industry in
Lebanon. Engineering Construction and Architectural Management Journal 5(3):
251-260.
Odeh A.M. and Battaineh H.T. (2002). Causes of construction delay: traditional
contracts. International Journal of Project Management 20:67-73
Peurifoy, R.L. and Ledbetter W.B. (1985). Construction planning equipment and
methods, 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.
90
Sabah Tourism Board (2008). Sabah Tourism Board Official Website. http://www.sabah
tourism.com/sabah-malaysian-borneo/en/home/. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Sambasivam M. and Soon Y.W (2007), Causes and Effects of Delays in Malaysian
Construction Industry. International Journal Project Management.
SCL (2002). Society of Construction Law: Delay and Disruption Protocol. http://www.
eotprotocol.com. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Spittler, J.R., and Jentzen, G.H. (1992), Dispute resolution: Managing construction
conflict with step negotiations. AACE Transactions, D9, 110.
Taylor S. (2005). Communication for Business: A practical Approach, 4th edition. United
Kingdom: Pearson.
The Star (June 2007). Treasury puts its foot down on project delays. http://thestar.com.
my. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Tse Y.C. and Love P.E. (2001). An Economic Analysis of the Effect of Delays on
Project Costs. Journal of Construction Research, Vol. 4 (2): 155-160
Potts K. and Patchell B. (1995) Major construction works: Contractual and financial
management. Longmans Scientific and Technical, England.
91
Reynolds R.B. and Revay S.G. (2001) Concurrent Delay: A Modest Proposal. Revay
Report. Vol.20 (2).Revay and Associates Limited, Montreal.
Utusan Malaysia (May, 2009). Kementerian kurang senang projek lewat. http://www.
utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2009&dt=0519&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec
=Dalam_Negeri.htm. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Utusan Malaysia (Aug 28, 2008). KDNK Sabah dijangka naik RM63 bilion.
http://utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2008&dt=0828&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&
sec=Sabah_%26_Sarawak&pg=wb_03.htm. As retrieved on 26.05.2009
Yates J.K. and Epstein A. (2006). Avoiding and Minimizing Construction Delay Claim
Disputes in Relational Contracting: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering
Education and Practice. 132(2): 168-179.
Zack, J.G. (2003). Schedule delay analysis; is there agreement?. Proceeding PMI-CPM
College of Performance Spring Conferens. May 7-9. Project Management Institute
College of Performance Management, New Orleans.
APPENDICES
STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
QUESTIONNAIRE
Details of researcher:
Name
Course
Matric No.
MA081333
Contact No.
016-8242093
dayangsabriah@yahoo.com
Supervisor
Contact No.
016-7124248
All data compiled are solely for academic purposes only. All your answers will be treated
as CONFIDENTIAL. Your cooperation is much appreciated. Once you have filled in the
questionnaire, please return it by using the envelope provided. A timely reply is crucial
for analysis.
STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL
Introduction
This is a comparative study between two region, respectively located in East and West
Malaysia; Johor and Sabah. It is expected that this research will provide some good
empirical data on the extent and ways to reduce delay in construction projects. The reasons
for these delays will also be documented with an overall aim to provide guidelines for
future owners, builders, designers, and managers of construction projects on the dos and
donts for devising effective systems to deliver projects on time, within budget, and to
quality standards, which fully satisfy the clients as well as the intended end-users.
Objectives
Objectives of the Study:
1.
To study the causes of delays in term of degree of occurrence and severity of effects
2.
3.
Instructions
This questionnaire consist of three (3) section:
Section A : Company Respondent Profile and Project Description
Section B : The Causes and Effect of Delays
Section C : Methods of Minimizing Project Delays
Please take a look at the following questionnaire and try to answer correctly and accurately.
All the information gathered here will be kept strictly confidential and will be used only for
research and analysis without mentioning the person or company names.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND COORPERATION AND TIME
96
SECTION A: RESPONDENT DETAILS
All the answers in this questionnaire will be treated with the strictest confidential. Please thick the
box and fill in the blanks if you select others.
1. State the type of your organization or company.
Contractor
Others:
Contact No. : ..
Signature:
Date: .
96
97
SECTION B: CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF DELAYS
Read through the list. For each option, please circle to show your answers based on the rating scale
given below and fill in the blanks if you select others.
Question 1: What is the frequency of occurrence for the following related causes of delays associated
with your project(s)?
Question 2: What is the severity of effects for following related causes of delays associated with your
project(s)?
Rating Scale for Question 1
Greatly often
Often
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
5
4
3
2
1
Frequency of Occurance
5
4
3
2
1
Severity of effect
Financial difficulties
Defective works
Improper planning
Others : _____________________
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Client interference
Contract modification
Change order
Uncoorperative client
Others : _____________________
97
98
Consultant Related Delays
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Mistakes in design
Changes in drawings/specifications
Incomplete documents/drawing
Defects in design
Others : _____________________
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Shortage of material
Noncompliance of material to
specification
Others : _____________________
Contract-relationship Related
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Others : _____________________
98
99
Plant/Equipment Related
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Equipment shortage
Wrong selection
Low efficiency
Others : _____________________
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Labour disputes/strikes
Weak motivation
Low productivity
Shortage of manpower
Absenteeism
Others : _____________________
External Factors
Frequency of Occurance
Severity of effect
Act of God
Price fluctuation
Government regulation
Civil disturbance
Others : _____________________
99
100
SECTION C: METHODS OF MINIMIZING PROJECT DELAYS
Please, thick for your selected answer based on the rating scale given below and fill in the blanks if
you select others.
Questions 3 : How did the effectiveness of the following methods minimise delays?
Rating Scale for Question 3
Very high effective
High effective
Moderate effective
Low effective
Not effective
5
4
3
2
1
Proposed Methods
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
1 2
3 4
100