CAUSES OF DELAY IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

A focus on government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar

by
Kanchana Amarasinghe

Supervised by
Dr. Martin Graham

Dissertation submitted to the

School of Construction Management and Engineering,
University of Reading,

in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Degree of Master of Science in Surveying

February 2016
 Abstract

Name : Kanchana Amarasinghe

Student Number : 1300260

Title : Causes of delay in the construction industry

Subtitle : An investigation into causes of delay in government

funded infrastructure projects in Qatar and developing
guideline to mitigate those delays

Month/Year of Submission : February 2016

__________________________________________________________________________

This study focused on causes, effects and causative groups of delay pertaining to
government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar. Considering the number of fast track
projects in Qatar, studies like this are crucial since construction delay is a common problem
around the globe as identified from the literature review.

Having identified 34 causes of delays and 7 effects as appropriate to this study from the
literature review, quantitative and qualitative data were collected from questionnaires and
interviews respectively and they were triangulated to identify their correlation. Priority was
given to the interviews due to their better quality.

In conclusion, the Clients were found as the main delay causative group. “Slow decision
making”, “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” by the
Client and “Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” by the
Contractor were identified as the most critical causes of delay. Time and cost overruns
were the major effects of delay.

Recommendations were made for the construction practice in Qatar and the future
researches mainly based on the interviewees suggestions.

Keywords: construction projects, delay, infrastructure, government sector, Qatar.

ii
 Declaration

I, the undersigned, declare that this is my own work, unless due acknowledgement is made
to the contrary.

I also agree that, subject to any confidentiality agreement, the College of Estate
Management is permitted to use and/or make reference to the material contained in this
document within its study materials or any other publication, provided appropriate
acknowledgement is made.

_______________________ ______________

Kanchana Amarasinghe Date

Student Number: 1300260

iii
Table of Contents

Page
Abstract.................................................................................................................................. ii
Declaration………….................................................................................................................. iii
Table of contents................................................................................................................... iv
List of tables.......................................................................................................................... viii
List of figures.......................................................................................................................... ix
Acknowledgements............................................................................................................... x
Abbreviations and Acronyms................................................................................................. xi

Chapter 1: Introduction........................................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction........................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Background: A Brief Overview of Qatari Construction Industry.......................... 1
1.3 Statement of problem ………………........................................................................ 2
1.4 Hypothesis…………..…….………………....................................................................... 2
1.5 Objectives………………………………......................................................................... 2
1.6 Limitations……………….………………......................................................................... 3
1.7 Chapter outline…………..………………...................................................................... 3
1.8 Summary…….………….……………….......................................................................... 3

Chapter 2: Literature Review................................................................................ 4

2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................... 4
2.2 The definition of delay………………....................................................................... 4
2.3 Types of delay in construction.…........................................................................ 4
2.3.1 Non-excusable delays.….................................................................... 4
2.3.2 Excusable, but non-compensable delays.......................................... 5
2.3.3 Excusable and compensable delays.................................................. 5
2.3.4 Concurrent delays.….......................................................................... 5
2.4 Causes, effects and mitigation of delay in construction.................................... 5
2.5 Identification of delay causative groups........................................................... 13
2.5.1 Delay causative groups focused on responsible parties.................. 14
2.5.2 Delay causative groups based on causes’ nature……….................... 14
2.5.3 Combined delay causative groups................................................... 15
2.5.4 Listing of causes based on the category of delay............................. 15

iv
 2.6 Critical review of the literature…………………………………………………..................... 19
2.6.1 Similarities and differences of researches……………........................ 19
2.6.2 Identifying major causes of delay …………………………........................ 20
2.6.3 Identifying the main effects of delay............................................... 20
2.6.4 Research limitations …….................................................................. 20
2.7 Research methodologies ……………..................................................................... 21
2.8 Summary……..……..…….………………...................................................................... 21

Chapter 3: Research Methodology...................................................................... 22

3.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 22
3.2 The research paradigms.................................................................................... 22
3.3 Research philosophies…………………................................................................... 23
3.4 Research approaches…………………..................................................................... 23
3.4.1 Deductive approach…………………………………………………..................... 23
3.4.2 Inductive approach…………………………….……………………..................... 24
3.5 Choice of research strategy……………................................................................. 25
3.5.1 Survey…........................................................................................... 27
3.5.2 Sampling…....................................................................................... 28
3.5.2.1 Probability sampling ………………………………....................... 29
3.5.2.2 Non-probability sampling ………………………….................... 29
3.5.3 Case studies….................................................................................. 30
3.5.4 Action research……………………………………………………......................... 30
3.5.5 Mixed methods…............................................................................. 31
3.6 Time horizon……………………………………............................................................... 31
3.7 Credibility of research findings ……………........................................................... 32
3.7.1 Reliability ……………………..…………………………………………..................... 32
3.7.2 Bias and errors….…………..………………………………………….................... 32
3.7.3 Validity….......................................................................................... 33
3.7.4 Generalisability …............................................................................ 34
3.8 Research ethics………………………………................................................................ 34
3.9 Data collection………………………………................................................................. 35
3.9.1 Primary data collection through questionnaires ….......................... 35
3.9.1.1 Types of questionnaire …................................................. 36
3.9.1.2 Pros and cons of questionnaire....................................... 36
3.9.2 Primary data collection using interviews …..................................... 36
3.9.2.1 Types of interviews…………………………............................... 37
3.9.2.2 Pros and cons of interviews………………….......................... 37
3.9.3 Secondary data collection………………………..................................... 38

v
 3.10 Data analysis……………………………………………………………..................................... 39
3.10.1 Quantitative data analysis………………………..................................... 39
3.10.2 Pros and cons of quantitative data analysis.................................. 41
3.10.3 Qualitative data analysis………………………....................................... 41
3.10.4 Pros and cons of qualitative data analysis..................................... 42
3.11 Adopted research design…………………………………..…………................................ 44
3.12 Summary…....................................................................................................... 46

Chapter 4: Data Collection, Analysis and Results................................................ 47

4.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 47
4.2 Data collection through questionnaires and analysis....................................... 47
4.2.1 Profile of respondents..................................................................... 47
4.2.2 Top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on impact…….. 50
4.2.3 Top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on frequency
of occurrence................................................................................. 51
4.2.4 Causes of delay from questionnaire based on both impact and
frequency of occurrence................................................................. 52
4.2.5 Ranking of delay causing categories based on questionnaire data. 52
4.2.6 Ranking of effects of delay based on questionnaire responses...... 53
4.3 Data collection through interviews and analysis.............................................. 54
4.3.1 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on impact………..... 54
4.3.2 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on frequency of
occurrence................................................................................ 54
4.3.3 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on both impact
and frequency of occurrence.......................................................... 55
4.3.4 Ranking of delay causing categories based on interview data........ 56
4.3.5 Ranking of effects of delay based on interviews............................. 57
4.4 Triangulation of data collected through questionnaires and interviews.......... 57
4.4.1 Causes of delay based on impact.................................................... 57
4.4.2 Causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence........................ 57
4.4.3 Causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence……………………………………………………………………..………..... 58
4.4.4 Delay causing categories based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence……………………………………………………………………..………..... 58
4.4.5 Effects of delay................................................................................ 58
4.5 Critical review of triangulated findings............................................................. 58
4.6 Summary........................................................................................................... 60

vi
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations................................................. 61
5.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 61
5.2 Conclusions....................................................................................................... 61
5.3 Limitations........................................................................................................ 62
5.4 Recommendations............................................................................................ 63
5.5 Researcher’s reflections.................................................................................... 64

References……………………………………………………….................................................. 65
Bibliography…………………….……………………………....................................................
65 70
70
Appendix – A: Questionnaire Sample………........................................................ 72
Appendix – B: Questionnaire Discussion…………................................................ 80
Appendix – C: Interview Questions……….……….................................................. 85
Appendix – D: Interviews………………………………................................................. 88
Appendix – E: Triangulation of Interview and Questionnaire data................... 98
Appendix – F: Critical Values of rho……….………................................................ 106
Appendix – G: Interview Confirmations…………………………….….......................... 108
108 Appendix – G (1): Interview of Dr. Jayalath C……….………………................ 109

Appendix – G (2): Interview of Mr. Folahan I…......................................... 115

Appendix – G (3): Interview of Mr. Fernando A…………………………........... 123

Appendix – G (4): Interview of Mr. Kumararathna N….............................. 129

Appendix – G (5): Interview of Mr. Dassanayaka C…................................ 137

Appendix – G (6): Interview of Mr. Gunawardena S…............................... 144

Appendix – H: Research Philosophies ……….……….............................................. 150
Appendix – J: Research Methodologies from the Literature Review.................. 154

Word Count: 14,998

vii
List of tables
Page
Table 1.1 – Qatar’s major construction projects from 2012 to 2018.................................... 1
Table 2.1 – Labour related causes of delay........................................................................... 15
Table 2.2 – Material related causes of delay......................................................................... 16
Table 2.3 – Client related causes of delay............................................................................. 16
Table 2.4 – Consultant related causes of delay..................................................................... 17
Table 2.5 – Contractor related causes of delay..................................................................... 17
Table 2.6 – Equipment related causes of delay..................................................................... 18
Table 2.7 – External causes of delay...................................................................................... 18
Table 3.1 – Comparing the main differences of deductive and inductive research
approaches......................................................................................................... 25
Table 3.2 – Research strategies and the purposes................................................................ 26
Table 3.3 – Probability sampling techniques......................................................................... 29
Table 3.4 – Non-probability sampling techniques................................................................. 30
Table 3.5 – Characteristics of quantitative and qualitative researches................................ 39
Table 3.6 – Types of qualitative data.................................................................................... 42
Table 3.7 – Analysis of qualitative data: a comparison of five approaches.......................... 43
Table 4.1 – Ranking of top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on impact.......... 51
Table 4.2 – Ranking of top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on frequency of
occurrence........................................................................................................... 51
Table 4.3 – Ranking of causes of delay from the questionnaire based on both impact and
frequency of occurrence.................................................................................... 52
Table 4.4 – Ranking of delay causing categories based on questionnaire data.................... 53
Table 4.5 – Ranking of effects of delay based on questionnaire responses.......................... 53
Table 4.6 – Ranking of top ten causes of delay from interviews based on impact............... 54
Table 4.7 – Ranking of top ten causes of delay from interviews based on frequency of
occurrence.......................................................................................................... 55
Table 4.8 – Ranking of the causes of delay from interviews based on both impact and
frequency of occurrence..................................................................................... 56
Table 4.9 – Ranking of delay causing categories based on interview data........................... 56
Table 4.10 – Ranking of effects of delay based on the interviews........................................ 57

viii
List of figures
Page
Figure 3.1 – Four paradigms used in social theory analysis……………..................................... 22
Figure 3.2 – Population, Sample and isolated cases……………................................................ 28
Figure 3.3 – Research choices……………………………………………………........................................ 31
Figure 3.4 – Types of questionnaire……………………………….…………......................................... 36
Figure 3.5 – Forms of interview…………………………………………………........................................ 37
Figure 3.6 – Types of secondary data……………...................................................................... 38
Figure 3.7 – Types of data……………....................................................................................... 40
Figure 3.8 – Research design……………................................................................................... 45
Figure 4.1 –Analysis of respondents’ profession …………….................................................... 48
Figure 4.2 – Respondents’ organization party type……………................................................. 48
Figure 4.3 – Respondents’ type of organization sector……………........................................... 49
Figure 4.4 – Respondents’ experience in various types of construction projects in Qatar… 49
Figure 4.5 – Respondents’ number of years experienced in Qatari construction projects... 50

ix
Acknowledgements
The continuous support and encouragement of many professionals, friends and relatives
made this research possible for me.

First and foremost, I would like to express my profound gratitude to Dr. Martin Graham for
his tremendous supervision, guidance and patience throughout this research.

I extend my appreciation to all the College of Estate Management staff for their valuable
support provided to me right through this M.Sc. course of three years.

I am so much grateful to all the interviewees and the questionnaire respondents for
participating and sharing knowledge while spending their precious time to make this
research successful.

I would also like to offer my gratitude to Mr. Wasantha Zoysa for encouraging me to start
this course, and also Mr. Amur Albakhit Al Amri and Mr. L.K. Ranjith Chandrasiri for various
assistances.

My special thanks are extended to Mr. Raja Sahabandu and Ms. Indunil Batuwangala for
the priceless assistance gave me to stay continued with the current profession.

And I also wish to convey my cordial thanks to my close family friends Mr. Kamal Nandana
Samarahewa, Ms. Deepashika Gunasekara, Mr. Chandika Dassanayaka, Mr. Sandun
Kattadige and Mr. Hettige Premashantha Perera for their continuous support given during
this study.

Finally, I give my heartiest gratitude to my beloved wife and daughter for their dearest
support in my difficult times.

x
Abbreviations and Acronyms

D&B Design and build

FEED Front-end-engineering design

FIFA Fédération Internationale de Football Association

I-Rank Rank from interview

I-RII Relative Importance Index from interview

Q-Rank Rank from questionnaire

Q-RII Relative Importance Index from questionnaire

rho Spearman rank correlation coefficient

RII Relative Importance Index

RII-Category Category based relative important index

RII-Combined Impact and frequency combined relative important index

RII-Frequency Frequency based relative important index

RII-Impact Impact based relative important index

UK United Kingdom

US$ United States Dollar

xi
Chapter 01: Introduction

1.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the Qatari construction industry is briefly after which the research problem is
identified. Having stated the hypothesis, the research objectives and the limitations of this study,
the chapter outline is outlined at the end.

1.2 Background: A Brief Overview of Qatari Construction Industry

The construction industry of Qatar is growing simultaneously with the country’s economy.
Table_1.1 illustrates the current major construction projects in Qatar as well as those recently
completed.

Table 1.1 – Qatar’s major construction projects from 2012 to 2018

Ventures – Middle East (2015) stated that in 2014 the construction sector of Qatar contributed
13% to the GDP.

According to African Manager (2015), 32% of Qatar’s infrastructure projects were delayed as of
September 2015. It was further stated that according to the acting general manager of the
Public Works Authority in Qatar, some construction contracting companies suffer due to the
work load being more than their capacities and some other companies face the issue of rising
building material prices.

1
MECONSTRUCTIONNEWS.COM (2015) reported that Qatar is ready to spend about 200 billion
US Dollars to boost the construction of stadiums and surrounding infrastructure. Also as
illustrated by KILANI (2014), the FIFA Football world cup of 2022 and the Qatar National Vision
2030 (QNV) are the two main leading construction projects at present.

MDP&S (2013) also confirmed the intention of the government of Qatar to invest heavily in large
infrastructure projects in the country such as roads and rail.

1.3 Statement of problem

As outlined in the background, it is identified that Qatari investments are highly focused on
infrastructure and the majority are funded by the government. In this scenario, it is essential to
investigate whether these projects are capable of completing on time or not since certain
projects such as stadiums have fixed targets to complete before the FIFA World Cup Final in
2022.

Therefore, the research problem is defined as “An investigation into causes of delay in
government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar and developing guidelines to mitigate those
delays”.

1.4 Hypothesis
Contractors are the main contributors to delays of government funded infrastructure projects in
Qatar.

1.5 Objectives
1. To identify major causes of delay and associated causative groups in the construction
industry around the globe using secondary data.
2. To identify what causes have the highest impact on government funded infrastructure
project delays in Qatar.
3. To identify the most frequently occurring causes of delays to the government funded
infrastructure projects in Qatar.
4. To identify the effects of delays to the government funded infrastructure projects in
Qatar.

2
1.6 Limitations
This research is limited to the land of Qatar and the infrastructure projects funded by the Qatari
government too.

1.7 Chapter Outline

This dissertation consists of five chapters supported by eight appendices along with references
and bibliographies provided at the end.

Chapter 01 contains the background, statement of problem, hypothesis, objectives and

limitations of the research.

in Chapter 02, a definition of delay, types of delay in construction, and its causes, effects and
available delay mitigation measures in construction as identified by various scholars around the
globe are discussed in order to achieve the first objective and also to develop a basis for the
rest of this study.

The research methodology is discussed in Chapter 03 including paradigms, philosophies,

approaches, strategies, time horizons, credibility, ethics, data collection and analysis of
research and finally the research design for this dissertation is outlined.

In Chapter 04, the data collected from both the questionnaires and the interviews are analyzed,
triangulated and critically reviewed with the intension of achieving the second, third and fourth
objectives and testing of the hypothesis.

The results obtained from Chapters 02 and 04 are concluded in Chapter 05. Also, limitations of
this study are discussed here. Finally, recommendations are provided for both the professionals
practicing in the Qatari construction industry and for scholars who might intend to conduct
similar studies.

1.8 Summary
It is clear, as discussed in Sections 1.2 and 1.3 in this chapter that Qatar has to face the
challenge of its delay of infrastructure projects which are mostly funded by the government.
While Qatar is facing 32% of infrastructure delays, they are ready to spend US$ 200 billion for
construction including infrastructure. Therefore, it is important for the government and other
relevant parties to identify the causes of construction delays in Qatar in order to mitigate them
as illustrated in section 1.7.

Having introduced as above, this study continues with Chapter 02: Literature review.

3
Chapter 02: Literature Review

2.1 Introduction
At the beginning of this chapter, “the construction project delay” is defined. Then the types of
construction delay are discussed. After that the findings of various scholars as regards the
causes of construction delay in different geographical regions of the globe and various sub-
sectors of the construction industry are reviewed and compared along with the effects and
methods of mitigating such delays. Finally, it was determined through a critical review of the
available literature, what causes of delay in construction should be selected to test in this study
while achieving the first objective.

2.2 The definition of delay

In construction, delay can be defined as ‘the additional time consumed to complete a project
beyond the originally stipulated contractual date agreed by the parties to deliver the project’
(Ramanathan et al. 2012).

2.3 Types of delay in construction

According to Alaghbari et al. (2007) construction delays can be grouped into following four
types.
1. Non-excusable
2. Excusable, but non-compensable
3. Excusable and compensable, and
4. Concurrent delays

The same categories of delay as above were listed by Trauner et al. (2009) in a different style
as follows.

I. Critical or noncritical
II. Excusable or non-excusable
III. Compensable or non-compensable
IV. Concurrent or non-concurrent

2.3.1 Non-excusable delays

According to CEM (2013), for non-excusable delays, the responsible party is the contractor.
Hence, the contractor will not be entitled for any extension of time but the owner will recover
liquidated damages from him.

4
2.3.2 Excusable, but non-compensable delays
In the event of delay due to ‘factors that are unforeseeable to the contractor, beyond the
contractor’s reasonable level of control and not the contractors fault or negligent act’ (Ahmed
undated: 5-6) it can be considered as excusable but it is non-compensable since it is not
attributable to any of the parties. Therefore, only an extension of time will be granted without
any financial compensation to the contractor. Natural disasters, adverse weather conditions and
unexpected war situations are some examples for this type of delay.

2.3.3 Excusable and compensable delays

When the client is responsible for the delay as a result of his ‘acts or omissions, the contractor
will be entitled for both time extension and financial compensation’ (André 2010). Some
examples for this type of delays are suspension of the works by the client and purposely
preventing the contractor’s access to the site.

2.3.4 Concurrent delays

According to André (2010) if the delay is found to be an isolated one then it is called a non-
concurrent delay. However, in practice most of the delays are caused by two or more parties.
This kind of delay is known as concurrent delay and therefore, assigning responsibility is more
difficult. However, depending on the above discussed three types of delays occurring
concurrently, the time extension and the financial compensation will need to be decided. For
example if the owner delays the specification of loose furniture that is excusable and
compensable while if the contractor who would have supplied and installed the furniture faced
an unexpected labour strike that is excusable and non-compensable; then only the extension of
time will be granted to the contractor but not financial compensation.

2.4 Causes, effects and mitigation of delay in construction

Alwi and Hampson (2003) carried out a study to identify the important causes of delays in
construction projects in Indonesia. The data were obtained from two types of respondents
namely Large Contractors and Small Contractors. As responded by small contractors it was
found that design changes, slow drawing revision and distribution, lack of trades' skill, site
conditions, and poor design were the top five causes of delay. According to the large
contractors, the top five causes of delay were slow in making decisions, design changes, lack of
trades' skill, inappropriate construction methods, and poor coordination among project
participants.

5
Koushki_(2005) identified the top three causes of delays in the construction of private residential
projects in Kuwait as the number of change orders by the owner, financial constraints of the
owner and the owners’ lack of experience in construction. The effects were found as time-
delays and cost-overruns. The methods of mitigating the delays were suggested as adequate
finance, pre-construction planning, and sufficient budget for design phase, appointment of an
independent supervisor, competent consultants and a reliable contractor.

Alaghbari et al. (2007) carried out a research to identify significant factors causing the delay of
building construction projects in Malaysia. The most influential individual causes of delay were
identified and ranked as financial difficulties and economic problems of the owner, financial
problems of the contractor, supervision too late and slowness in making decisions by the
consultants, slow to give instructions by the consultants, lack of materials on the market
(external), poor site management by the contractor, materials shortages on site (contractor),
construction mistakes and defective work by the contractor, delay in delivery of materials to site
by the contractor, slowness in making decisions by the owner, a lack of consultant’s experience,
and incomplete documents (consultant). It was recommended that sufficient financial and
technical supports are essential to mitigate these delays.

Ren et al. (2008) ranked the parties contributing to causes of delay in Dubai construction
projects as 1-Contractor (very high), 2-Consultant (intermediate), and 3-Client (low). The five
critical causes of delays contributed by the client are unrealistic project duration, many
provisional sums and prime costs, nomination of sub-contractors and suppliers, client’s irregular
payments to the main contractor and variations. The consultant related critical causes of delay
are incomplete drawings, delay in approval of documents, incomplete contract documents,
changes in drawings and specifications, and the duration of inspection procedures. The major
causes contributed by the contractor are preparing the method statements, ill-financed project,
inappropriate organization management, unsmooth external and internal communications, and
mistakes in construction.

Al-Kharashi and Skitmore_(2009) recognized the ten most critical causes of delay in Saudi
Arabian public sector construction projects as poor qualification of the contractor's technical
staff, poor site management and supervision by contractor, insufficient experience of the
contractor, difficulties in financing the project by the contractor, inadequate contractor's work,
non-payment of contractor’s claims by the owner, suspension of work by the owner, delay in
progress payments by the owner, delay in approving major changes in the scope of work by the

6
consultants, and inadequate experience of the consultants. It was suggested to mitigate the
delays by distributing projects more evenly over a number of years to help alleviate the
situation, offering greater encouragement for contractors and consultants to cooperate with
external companies with more experience than local companies to improve the level of local
experience, and using more modern management methods to measure the range of intangible
issues involved.

Kaliba_(2010) identified that financial difficulties on the part of contractors, change orders or
scope changes, and poor sub-contractor performance as the top three causes of schedule
overrun in Zambian construction projects. To mitigate the delays he recommended to have
experienced competent consultants and contractors; effective cost control, quality control,
quality assurance, communication, decision making, planning, schedule, time control systems;
adequate specifications, funds; proper coordination, supervision; and not allowing fraudulent
practices.

According to Motaleb and Kishk_(2010) the top six causes of delay in UAE construction projects
as in the order of rank are change orders by client, lack of capability of the client’s
representative, slow decision making by client, lack of experience of client in construction, poor
site management and supervision, and an incompetent project team. The effects of such delays
were found as time overrun, cost overrun, disputes, arbitration, litigation and total abandonment.
They emphasized on a need for the training of clients and their representatives but also all the
project teams.

Olatunji (2010) identified late payment to contractors by the client, contractors' incompetence,
contractors' cash flow problems, changes by clients in design, contractor abandonment of the
project and late information as the top six ranked causes in the same order that influence
construction project delivery time in South Africa. The suggested methods of mitigating the
delays in this study were (1) Clients should evaluate the quality performance of contractors
before awarding a contract, (2) Evaluation of contractors’ technical and financial performance,
and (3) Provide quality management guide lines.

André (2010) found unrealistic imposed contract durations by the client, inevitable and “hard to
predict changes” to the project, change orders by the client, incomplete and ambiguous projects
with errors and omissions by design team and lowest bid contracting system as the top five
most frequent causes of delay in his study for the impact of delays to the cost of Portuguese
construction projects. He further found that suspension of works by the client, unrealistic

7
imposed contract durations set by the client, inclement weather conditions, inevitable and hard
to predict changes to the project and unforeseen ground conditions as causes of construction
delays with the highest impact to projects.

Afshari et al. (2011) ranked twenty top causes of non-excusable delays to the Iranian “Mapna
Group” construction projects relating to the contractor as not selecting competent
subcontractors; poor management of the project changes; lack of a mechanism for recording;
analyzing; and transferring project lessons learned; delays in forwarding materials and
equipment to the site; delay in awarding subcontractors’ contracts; lack of effective
management and control of subcontractors; delay in detailed design by project engineer
subcontractor; delay in supplying shortage of the equipment; poor management of the project
site; poor management of the project’s contract; issues on recruiting, attaining, and promoting
expert and experienced project team; lack of effective communication and coordination with
project stakeholders especially with the client/client’s consultant; delay in obtaining technical
information from subcontractors; conflicts among performing organizations, client and client’s
consultant; slow decision making by the project manager; detail design errors by
subcontractors; delay in basic design by performing organization; lack of applying contractual
tools (liquidated damage or acceleration of work) against subcontractor; delay in basic design
by project engineering subcontractor; and conflicts in work schedules of the subcontractors. To
reduce the effects of delay it was suggested to record, analyze and transfer lessons learned
from the previous projects to the new ones.

Haseeb et al. (2011) identified the top main causes of delay in large construction projects in
Pakistan as client's finance and payments problems, contractor's inaccurate time estimation,
material quality issues, supplier/ sub-contractor payment delay, poor site management etc. in
that order of rank. The effects of delay were found as time overrun, cost overrun, disputes,
negotiation and court cases, and abandonment. The suggested methods of mitigating the
delays were Increasing the client's financial capability and on time payment to the contractor/
consultants etc., contractor's timely payment to the suppliers and subcontractors, accurate time
and cost estimates of the projects, avoiding material shortages without compromising the quality
and timely completion of sub-contract works and delivery of material.

Al Jurf and Beheiry (2012) found the five most critical causes of delay in Qatar’s residential
compounds projects as shortage of material and equipment in the local market, cash flow
inconsistency during construction, contractor’s financial difficulties, delay in monthly payments

8
from owner, and late delivery of materials and equipment. It was suggested that to mitigate the
delays; project planners and design engineers pay close attention during the detailed design
phase, and the contractors need to advise owners on these possible risk factors to the cost and
schedule predictability and obtain clear price quotes from materials and equipment suppliers
and enter into comprehensive iron clad agreements regarding delivery schedules.

As found by Mohammad and Isah (2012), the top ten causes of delay in the Nigerian
construction industry in rank order are improper planning, lack of effective communication,
design errors, shortage of supply (steel, concrete etc.), slow decision making, financial issues,
shortage of material, cash-flow problems during construction, increase in quantities, and
mismanagement by the contractor (financial, supplier support, sub-contractor).The effects of
delay were identified as a loss of interest by the stakeholders, blacklisting by authorities, waste
of money and time, and declination of reputation. It was suggested that risk management,
proper planning, payments from the client and preparation of insurance claims, good
scheduling, and client representatives for the project as the six main methods of mitigation of
delay.

Pourrostam and Ismail (2012) recognized delay in progress payments and change orders by the
client during construction, poor site management, slowness in the decision making process by
the client and financial difficulties by the contractor as the main causes of delay in Iranian
construction projects.

A “Comparative study of delay factors in Libyan and the UK construction industry” was carried
out by Shebob et al. (2012). It was discovered that changes in materials prices and changes in
the scope of the project were the top two causes of delays which are common in both Libya and
the UK. Shortage of manpower (skilled, semi-skilled, unskilled labour) and waiting time for
approval of drawings and test materials were the top two causes of delay in Libya alone.
Financial problems (delayed payments, and economic problems) and severe weather conditions
on the job site were the top two causes of delay in the UK alone.

Mahamid (2013) carried out a study to identify the common risks affecting time overrun in road
construction projects in the West Bank in Palestine from a contractors’ viewpoint. The top seven
critical causes of delay were identified as financial status of the contractors, payment delays by
the owner, political situation, segmentation of the West Bank, poor communication between
construction parties, lack of equipment efficiency and high competition in bids. As a solution to
the delay, it was suggested that the owners should pay progress payments on time, the bids

9
should be awarded to the contractors who are financially sound, the construction parties should
have more communication and coordination during all project phases, and the managerial skills
of the construction parties should be improved by conducting workshops and training courses.

Man (2013) conducted a study to find out delay and success factors in Malaysian construction
industry. The top six delay factors were identified as Shortages of skilled labour and Equipment,
Delayed progress payments paid by clients, Contradictory interests between assorted parties,
Shortages of labour, and Contractor’s financing necessities; in the order of ranking. It was
identified that the top five success factors are "Effective management for materials, equipment
and supplies", "Effective planning in job sequence", "Effective planning, controlling and
organizing of the activities", "Establish clear and realistic goals", and "Allocation of
responsibilities to employees in line with competencies".

Alinaitwe et al. (2013) carried out “An Investigation into the Causes of Delay and Cost Overrun
in Uganda’s Public Sector Construction Projects” and found the main causes of delays as
changes in scope by the client, delayed payments to the contractor by the client, poor
monitoring and control of the project and high inflation and interest rates in financing. It was
recommended to minimize scope changes, improve project management, improve procurement
strategy (from traditional to D&B), and make payments on time in order to mitigate the project
delays.

According to Alnuaimi and Al Mohsin (2013) the main causes of delay in completion of
construction projects in Oman within the period from 2007 to 2008 are inclement weather,
variations and claims, changes in initial design, lack of funds, new legal instructions or rules; in
the order of rank, and that from 2009 to 2010 are planning and programming construction work,
poor construction experience, shortage in material, fail in producing practical work programs,
and changes in initial design; in the order of rank. It was emphasized that the client should study
the construction project properly at all stages.

An empirical study was carried out by Rahsid et al. (2013) to identify causes of delay in
construction projects of Punjab-Pakistan. Late procurement of materials, conflicts between joint-
ownership of the project, shortage of equipment, delays in producing design documents, unclear
and inadequate details in drawings, personal conflicts among labors, and delay in
manufacturing special building materials were found as the top seven causes of delay in the
concerned study. They finally recommended that (1) Financial issues should be given
considerable importance (2) The client should carefully select the consultants and keep a good

10
relationship (3) Proper quality control of the project (4) Sufficient material supply and (5) Owning
of equipment by the contractor.

Pethkar and Birajdar (2014) carried out a literature review on causes of delay in building
construction projects in India and identified the top ranked causes of delay as inadequate
contractor experience, ineffective project planning and scheduling, poor site management and
supervision , design changes by owner or agent during construction, late delivery of materials,
unreliable subcontractors, delay in performing inspection and testing, unqualified workers,
change orders, delay in site delivery, delay in approving design documents, delay in progress
payments, slowness in design making, poor communication and coordination with other parties,
unexpected surface and subsurface conditions (soil) based on their secondary data. Effective
planning and scheduling by contractor, correct site management and supervision, reducing
demand of owner's design changes during construction, material delivery on time, and well
performing and a less number of subcontractors were emphasized as methods of mitigating
project delays.

Pham and Hadikusumo (2014) conducted a study to recognize schedule delays in engineering,
procurement and construction petrochemical projects in Vietnam where the design responsibility
was with the contractor. They ranked the causes of delay separately for the construction and
engineering phases. According to their findings the top six causes of delay in the construction
phase were poor communication and coordination by contractor with other parties, inadequate
control procedures by the contractor, ineffective planning and scheduling by the contractor, the
effect of weather on construction activities, inadequate contractor experience, land acquisition
and land lease issues. As regards the engineering phase, the top five causes of delay were
recognized as delay in approving shop drawings and material samples by the owner, lack of
input data (specification, codes and standards) by the contractor, changes in project scope and
specification by the owner, unclear and inadequate detail in design by the contractor, and
mistakes and discrepancies in design documents of the contractor. To mitigate these delays it
was suggested that contractors need to develop their project management competency, project
owners have to carefully select the contractor based on their technical and management
capability, project owners also need to establish clear project requirements in the basic design
(or FEED) and maintain the project scope avoiding design changes at the level best, and the
government may need to develop a policy for leased land and land acquisition.

11
Owolabi et al. (2014) identified the main causes of delay in Nigerian construction project
delivery as lack of fund to finance the project to completion, changes in drawings, lack of
effective communication among the parties involved, lack of adequate information from
consultants and slow decision making. The effects due to such delays were found by them as
time overrun, increase in the final cost of the project, wastage and under-utilization of man-
power and resources, tying down of client capital due to non-completion of the project and
disputes between the parties involved.

As identified by Marzouk and El-Rasas (2014) the top five causes of delay in Egyptian
construction projects were the type of project bidding and award (negotiation, lowest bidder),
ineffective planning and scheduling of the project, variation orders/changes of scope by owners
during construction, lateness in revising and approving design documents by the owner, finance
and payments of completed work by the owner. It was recognized that the owner related causes
are the most frequently occurring and also most effective in Egyptian construction projects
followed by the contractor related causes. In order to mitigate these delays; realistic project
durations, proper feasibility studies, realistic financial plans and cash flow forecasts, timely
approvals from the authorities, adequate funding, responding to contractor queries on time, and
practical contractor's financial plans were suggested.

Ghasemzadeh (2014) recognized in the design build method (D&B) of Iranian construction
industry, the top five causes of delay in project delivery as delay in progress payments by
owners, funding difficulties by contractors, inflation, late material delivery, sub-contractors’
delays; and that in design bid build (DBB) as payment difficulties by owner, inflation, delay in
material delivery, slowness in decision making by client, make changes during the construction
phase of project by client; and that in build operate and transfer (BOT) as financial difficulties by
contractor, unavailability of professional construction managers, unsuitable project delivery
methods, and inflation. Ghasemzadeh’s study showed that both in D&B and DBB procurement
methods, “owner’s payment difficulties” became the top most cause of project delay. However,
in the BOT procurement method, the contractor’s financial difficulties became the top most
cause of project delay. In order to mitigate the project delays, Ghasemzadeh recommended to
have (1) Past experience and consultation (discussion, brainstorming) to find the probable
project delays (2) Knowledge and skills of experienced people in the field, and (3) Conduction
and mitigation when it occurs during the work.

12
Mukuka et al. (undated) identified the top ten causes of construction project delay in Lusaka,
Zambia as late material delivery, progress payment delay by the client, difficulties in financing
projects by contractor, equipment breakdowns, use of outdated equipment, delay in ordering
material, poor coordination, equipment shortages, ineffective planning and scheduling of
projects, effect of weather on construction activities; in the order. The top ten effects of delay
were ranked as time overrun (extension of time), cost overrun, bad reputation with client, bad
reputation with construction team, claims, loss of profit, termination of contracts, disputes, loss
of skilled employees, arbitration, litigation, total abandonment, and loss of un-skilled employees.
They emphasized that such delays can be mitigated through proper site management and
supervision, effective strategic planning, clear information and communication channels, use of
proper and modern construction equipment, proper project planning and scheduling.

Ahmed et al. (undated) carried out an empirical study to determine causes of construction
delays in Florida. The top ten causes were identified as late building permits approval, change
orders by the owner, frequent changes in drawings, incomplete documents, poor inspections,
frequent changes in specifications, wrong decisions during development stage, late shop
drawings approval, poor design development, and changes of laws and regulations; in that
order. Delays due to causes of economic, finance, administrative and management issues had
shown low importance. Most responsible parties for the project delays were ranked as (1)
Contractor, (2) Client, (3) Government, (4) Shared (All parties), and (5) Consultant. The effects
of such delays were identified as the development of adversarial relationships and distrust
among the parties, parties seeking litigation and arbitration etc. for dispute resolution, cash-flow
issues, and a general feeling of anxiety towards each other. In order to reduce the effects of
such delays it was recommended that the adoption of a streamlined building permit approval
process, managing the design process properly and making decisions on the right time. It was
found that 48% of delays were “Excusable Compensable” and 44% were “Non-Excusable” and
only 8% were “Excusable Non-Compensable” delays.

2.5 Identification of delay causative groups

Having reviewed the literature pertaining to the causes of delay in construction projects, it was
found that many scholars have grouped the causes based on different points of view. Some of
them have focused on the most responsible parties rather than the nature of the cause, and
some have considered similarities in the nature of the cause rather than pointing at a party as
illustrated hereafter.

13
2.5.1 Delay causative groups focused on responsible parties
Alaghbari et al. (2007) categorized the causes into four groups based on their influence towards
delay, they were ranked in the order as “Contractor”, “Consultant”, “Owner”, and “External”
related factors.

Rahsid et al. (2013) categorized the causes of delay related to the contractor, client and
consultant as the top three most significant categories of delay in the same order of rank; and
material, labour and equipment related causes of delay as less significant ones. In this
categorization of delays, the most significant groups highlight the most responsible parties
whereas less significant groups do not point out a single party.

2.5.2 Delay causative groups based on causes’ nature

Alwi and Hampson (2003) categorized the causes of delay into six major groups namely People,
Professional Management, Design and Documentation, Materials, Execution, and External;
which are based on the similarity in the nature of the cause. It was found that the highest ranked
delay groups were “Professional Management” and” Design and Documentation” according to
large and small contractors respectively. Even though, the ranking of the causes of two
responding groups (i.e. large contractors and small contractors) are not exactly the same,
design changes and lack of trades' skill were commonly top ranked causes of delay according
to both responding groups.

Mahamid (2013) classified the delay causative factors into six groups namely project,
managerial, consultant, financial, external, and construction items.

As ranked by Man (2013) based on the results, the categories of delay factors are contractual
links, financing, changes, equipment, labour, environment, scheduling and manipulating
method, material, and government connection. In the same context the categories of success
factors were ranked as “technical”, "environment, economic, political and social", “scope and
planning”, "management, organization and communication", and “controls”.

Luu et al. (2015) identified six groups of critical causes of delay in Vietnam’s government
construction projects as: lack of competence, finance, and the approval procedures of the
owner; external elements; extraneous nature and internal interaction of the project;
incompetence of the consultant; lack of competence, finance, and productive forces of the
contractor; and improper contract terms. Their study further indicated that the contractors and
clients cause the highest impact on project delay.

14
2.5.3 Combined delay causative groups
In the above discussed systems of demarcating causative groups, some of the group elements
are not purely attributable to the concerned grouping system, but can be considered as bias
towards the said grouping system. For example the group ‘External’ (Alaghbari et al.2007, Alwi
and Hampson 2003) is common in both the systems i.e. “responsible parties” and “causes’
nature”. Hence as regards the former, the meaning of External can be considered as external
parties, and the latter means the causes of delay related to the external factors. However, yet
the external factors are not purely derived from external parties.

Further to the aforesaid grouping systems, there could be a combined system of the same two
where the situation makes it difficult to define a unique method. Shebob et al. (2012)
categorized the causes of delay as related to external factors, consultants, early planning,
owner, contractor/material, contractor/manpower, contractor/project management and
contractor/equipment which were the top eight categories ranked in the order in their study.
Alaghbari et al. (2007) also listed material, labour and equipment related delays under the
category of contractor related delays.

2.5.4 Listing of causes based on the category of delay

The literature review indicates that the majority of scholars have categorized the causes of
delay based on the nature of the cause. Out of various groups identified using different grouping
methods by previous researchers, the following seven delay causative groups along with
causes of delay under them, tabulated in Tables 2.1-2.7 can be recognized as the most
appropriate ones to this study in Qatar.

Table 2.1 – Labour related causes of delay

Category Cause of delay Authors
Shortage of labour André (2010), Haseeb et al. (2011),Mahamid (2013),
Man (2013), Marzouk and El-Rasas (2014)
Labour Low productivity of labour André (2010), Haseeb et al. (2011), Marzouk and El-
related Rasas (2014)
Labour injuries Ahmed et al. (undated), Haseeb et al. (2011)
Labour disputes and strikes Ahmed et al. (undated), Haseeb et al. (2011)

15
Table 2.2 – Material related causes of delay
Category Cause of delay
Delay in material delivery
Shortage of material
Material
related
Fluctuation of material prices
Poor quality of material
Table 2.3 – Client related causes of delay
Category Cause of delay
Frequent changes in
specification and/or quantity
during construction
Slow decision making
Client related
Unrealistic contract duration
Poor finance and late payments
Inadequate skill and experience
of client's representative
Suspension of works
Authors
Mukuka et al. (undated), Alaghbari et al. (2007),
Afshari et al. (2011), Haseeb et al. (2011), Al Jurf and
Beheiry (2012), Shebob et al. (2012), Rahsid et al.
(2013), Ghasemzadeh (2014)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Alaghbari et al. (2007),
Haseeb et al. (2011), Al Jurf and Beheiry (2012),
Shebob et al. (2012), Alnuaimi and Al Mohsin (2013),
Ghasemzadeh (2014), Pham and Hadikusumo (2014)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Haseeb et al. (2011),
Shebob et al. (2012), Alnuaimi and Al Mohsin (2013),
Mahamid (2013)
Haseeb et al. (2011), Mahamid (2013)
Authors
Ahmed et al. (undated), Koushki (2005), André
(2010),Kaliba (2010),Motaleb and Kishk (2010),
Olatunji (2010), Shebob et al. (2012), Pourrostam and
Ismail (2012), Alinaitwe et al. (2013), Alnuaimi and Al
Mohsin (2013), Daniel (2014), Ghasemzadeh (2014),
Marzouk and El-Rasas (2014),Owolabi et al. (2014)
Motaleb and Kishk (2010), Pourrostam and Ismail
(2012), Owolabi et al. (2014), Ghasemzadeh (2014)
Ren et al. (2008), André (2010), Daniel (2014)
Haseeb et al. (2011), Owolabi et al. (2014), Marzouk
and El-Rasas (2014)
Koushki (2005), Motaleb and Kishk (2010)
Al-Kharashi and Skitmore (2009), André (2010)
16
Table 2.4 – Consultant related causes of delay
Category Cause of delay
Inadequate consultant's
experience and competence
Wrong, inappropriate or
incomplete design
Consultant
Late design works
related
Slow inspection and late approval
Poor contract management
Insufficient inspectors or poor
inspection
Authors
Mukuka et al. (undated), Ren et al. (2008), Kaliba
(2010), Pourrostam and Ismail (2012), Shebob et al.
(2012), Mahamid (2013), Luu et al. (2015)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Ren et al. (2008),Mahamid
(2013), Rahsid et al. (2013), Daniel (2014)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Ren et al. (2008),
Mahamid (2013), Rahsid et al. (2013),Daniel (2014)
Ren et al. (2008), Mahamid (2013), Daniel (2014)
Ren et al. (2008), Daniel (2014)
Ren et al. (2008), Mahamid (2013)

Table 2.5 – Contractor related causes of delay

Category Cause of delay Authors
Financing problems and late Mukuka et al. (undated), Ren et al. (2008), Haseeb et al.
payment to the subcontractors/ (2011), Pourrostam and Ismail (2012), Mohammad and
suppliers Isah (2012), Mahamid (2013), Man (2013),
Ghasemzadeh (2014) , Luu et al. (2015)
Inadequate contractor's Alaghbari et al. (2007), Al-Kharashi and Skitmore (2009),
experience and competence Olatunji (2010), Alnuaimi and Al Mohsin (2013), Pham
and Hadikusumo (2014), Luu et al. (2015)
Contractor Poor site management and Alaghbari et al. (2007), Al-Kharashi and Skitmore (2009),
related supervision Motaleb and Kishk (2010), Haseeb et al. (2011),
Pourrostam and Ismail (2012)
Improper planning and Mukuka et al. (undated), Mohammad and Isah (2012),
scheduling Alnuaimi and Al Mohsin (2013), Marzouk and El-Rasas
(2014), Pham and Hadikusumo (2014)
Poor coordination Mukuka et al. (undated), Alwi and Hampson (2003),
Pham and Hadikusumo (2014)
Poor subcontractor Kaliba (2010), Ghasemzadeh (2014)
performance

17
Table 2.6 – Equipment related causes of delay
Category Cause of delay
Shortage of Equipment
Equipment Equipment breakdowns
related
Lack of equipment efficiency
Late delivery of equipment to
site
Table 2.7 – External causes of delay
Category Cause of delay
Adverse weather conditions
(sand storm, heavy rain and
flood etc.)
Unforeseen poor ground
conditions
External
Social, economic or political
insecurity/instability (Cultural
issues, inflation and war etc.)
Visa approval, building
approval and utility
connection delay
Authors
Afshari et al. (2011), Al Jurf and Beheiry (2012),
Mahamid (2013), Rahsid et al. (2013), Luu et al.
(2015)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Al Jurf and Beheiry (2012),
Man (2013)
Mahamid (2013), Rahsid et al. (2013)
Afshari et al. (2011), Al Jurf and Beheiry (2012)
Authors
Mukuka et al. (undated), Koushki (2005), André (2010),
Kaliba (2010), Haseeb et al. (2011),Mohammad and
Isah (2012), Mahamid (2013), Man (2013), Daniel
(2014), Ghasemzadeh (2014), Luu et al. (2015)
Mukuka et al. (undated), André (2010), Haseeb et al.
(2011),Man (2013), Daniel (2014), Marzouk and El-
Rasas (2014), Luu et al. (2015)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Kaliba (2010) , Motaleb and
Kishk (2010),Mohammad and Isah (2012), Mahamid
(2013), Ghasemzadeh (2014)
Mukuka et al. (undated), Man (2013), Daniel (2014),
Ghasemzadeh (2014)
18
2.6 Critical review of the literature
Initially, the similarities and differences of findings of various scholars are critically reviewed with
respect to their country of study, the sector of study and also some most critical causes and
effects of delay which are highlighted in the literature more frequently. Finally, the limitations of
some researches are discussed.

2.6.1 Similarities and differences of researches

The causes of delays found by Pourrostam and Ismail (2012) in Iranian projects are similar to
the findings of Haseeb et al. (2011) for Pakistan’s large construction projects i.e. payment
delays of client and poor site management are common top ranked causes of delay in both
Pourrostam’s and Haseeb’s studies. The effects of delays found and methods of mitigating
delays suggested by Pourrostam are also same as that of Haseeb.

Man (2013) agreed with Alaghbari et al. (2007) as regards financial difficulties of both the client
and the contractor in Malaysian construction industry, being two common causes of delay in
their studies.

It was revealed that none of the individual top most causes of delays are common in the two
studies carried out by Rahsid et al. (2013) and Haseeb et al. (2011). Nevertheless the main
delay causing categories related to client, contractor and material were found to be common in
the two studies.

Findings of Pourrostam and Ismail (2012) were similar to that of Ghasemzadeh (2014) since
delay in progress payment by client was rank 1 and contractor’s financial difficulties was rank 5
in their study for the construction projects in the same geographical area, i.e., Iran. Hence, both
the studies of Pourrostam and Ghasemzadeh indicate that most probably finance problems
would be the most significant group of delay causes to construction project delivery in Iran
despite the procurement method and irrespective of the responsible party to the cause.

The top ranked causes of delay found by Mukuka et al. (undated) in Zambia such as progress
payment delay and material delivery were two of the main findings of Ghasemzadeh (2014) in
Iran also. Kaliba (2010) agrees with Mukuka’s top ranked contractor related cause “financial
difficulties of the contractor” and also client related cause “changes” in Zambian construction
project delays.

19
2.6.2 Identifying major causes of delay
As tabulated in section 2.5.4, out of the thirty scholars fourteen agreed that “Frequent changes
in specification and/or quantity during construction” as the most critical cause of delay in
construction followed by “Adverse weather conditions” as agreed by eleven of them and
“Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/suppliers” as agreed by nine of
them; under the delay causative categories of “Client related”, “External” and “Contractor
related” respectively.

The major causes of delay under the groups related to Material, Consultant, Labour and
Equipment were “Delay in Material delivery/ Shortage of material”, “Inadequate consultant's
experience and competence”, “Shortage of labour” and “Shortage of equipment” respectively.

2.6.3 Identifying the main effects of delay

As identified by Ahmed et al. (undated), Mukuka et al. (undated), Motaleb and Kishk (2010),
Haseeb et al. (2011), Pourrostam and Ismail (2012), Mohammad and Isah (2012), Alinaitwe et
al. (2013), and Owolabi et al. (2014) the major effects due to construction project delay can be
seen as follows.

 Time overrun  Claims

 Cost overrun  Total abandonment
 Disputes  Declination of parties’ reputation
 Distrust  Arbitration
 Growth in adversarial relationships  Litigation

2.6.4 Research limitations

The study of Afshari et al. (2011) discussed in Section 2.3 was carried out within the Mapna
Group of Iran while focusing only on the contractor related causes of delay and limited to non-
excusable delays as well.

The research of Mahamid (2013) was limited to the West Bank area of Palestine and
contractors were the only respondents.

The study of Rahsid et al. (2013) was restricted to Punjab area of Pakistan and not limited to the
size of projects. On the other hand, the study of Haseeb et al. (2011) was limited to large
projects but included the whole of Pakistan.

20
2.7 Research methodologies
The literature review revealed that the researchers have used different methodologies for
sampling, data collection and data analysis as well. The research methodologies identified from
the literature review are comprehensively discussed in Appendix – J.

2.8 Summary
It was observed through the literature review that various scholars around the globe have
identified a large number of different causes and few number of effects in the construction
project delay. Most of them have suggested methods of mitigating the delays as well.

Identifying delays with high impact and frequency of occurrence is crucial.

The delay causative groups such as “Contractor”, “Client”, “Consultant” and “External” show a
major impact on project delays. In most of the studies it was found that “Contractor” is the
highest ranked delay causative group, even though the majority of them identified that “frequent
change orders” is the highest ranked cause of delay for which the Client is responsible.

Time overrun and cost overrun were the main effects of delay as identified by the majority of the
scholars while legal and reputational effects were comparatively minor as indicated in some
studies.

Finally, having reviewed the literature to discover the major causes of delay and the causative
groups in the construction industry around the globe, it is claimed that the first objective of this
dissertation has been fulfilled.

In Chapter 3, a range of available research methodologies are identified and discussed and that
considered to be the most suitable for this study is derived and justified.

21
Chapter 03: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction
A research methodology basically consists of data collection and data analysis techniques,
which essentially require ‘a plan of action known as a research strategy’ (Denscombe 2014). In
the light of the hypothesis and the objectives of this study, the most appropriate research
strategy, sampling, data collection and data analysis methods are identified through a broad
study of research methodologies discussed hereunder.

3.2 The research paradigms

As defined in Saunders et al. (2009), a paradigm is a method of studying the events in a society
in order to obtain a particular understanding of the same.

‘Quantitative and also qualitative methods could be applied as necessary with any research
paradigm. However, the paradigm has to be selected prior to any method, since it is the basic
belief system or global opinion which guides the study through the fundamental ways of
ontology and epistemology in addition to the selection of method’ (Saunders et al. 2009).

Saunders et al. (2009) identified four paradigms known as radical structuralist, radical humanist,
interpretive and functionalist as described in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 – Four paradigms used in social theory analysis

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

However, the research paradigms are based on the research philosophies.

22
3.3 Research philosophies
Selection of a research philosophy is debatable and leaves the scholar in a position called
“Pragmatism” that argues, ‘the research question is the most vital factor of the philosophies
such as ontology, epistemology and axiology while swinging between the positions of positivism
and interpretivism’ (Saunders et al. 2009). Research philosophies are further discussed in
Appendix – H.

3.4 Research approaches

Two research approaches namely deduction and induction can be identified for the researches.
As outlined by Saunders et al. (2009) deduction is testing a theory and induction is building a
theory.

3.4.1 Deductive approach

In the deductive approach, the theories and hypotheses are developed at the beginning. Then
the hypotheses are tested by designing a research strategy. In the natural sciences, deduction
is the governing approach for its studies.

Saunders et al. (2009:124, citing Robson 2002) outlined five stages for the progression of a
deductive study:
1. Deduction of a hypothesis from the concept;
2. Stating the hypothesis in terms of its relationship with two specific notions;
3. Testing the hypothesis;
4. Scrutinizing the results;
5. Altering the theory based on the findings as necessary.

If it is found that any modification to the theory is required, it can be further reviewed after
modifying and repeating the above steps from the beginning.

The deductive approach holds many vital features such as operationalization, reductionism and
generalization etc. and deals with many other important factors such as type of data to be
collected, control of the test and systematization of the methodology. For example, if a
construction company in Qatar sensed that “their inexperienced young site engineers cause the
delays of their running projects”, then they can develop a null hypothesis in the same stance. In
this scenario to test this hypothesis a researcher will use mostly quantitative data rather than
qualitative or combined data. In order to identify whether the delays caused by young engineers
are purely based on their inexperience, it is essential to maintain controls over the other factors

23
such as engineers being sick and inadequate site facilities provided for the engineers etc.
separately. This experiment should be operationalised to measure the delay quantitatively. In a
construction project it is very difficult to recognize the accumulated trivial delays incurred during
the whole year. However, it would be noticeable when delays are reviewed on weekly or
monthly basis. Therefore, it follows the theory of reductionism that suggests the whole can be
understood better when it is segregated into its smallest parts. This cause of delay can be
generalized if the researcher selects samples of the required size in number from the other
companies as well.

3.4.2 Inductive approach

The inductive approach is the reverse way of deduction. As described by Saunders et al.
(2009), at the very beginning the data is collected and analyzed to develop the theory. The
scholars who follow induction may criticize the deductive approach due to its strict style that
does not allow other fact to be explored though they really occur. Albeit the deductive approach
suggest alternative notions for the research, still its rigidly structured design maintains certain
sharp limits.

In the example provided in section 3.4.1, if the scholar is allowed to collect the data beyond the
limit of strictly adhering to the inexperience of young engineers, he would probably find many
other causes associated with them such as poor communication and lack of training programs
etc. In this scenario the scholar’s approach is inductive as he collects more qualitative data
rather than quantitative data. Although deduction seeks for large numbers of quantitative data
through a large sample such as respondents’ questionnaires, induction can be satisfied with a
small credible sample such as interviewees.

As summarized by Saunders et al. (2009), selecting a research approach is vital for three main
reasons. Firstly, it guides the scholar to select what sort of data to be collected and from where
to collect and how these data can answer the original research problem.

Secondly, it clarifies the appropriateness of the selected approach as regards objectives. For
example, if one of the objectives in this study was to investigate why Qatari construction
projects are delayed then the approach should be inductive. As this research requires to find
the major causes of delay in Qatari construction projects based on a list of causes derived
through the literature review, the approach should be deductive.

24
Thirdly, it identifies the research limitations as regards availability of data, accessibility of data,
legal and ethical issues etc. For example, an interviewee might not divulge certain data such as
company secrets which are essentially required for the scholar to complete the research
successfully, due to the fact that it is either illegal or unethical to do so. Hence, the inductive
approach is unsuitable in this scenario. On the other hand when the scholar is lacking the
required theory to develop a hypothesis, the deductive approach is not applicable.

This study is bias to a deductive approach since the listed objectives seek to find out what
causes delays and what parties are responsible etc. based on a predetermined set of factors to
be tested. However, the finding from this approach could be verified with the help of an inductive
approach.

Table 3.1 – Comparing the main differences of deductive and inductive research approaches

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

3.5 Choice of research strategy

The research strategy would be based on one of the following main purposes of the research as
illustrated by Saunders et al. (2009).
 Exploratory study: discovers what really occurs.
 Descriptive study: precise explanation of a particular object, event or person.

25
  Explanatory study: confirms possible connections among variables. For example a
researcher may be interested in finding out the relationship between a contractor’s
performance and the extent of his experience in a particular sector.

Table 3.2 illustrates some of the widely used research strategies based on various research
purposes.

Table 3.2 – Research strategies and the purposes

Source: Denscombe (2014)

26
The usefulness and the appropriateness of a research strategy were emphasized by
Denscombe (2014) while suggesting the factors to be considered such as suitability, feasibility
and ethics.

Suitability includes identification of the research purpose clearly and its comprehensible
relationship to the research strategy, and also the ability of the selected strategy to generate
results by which the research question is answered.

Feasibility ensures the ability to spend adequate time and money especially for data collection
and any other matter related to the research, and also the accessibility of suitable data and their
acceptability to the research evaluators.

Ethics are highly concerned in research strategies as they suggest that the respondents should
not be harmed. It requires the informed consent from the respondents. The scholars should
assure the confidentiality to the participants while practicing within the frame of relevant
research ethics codes.

Out of many research strategies outlined in Table 3.2 some of the slightly appropriate ones to
this study in Qatar such as surveys, sampling, case studies, action research, and mixed
methods are briefly discussed hereunder in order to select the most appropriate ones.

3.5.1 Surveys
Surveys are carried out to view certain phenomenon ‘in detail and comprehensively’
Denscombe (2014) and usually, it a strategy that ‘associated with the deductive approach’
Saunders et al. (2009).

As outlined in Denscombe (2014) surveys can be carried out through the data collection
methods such as questionnaires and interviews. In this scenario the questionnaire distribution
and interview conducting methods can be face to face with individuals or groups, telephonic or
internet that uses emails, websites and social networks such as Facebook and Twitter etc.
Additionally, postal mails also could be used for questionnaires.

It is important to select the right participants for the survey based on the research question, type
of participants and their capability to respond. Under these circumstances, this study regarding
the Qatari construction sector should select the construction professionals etc. with experience
in Qatar and with the ability to communicate in English.

27
Since ‘a large quantum of data could be collected from a massive population in a very cost-
effective way, surveys are very popular’ Saunders et al. (2009). The other benefit of surveys are
the ‘ability to collect real-world data either quantitative or qualitatively’ Denscombe (2014).

The main disadvantages of surveys are ‘limitation of depth of detail in the data obtained mainly
from wide ranging surveys and low response rates. Additionally, it is more difficult to reach the
most appropriate respondents within a large population’ Denscombe (2014).

3.5.2 Sampling
Sampling is briefly discussed in section J.1 of Appendix – J according to the way it was utilized
by various scholars. In this section, it is broadly studied in the light of the objectives of the
concerned research.

Cohen et al. (2000) suggests that the quality of research depends on an appropriate sampling
strategy. In selecting such a strategy the main factors to be considered are the size,
accessibility, parameters and representativeness or exploratoriness of the sample. Very large
samples would be unmanageable and very small samples would not represent the population.

As outlined in Denscombe (2014) representative samples are used to obtain quantitative data in
large scale surveys. Similarly, exploratory samples are used in small scale surveys to obtain
qualitative data.

According to Saunders et al. (2009) if the data is collected from every possible individual of the
population it is called census, and if the data is collected from a very small sub group it is
termed as cases or elements as shown in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2 – Population, sample and isolated cases

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

28
Two approaches called probability sampling and non-probability sampling were ascertained in
Denscombe (2014).

3.5.2.1 Probability sampling

As illustrated in Saunders et al. (2009) and also in Denscombe (2014), the five probability
sampling techniques are summarized in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 – Probability sampling techniques

Source: Denscombe (2014)

3.5.2.2 Non-probability sampling

Table 3.4 illustrates five types of non-probability sampling.

29
Table 3.4 – Non-probability sampling techniques

Source: Denscombe (2014)

3.5.3 Case studies

In the strategy of case studies one event or very few of them would be deeply investigated to
answer the research question. Denscombe (2014) pointed out that a ‘case’ needs to be a fairly
independent entity and to have fairly distinct borders.

Due to the difficulty of access to case studies in Qatar, and also due to uncertainty as regards
appropriateness of generalizing to the topic of this research, case studies are not considered
appropriate for this study.

3.5.4 Action research

According to Denscombe (2014), action research possesses a practical nature as the
participants are active. It is a cyclic process that allows initial findings to alter the topic for further
investigations. Cohen et al. (2000) pointed out that it motivates the people rather than solves
problems. Action research is limited to a set of selected people so that it cannot be generalized.

30
Action research would be applicable to this study only if the members of government funded
infrastructure projects in Qatar are the only participants and the objectives are to make
improvements to the processes rather than identifying the causes. Therefore, in the light of the
stated objectives, action research is not appropriate to this study.

3.5.5 Mixed methods

It is a mix of many methods and as outlined by Denscombe (2014) the research question is
reviewed from different angles and many studies can be combined as they best suit for solving
the concerned problem.

The key benefit of the mixed method is the very clear picture of the findings and their accuracy
that can be achieved through triangulation of both quantitative and qualitative data. Most
probably this would be the ideal choice for this study and as was also adopted by many scholars
identified in the literature review in similar backgrounds.

Saunders et al. (2009) illustrated many choices of combining the research strategies as shown
in Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3 – Research choices

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

3.6 Time horizon

As outlined in Saunders et al. (2009), a research will be cross-sectional when the concerned
phenomena are studied at a particular instance. Some other studies that involve observation of
events or people throughout a period of time with the scholar’s control over the observed
variables, without influencing such variables by the process, are known as longitudinal
researches.

31
As such, this study will be conducted over a relatively short period of time, it’s time horizon is
considered to be cross-sectional.

3.7 Credibility of research findings

The credibility of research findings are mainly dealt with reliability, bias, error, validity and
generalisability.

3.7.1 Reliability
Reliability of research findings can be assessed by answering the following questions as
outlined in Saunders et al. (2009:156, citing Smith et al.2008:109).
1. Are the measures the same as in other times?
2. Are the observations the same as others?
3. Are they transparent in the same way they sense raw data?

Saunders et al. (2009:156, citing Robson2002) further identified four threats to reliability as
follows.
i Subject or participant error – depends on the respondent’s interest
ii Subject or participant bias – respondents can be biased to their personal
believes and advantages over the reality
iii Observer error – can be eliminated by either repeating the
observation or including more than one observer
iv Observer bias – method of elimination depends on data collection
and analysis techniques

3.7.2 Bias and error

As explained by Norris (1997), social researches like this are subject to failings due to bias and
errors as stated in section 3.7.1, in the same manner that any other human activity would do. A
paradigm solution to eliminate the bias and error is not available. However, they can be labeled
and the researcher can seek approaches to minimize the effects of bias and errors.

Norris (1997) emphasized that to enhance the quality of the research; the scholar should be
honest and continue the study in a fair manner. Also, the data can be reviewed by others such
as critical friends with the subject knowledge. The mixed method suggested by Denscombe
(2014) also supports this approach.

32
As provided by Norris (1997) some examples of potential sources of bias are:
a) the reactivity of researchers with the providers and consumers of information;
b) selection biases including the sampling of times, places, events, people, issues,
questions and the balance between the dramatic and themundane;
c) the availability and reliability of various sources or kinds of data, either ingeneral or their
availability to different researchers;
d) the affinity of researchers with certain kinds of people, designs, data,theories, concepts,
explanations;
e) the ability of researchers, including their knowledge, skills,methodological strengths,
capacity for imagination;
f) the value preferences and commitments of researchers and theirknowledge or otherwise
of these;
g) the personal qualities of researchers, including, for example, their capacityfor
concentration and patience; tolerance of boredom and ambiguity; theirneed for
resolution, conclusion and certainty.

3.7.3 Validity
Validity of findings depends on ‘how really they are as the way they appear, thus concerning the
causal relationship between the two variables’ (Saunders et al. 2009).
The threats of validity were identified by Saunders et al. (2009:156, citing Robson2002) as
follows.

a) History – an error of an event observed currently should not threat the validity of the
entire history.
b) Testing – findings would be erroneous if the respondents realize that the research
outcome will influence them negatively.
c) Instrumentation – observations may not be real as they should be when the
respondents are directed out of the routine activities during the research period.
d) Mortality – drop of participants out of researches.
e) Maturation – Influence of other occurrences during the research progression.
f) Ambiguity about casual direction – e.g. when the contractor’s progress delay and the
client’s payment delay to the contractor occur at the same moment, a researcher in
Qatar may face the dilemma in identifying the cause and the effect of delay clearly out of
the two phenomena since they are inter-related.

33
3.7.4 Generalisability
According to Saunders et al. (2009) generalisability, which is also known as external validity,
attempts to apply findings equally with other research settings.

This researcher identifies findings drawn from researches involving case studies that cannot be
generalized and also cannot be utilized for thus study in Qatar, since they only focus on
individual organizations and cases.

3.8 Research ethics

As outlined by Denscombe (2014), social researchers are required to achieve their goal by
ethical means, and ethical approval from relevant parties and authorities are necessary for the
methods below.
 Questionnaires;
 Interviews or focus groups;
 Participant observation or synthetic observation.

Generally, in most of the countries in the world there can be ethics committees who approve
social researches and more attention will be paid to the participants of the following types
according to Denscombe (2014: 307).
 Vulnerable groups such as children and people with a learning disability;
 Sensitive topics such as sexual, religious or legal behaviour;
 Use of confidential information about identifiable individuals;
 Process that might cause psychological stress, anxiety, humiliation or cause minimal
pain;
 Intrusive interventions such as administration of drugs or vigorous physical exercise that
would not be part of participant’s normal lives.

Denscombe (2014: 309) identified key principles of research ethics as follows.

 Protection of participant’s interest;
 Participants should be voluntary and based on informed consent;
 Deceptions operates should be avoided with scientific integrity;
 Compliance with the laws of the land (in this study the law of Qatar).

34
3.9 Data Collection
According to Saunders et al. (2009), data that have already been collected for another purpose
is called secondary data, and the collection of new data for a particular purpose is called
primary data.

As suggested by Denscombe (2014) it is vital to carry out a pilot study that tests the method of
data collection in advance. Saunders et al. (2009) advised to select the data collection method
that suits to the research question and the objectives after evaluating all possible ones.

Denscombe (2014) stated that questionnaires, interviews, observations and documents are the
main types of data collection while Saunders et al. (2009) stated that questionnaires, interviews
and observations are the main primary data collection methods.

3.9.1 Primary data collection through questionnaire

According to Denscombe (2014) questionnaires will be appropriate when:
1. concise, undebatable and uncomplicated information is required;
2. personal interaction is not necessary to obtain regular data from identical questions;
3. the questions are easily understood by the respondents;
4. the background permits for complete and genuine answers.

According to Saunders et al. (2009), questionnaires are not applicable for exploratory
researches and the ones that require large numbers or open-ended questions, but can be used
in descriptive and explanatory ones. Hence, they are suitable for use in this study in Qatar as it
involves the identification of cause-and-effect relationships of construction delays.

The successful questionnaires are high in ‘response rate, completion rate and validity of
responses’ Denscombe (2014).

35
3.9.1.1 Types of questionnaire
Figure 3.4 illustrates types of questionnaire used in social researches.

Figure 3.4 – Types of questionnaire

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

3.9.1.2 Pros and cons of questionnaire

Denscombe (2014) pointed out:

 The advantages of questionnaire include being relatively economical, easy in arranging

since the respondents can decide when and where to fill it, ability to deliver standardized
questions, accuracy of data and the adaptability with online facility.
 The disadvantages of questionnaires include the discouragement and frustration of the
respondents due to pre-coded questions, researcher bias questions hinder the respondents’
true view, and the difficulty to identify the respondents’ honesty.

As outlined by Saunders et al. (2009), findings of questionnaire for this study in Qatar could be
complemented through interviews carried out in-depth to discover and realize the phenomena in
the light of research hypothesis and the stated objectives.

3.9.2 Primary data collection using interviews

As outlined in Denscombe (2014), interviews are useful in discovering information related to
very complicated phenomena. In this scenario the researcher may seek personal experience,
feelings, emotions and opinions of certain experts or key actors in the field of study. Saunders et
al. (2009) stated that valid and reliable data related to the research question and the objectives
can be obtained through interviews. They can be carried out face-to-face or by electronic
means such as the internet and telephone.

36
3.9.2.1 Types of interviews
Three main types of interviews were identified by Saunders et al. (2009) and also by
Denscombe (2014) as follows.
 structured interviews
 semi-structured interviews
 unstructured interviews

Saunders et al. (2009, citing Robson 2002) stated another typology as below.
 respondent (participant) interviews
 informant interviews

In addition to the above typologies, different forms of interviews are illustrated in Figure 3.5.

Figure 3.5 – Forms of interview

Source: Saunders et al. (2009, citing Healey 1991; Healey and Rawlinson 1993, 1994)

3.9.2.2 Pros and cons of interviews

Denscombe (2014) pointed out:

 the advantages of interviews for the production of data that deals with the topic in depth
and detail allowing the researcher to obtain vital insights; normal equipment such as
telephones, computers and recorders can be used; generates a fair and beneficial
ground for both the researcher and the respondent in expressing and sharing ideas

37
 openly and personally; high response rate; more reliable and valid; except for structured
interviews, the other two types possess flexibility.
 the disadvantages of interviews include being seen as an invasion of privacy; inhibitions
due to the use of electronic devices such as audio-video recorders; relatively more time
consuming; effects due to the researcher’s identity; threat to the validity and reliability in
any case if the interviewee is dishonest.

3.9.3 Secondary data collection

Various types of secondary data are listed Figure 3.6 will be further discussed under “Research
design” section.
Figure 3.6 – Types of secondary data

38
3.10 Data analysis
Data analysis methods depend on whether the research is quantitative or qualitative. The main
differences of their characteristic which decided the method of analysis are tabulated in Table
3.5.

Table 3.5 – Characteristics of quantitative and qualitative researches

Source: Denscombe (2014)

Figure 3.7 illustrates how to define the type of data in the ascending order of numerical
precision. As outlined by Saunders et al. (2009) if the data cannot be measured they are called
categorical data; and the quantifiable data are called numerical data.

3.10.1 Quantitative data analysis

According to Saunders et al. (2009), quantitative data in raw and needs to be processed to
make them useful by means of analysis techniques such as statistics, charts and graphs that
explore trends and relationships within the data.

Denscombe (2014) described that answers to closed-ended questions obtained through

questionnaires; content analysis of transcripts obtained through interviews; measurements from
experiments and observation schedule used with events obtained through observations; official
statistics, business data and content analysis of company reports obtained through documents
as sources of quantitative data.

As described by many authors, most of the time quantitative data analysis needs to find the
statistical mean, median, mode, standard deviation, variance, range and skewness etc. The
correlations between the variables can be tested using the ‘Kolmogorov-Smirnov test’ Saunders
et al. (2009), and also Spearman rank correlation coefficient, Cronbach's alpha and Kendall’s
Coefficient of concordance etc. as highlighted in Chapter 2.

39
Figure 3.7 – Types of data

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

40
3.10.2 Pros and cons of quantitative data analysis
Denscombe (2014) pointed out:

The advantages of quantitative data analysis as:

 It possesses a scientific status since it is based on statistics. The analyses are based on
objective laws but not the values of researcher;
 Provides extra confidence in credibility;
 Measurements are accurate since they are based on quantities rather than feelings and
emotions;
 Large number of data can be analyzed;
 Data can be neatly presented with the use of computer software that can produce charts
and tables etc.

The disadvantages of quantitative data analysis as:

 Risk of accumulation of weak data that may decline the quality of research.
 Researchers may tend to use more technically convenient procedures despite this and
the actual purpose of the research.
 Analysis can be more complex due to overloaded data.
 The depth of information is limited.

3.10.3 Qualitative data analysis

According to Denscombe (2014), qualitative data are mainly linked with research strategies
such as phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory and case studies and with research
methods such as observations, documents and interviews. However, the open-ended questions
which might be a part of questionnaires can also be considered as qualitative data.

As pointed out by Saunders et al. (2009), qualitative data are non-quantified, non-numerical
data that need classification and theoretical analysis. These data require at least structuring
using narrative to recognize the links, unitizing, categorizing, summarizing and generating well-
grounded conclusions. Unlike the quantitative approach, the data collection and its analysis are
interactive in a qualitative approach. The procedure of qualitative analysis might be related to
either the inductive or deductive approaches.

Table 3.6 illustrates various types of qualitative data with respect to their sources, collecting
method and format.

41
Table 3.6 – Types of qualitative data

Source: Denscombe (2014)

A comparison of different approaches of qualitative data analysis is shown in Table 3.7.

3.10.4 Pros and cons of qualitative data analysis

Denscombe (2014) pointed out:

The advantages of qualitative data analysis as:

 Well detailed rich outputs can be obtained.
 Since the findings are drawn from real world settings, data and analysis are grounded.
 Interpretive skills of the scholar can produce a variety of clarifications.
 Uncertainties and inconsistencies are tolerated without weakening the analysis.

The disadvantages of qualitative data analysis as:

 Difficulty in generalizing the findings to other similar events.
 Longer time consumption in analysis compared to a quantitative approach.
 High involvement of the researcher raises an issue about the impartiality of the findings.

42
43
3.11 Adopted research design
Having examined various research methodologies as discussed so far, it can be decided that
survey is the most appropriate strategy for this research. Therefore, data can be collected from
questionnaires and interviews and analyzed to achieve the research objectives and to test the
hypothesis as outlined in the following steps.

Step one: causes of delay around the globe were identified through the collection and analysis
of secondary data from around the world as illustrated in Tables 2.2 – 2.8.

Step two: causes of delay identified in Step one were grouped together to achieve Objective 1.

Step three: A questionnaire will be prepared based on the findings of the above two steps in
order to obtain the required quantum of data with a high response rate ensuring that the
questionnaire is not too lengthy in order to protect the respondents’ interest to fill it. A Likert
style rating scale will be used in the questionnaires to measure how strongly the causes of delay
make impact on the projects and how frequently they occur.

Step four: Interview questions will be prepared in order to obtain qualitative data through semi-
structured interviews and will be compared and verified using the quantitative data collected
through questionnaire.

Step five: Questionnaires will be distributed and collected while interviews are scheduled and
conducted.

Step six: both the quantitative and qualitative data will be analyzed and the results will be
tabulated in the order of rank with the use of RII. Objectives 2, 3 and 4 will be achieved at this
stage and also the hypothesis will be tested for acceptance or rejection. RII values will be
calculated as follows.

44
At this stage, the findings of the two methods will be triangulated. The correlation in ranking of
causes of delay between the two responding groups i.e. from questionnaires and interviews will
be found using rho as illustrated in Naoum (2007) as follows.

Figure 3.8 graphically illustrates the above steps.

Figure 3.8 – Research design

45
3.12 Summary
This study requires identifying major causes of construction projects delays, the most
responsible parties to the same and the key effects of delay in government funded infrastructure
projects in Qatar. Therefore, it requires credible information from key players who are both
currently and previously involved in the same kind of projects and also from those who are
connected to and well aware of the concerned matter, in order to generalize the findings
throughout the concerned sector in Qatar. In this scenario, obtaining qualitative data through
interviews will allow the researcher to achieve the objective in the best way, as was conducted
by other scholars in the literature review since they are more reliable and possess better quality
than the data from the questionnaires, as they are discussed in more depth. However, such an
inductive approach can be justified by utilizing a deductive approach such as questionnaires in
which the causes of delays, responsible parties and effects are quantitatively analyzed.

In Chapter 4: Data Collection, Analysis and Results; the above methods are successfully
applied in order to achieve the objectives and to test the hypothesis.

46
Chapter 04: Data Collection, Analysis and Results

4.1 Introduction
As outlined in Chapter 3, the quantitative data were collected through questionnaires and the
qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Both these types of data
were reviewed and analyzed to achieve the objectives and to test the hypothesis as discussed
here onwards.

4.2 Data collection through questionnaires and analysis

The questionnaire was designed based on the objectives as well as the hypothesis for this
research and distributed among various construction professionals such as engineers, project
managers, architects and quantity surveyors etc. using the online distribution methods as
outlined in Chapter 3: Research Methodology. The total number of respondents was 77 during a
period of one month out of over 150 questionnaires distributed to the professionals via e-mails.
They were followed up daily using phone calls and e-mail reminders. However, the shortfall of
responses is due to their busy working schedule. However, out of 77 only 44 respondents
answered properly for the most significant questions required for this study. The rest of the 33
responses were rejected since they were not complete as required for the analysis.

4.2.1 Profile of respondents

Questions 1 to 6 were designed to collect information appertaining to the respondents’ profiles
including their contact details, profession, type of organization, sector, types of projects and the
length of experience. This researcher considers such questions as important to ask in order to
contact the respondents if it is necessary identify any bias of the answers based on the
respondents’ profile and test the reliability of data as discussed in this chapter hereafter.

Figure 4.1 shows an analysis of respondent’s professions.

47
Figure 4.1 –Analysis of respondents’ profession

Answers to the third question indicated the percentage of type of organization party that the
respondents are engaged with as illustrated in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 – Respondents’ organization party type

48
Figure 4.3 shows that according to the respondents who stated their type of construction
organization sector in Qatar, that the majority i.e. more than 80% (74.65% + 5.63%) are
engaged in the private sector whereas a little above 25% (19.72% + 5.63%) are with public
sector. This percentage is based on a total of 71 respondents. Four of them are involved in both
public and private sectors. Six respondents did not answer this question.

Figure 4.3 – Respondents’ type of organization sector

74.65%
80.00%

70.00%

60.00%

50.00%

40.00%

30.00%
19.72%
20.00%
5.63%
10.00%

0.00%
Public only Public & Private Private only

Figure 4.4 shows the percentage of type of projects that the respondents have experienced.

Figure 4.4 – Respondents’ experience in various types of construction projects in Qatar

From the answers to the sixth question, it was found that exactly 50% of those who answered
i.e. 64 respondents possess less than 5 years’ professional experience.

49
Figure 4.5 shows the categories of percentages of respondents’ number of years experienced in
Qatari construction works.

Figure 4.5 – Respondents’ number of years experienced in Qatari construction projects

4.2.2 Top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on impact

Answers to the seventh question are important as they satisfy the second objective of this
research. Table4.1 shows the top ten causes of delay based on “impact” to government funded
infrastructure Projects in Qatar, as extracted from Table B.1 of Appendix – B.

Out of 77 respondents to the questionnaire, 48 answered this question. The top two causes of
delay were related to the category of client, namely “frequent changes in specification and/or
quantity during construction” and “slow decision making” with RII values of 0.719 and 0.708
respectively. The third and fourth causes “Contractor's financing problems and late payment to
the subcontractors/ suppliers” and “Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor” for
which the contractor is responsible, return RII values 0.672 and 0.656 respectively. The
consultant is responsible for the fifth cause of delay namely “Late design works by the
Consultants” with a RII value of 0.646 based on impact to the project.

50
Table 4.1–Ranking of top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on impact
Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Impact
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.719 1
Slow decision making by Client Client 0.708 2
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/
Contractor 0.672 3
suppliers
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.656 4
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.646 5
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.641 6
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.641 7
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.635 8
Delay in material delivery Material 0.620 9
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.615 10

4.2.3 Top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on frequency of occurrence
As with the seventh question, the eighth question is also important since it helps to achieve the
third objective of this research. Table 4.2 shows the top ten causes of delay based on
“frequency of occurrence” to government funded infrastructure Projects in Qatar, as extracted
from Table B.2 of Appendix – B.

Table 4.2– Ranking of top ten causes of delay from questionnaire based on frequency of
occurrence

Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Frequency

Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.698 1

Slow decision making by Client Client 0.625 2
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.625 3
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.620 4
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.609 5
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.609 6
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/
Contractor 0.599 7
suppliers
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.578 8
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.563 9
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.557 10

51
Those who answered the seventh question, answered the eighth one as well. In this scenario,
the top cause of delay is “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction”
by the Client and the next two causes are “Slow decision making by Client” and “Improper
planning and scheduling by the Contractor”. These causes of delay possess the RII values
0.698, 0.625 and 0.625 as shown in Table 4.2.

4.2.4 Causes of delay from questionnaire based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence
It is necessary to identify the combined effect of both the RII values based on impact and their
frequency of occurrence. RII-combined was determined by multiplying RII-impact with RII-
frequency as shown in Table 4.3 showing ten major causes of delay as extracted from Table
B.3 of Appendix – B.

Table 4.3 – Ranking of causes of delay from the questionnaire based on both impact and
frequency of occurrence
Responsible
RII- RII- RII-
Cause of Delay Party/ Rank
Impact Frequency Combined
Category
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
Client 0.719 0.698 0.502 1
construction by Client
Slow decision making by Client Client 0.708 0.625 0.443 2
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.656 0.625 0.410 3
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
Contractor 0.672 0.599 0.402 4
subcontractors/ suppliers
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.635 0.620 0.394 5
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.641 0.609 0.390 6
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.641 0.609 0.390 7
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.646 0.563 0.363 8
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.615 0.578 0.355 9
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.604 0.557 0.337 10

As far as the combined ranks are concerned, the client is responsible for the top two causes of
delay namely “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” and “Slow
decision making by Client” with RII values 0.502 and 0.443 respectively. However, the
contractor is responsible for the next three causes of delay.

4.2.5 Ranking of delay causing categories based on questionnaire data

Delay causing categories can be ranked by adding all the relevant RII-Combined values and
dividing by the number of causes in each category as shown in Table B.4 of Appendix – B and
are summarized in Table 4.4.

52
Table 4.4 – Ranking of delay causing categories based on questionnaire data

Responsible Party/ Category RII-Category Rank

Contractor 0.381 1
Client 0.354 2
Consultant 0.290 3
Material 0.230 4
Labour 0.198 5
Equipment 0.164 6
External 0.152 7

The results shown in Table 4.4 are utilized to test the hypothesis and it is clear that the
hypothesis can be accepted based only on the data analysis of questionnaire. However, it is
vital to adopt triangulation in such a way that the data collected through interviews are also
considered in addition to that of questionnaires. This is further discussed in the latter part of this
chapter.

4.2.6 Ranking of effects of delay based on questionnaire responses

According to the responses to the ninth question of the questionnaire survey, most significant
effects due to the causes of delays pertaining to the government funded infrastructure projects
in Qatar are shown in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 – Ranking of effects of delay based on questionnaire responses

Effect of Delay RII Rank

Time overrun 0.852 1
Cost overrun 0.801 2
Disputes 0.693 3
Tarnishing business relationships among parties 0.591 4
Quality shortfalls 0.574 5
Litigation, adjudication or arbitration 0.563 6
Abandonment 0.477 7

Time overrun, cost overrun and the disputes are the top three effects of delay in the order as
found in this study based on the questionnaire responses.

53
4.3 Data collection through interviews and analysis
The interviewees were selected based on their professional representation and the length of
experience in the construction industry. Therefore, two from each category i.e. Client,
Consultant and Contractor were selected in such a way that one of each category possesses
experience of more than ten years in Qatar and the other, with experience less than ten years in
Qatar, so that the effect of respondents being bias could be reasonably distributed among the
responses of each party. Table D.1 of Appendix – D illustrates the selection of interviewees.

4.3.1 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on impact

The interviewees’ answers to the tenth question satisfied both the second and third objectives.
Table 4.6 shows the top ten causes of delay based on “impact” to the government funded
infrastructure Projects in Qatar, as extracted from Table D.3 of Appendix – D focusing on the
second objective.

Table 4.6 – Ranking of top ten causes of delay from interviews based on impact
Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Impact
Slow decision making Client 0.875 1
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.833 2
Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers Contractor 0.833 3
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.833 4
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.792 5
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.750 6
Poor subcontractor performance Contractor 0.750 7
Delay in material delivery Material 0.750 8
Shortage of material Material 0.750 9
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.750 10

In this case the client is responsible for the most causes of delay based on impact, namely
“Slow decision making” possessing a RII values of 0.875. The second and third causes are
“Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” and “Financing problems
and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” for which the client and the contractor are
responsible respectively with a RII value of 0.833 for both of them.

4.3.2 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on frequency of occurrence
In the same context, focusing on the third objective, Table 4.7 illustrates the top ten causes of
delay based on “frequency of occurrence” as extracted from Table D.4 of Appendix – D.

54
Table 4.7–Ranking of top ten causes of delay from interviews based on frequency of
occurrence

Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Frequency

Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.833 1

Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers Contractor 0.833 2
Slow decision making Client 0.792 3
Poor finance and late payments Client 0.708 4
Delay in material delivery Material 0.708 5
Late design works Consultant 0.667 6
Shortage of material Material 0.667 7
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.667 8
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.625 9
Improper planning and scheduling Contractor 0.625 10

In this scenario “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” and
“Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” became the top two
most frequently occurring causes of delay for which the client and the contractor are
responsible, with RII values of 0.833 for both of them. The third and fourth ones are also client
related as shown in table 4.7 above.

4.3.3 Top ten causes of delay from interviews based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence
As shown in Table 4.8 which was extracted from Table D.5 of Appendix – D, the RII-combined
values for the top ten causes of delay were derived from the data collected through interviews in
the same manner as was carried out for the questionnaires.

According to the combined effects of impact and frequency of occurrence derived from interview
data, “Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” and “Frequent
changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” are the top two causes of delay,
with RII values 0.694 for both of them. The client is responsible for the third one “Slow decision
making” with a RII value 0.693 in this scenario.

55
Table 4.8 – Ranking of the causes of delay from interviews based on both impact and frequency
of occurrence
Responsible
RII- RII- RII-
Cause of Delay Party/ Rank
Impact Frequency Combined
Category
Financing problems and late payment to the
Contractor 0.833 0.833 0.694 1
subcontractors/ suppliers
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
Client 0.833 0.833 0.694 2
construction
Slow decision making Client 0.875 0.792 0.693 3
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain
External 0.833 0.667 0.556 4
and flood etc.)
Delay in material delivery Material 0.750 0.708 0.531 5
Shortage of material Material 0.750 0.667 0.500 6
Late design works Consultant 0.708 0.667 0.472 7
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.750 0.625 0.469 8
Poor subcontractor performance Contractor 0.750 0.625 0.469 9
Poor finance and late payments Client 0.625 0.708 0.443 10

4.3.4 Ranking of delay causing categories based on interview data

As was carried out for the Questionnaire data, the delay causing categories can be ranked and
that for the interview data can be extracted from Table D.6 of Appendix – D and is summarized
in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9 – Ranking of delay causing categories based on interview data

Responsible Party/ Category RII-Category Rank

Client 0.459 1
Contractor 0.425 2
Material 0.328 3
Consultant 0.312 4
External 0.310 5
Labour 0.215 6
Equipment 0.162 7

56
4.3.5 Ranking of effects of delay based on interviews
According to the interviewees’ answers to the eleventh question, the effects of delay are ranked
as shown in Table 4.10.Time overruns, cost overruns and disputes are the top three effects of
delay in the order as found in this study based on the interviews, and are similar to the
questionnaire responses.

Table 4.10 – Ranking of effects of delay based on the interviews

Effect of Delay RII Rank
Time overrun 1.000 1
Cost overrun 1.000 2
Disputes 0.750 3
Quality shortfalls 0.208 4
Tarnishing business relationships among parties 0.208 5
Litigation, adjudication or arbitration 0.167 6
Abandonment 0.083 7

4.4 Triangulation of data collected through questionnaires and interviews

The data collected through questionnaires and interviews were compared based on the impact
and frequency of occurrence as regards the causes of delay, and the effects as well using a
comprehensive analysis of data in Appendix – E with tabulation and application of the
Spearman rank correlation coefficient.

4.4.1 Causes of delay based on impact

For the fulfillment of the second objective, the causes of delay based on the impact, in both the
cases of questionnaires and interviews were ranked and compared as outlined in Table E.1 of
Appendix – E. It was established that the ranks of these two sets of data are significantly
correlated; and “Slow decision making by Client” and “Contractor's financing problems and late
payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” etc. are the most critical causes in this scenario.

4.4.2 Causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence

Similar to the cause of impact-causing delays above, the frequently occurring delay ranks of the
two data sets are also triangulated using Table E.3 of Appendix – E, in order to fulfill the third
objective of this study. Under this situation also, the ranks of these two sets of data are
significantly correlated; and “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
construction by the Client” is the most critical cause in this case.

57
4.4.3 Causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurrence
After considering the ranking of causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of
occurring according the points of view of both the interviewees and the questionnaire
respondents, “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction by the
Client” is identified as the major cause of delay in government funded infrastructure projects in
Qatar as illustrated in Table E.5 of Appendix – E.

4.4.4 Delay causing categories based on both impact and frequency of occurrence
Information derived through Table E.7 of Appendix – E can be utilized to test the hypothesis.
Based on the questionnaire responses, the Contractor is the main delay causing party followed
by the Client. However, according to the interviewees, the Client is the top delay causing
category followed by the Contractor.

4.4.5 Effects of delay

As outlined in Table E.8 of Appendix – E, both the interviewees and the respondents to the
questionnaires agreed in the same order that “Time overrun”, “Cost overrun” and “Disputes” are
the top three effects of delay in government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar, fulfilling the
fourth objective of this research.

4.5 Critical review of triangulated findings

For the questionnaire responses, the law of large numbers can be applicable as illustrated by
Saunders et al. (2009: 218). Since out of 77 responses 48 were found as valid, the
representation of the Qatari construction population from questionnaires is more than that from
interviews in which the sample size was only 6.

On the other hand, Denscombe (2014: 186) describes that interviews are more reliable since
the in depth discussions are possible. However, as far as the objectives of this research are
concerned, a large representation of the population is essential in order to identify various points
of views as regards the research topic and also to minimize any possible bias and errors.

Outliers of certain situations were observed in Appendix – E mainly due to two factors. The first
one is the boundaries of respondents’ working experience which are defined only by the limited
number of projects they were involved with. Secondly, the probability of occurring bias and
errors could be higher in the case questionnaires since the true feelings of the respondents are
not expressed as it is not conducted face-to-face. On the other hand the bias and errors are
mostly eliminated through the in depth discussions of the interviews.

58
Analyses show that the rankings of both the Client and the Contractor are maintained at a very
high level in both data collection methods leaving the Consultants at a very low level in the
sequence. Therefore, selection of the most delay contributing party between the Contractor and
the Client is challenging. This selection directly affects testing of the hypothesis since its
acceptance or rejection is purely based on whether the Contractor is the most delay contributing
party or not.

The questionnaire respondents show a little bias since loyalty dictates that each party will be
bias towards their respective discipline. Although, the respondents engaged with the contracting
companies ranked client-related causes of delay as top two and top three, based on “impact”
and “frequency of occurring” respectively, they agreed that for the third and fourth causes of
delay based on impact and also the fourth to seventh causes of delay based on frequency of
occurring, the contractor is responsible. However, the questionnaire respondents of client
representatives did not show any significant bias since they agree that “Frequent changes in
specification and/or quantity during construction by Client” is the highest cause of delay.

According to Figure 4.2, the Client’s contribution in answering the questionnaire is as little as
12.5% whereas it is greater from Contractor as 34.7%. The Consultants’ contribution in this
scenario is the highest since 50% of the respondents are Consultants who should be able to be
considered as an impartial party. Under these circumstances if bias exists, the expected result
can be against the Client. However, Table 4.4 shows that the Contractor is the most responsible
party to delays since the collective effect of Contractor related causes of delays outweighs the
top ranked Client related delay based on the quantitative data.

Although, only three out of six interviewees represented the Contractor, the results show that
the Client is the most responsible party to the delays. If bias exists, the results can be against
the Contractor.

The effects of delay can be accepted as outlined in Table E.8 of Appendix – E since any
significant deviation between the two sets of ranking is not shown.

59
4.6 Summary
The quantitative and qualitative data were collected successfully through the questionnaires and
the interviews. Then the second, third and fourth objectives were achieved through a systematic
analysis including triangulation of the collected data as explained in this chapter.

In Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations, the output of this chapter is further discussed
and conclusions concerning the research objectives and the hypothesis are determined.
Recommendations for future practice in this area of the study and also for further researches
are also provided.

60
Chapter 05: Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Introduction
In this chapter the achievement of the objectives and the testing of the hypothesis are
concluded; the limitations are discussed and recommendations are given subsequently. At the
end, this researcher’s reflections are stated.

5.2 Conclusions
The purposed of this research was to investigate causes of delay in government funded
infrastructure projects in Qatar and develop guideline to mitigate the delays.

The very first step of the study was to identify major causes of delay and the causative groups in
construction industry around the globe through the literature review in order to achieve the first
objective and proceed further. The delay causative groups were identified as Client, Contractor
and Consultant possessing 6 causes under each; and Labour, Material, Equipment and External
possessing 4 causes under each. Therefore, 34 numbers of major causes of delay were
identified from the secondary data.

Considering the identified 34 numbers of causes and 7 effects, data were collected and
analyzed to achieve the other 3 objectives and to test the hypothesis.

As reflected in the data triangulation process of Chapter 04, information obtained from the
interviews and the questionnaires are correlated. In other words, the quantitative data supports
the validity of the qualitative data and vice versa. However, data obtained from the interviews
are more appropriate to conclude the results due to its better quality. Therefore, from this point
onward, conclusions are made based on the interviews.

Fulfilling the second objective, the causes were ranked based on their highest impact and the
ten major causes are accepted as shown in Table 4.6. The three major causes were “Slow
decision making”, “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction” and
“Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” in the order. The Client
is responsible for the first two causes and the Contractor is responsible for the third cause.

The third objective was achieved by ranking the causes of delay based on their frequency of
occurring as shown in Table 4.7. The two major causes were “Frequent changes in specification
and/or quantity during construction” and “Financing problems and late payment to the

61
subcontractors/ suppliers” for which the Client and the Contractor are responsible respectively.
“Slow decision making by the Client” was ranked as the third in this situation.

The effects of delay were ranked as shown in Table 4.10. Time and cost overruns were the two
major effects and the disputes became the third, thus achieving the fourth objective.

The results of the primary research show a close relationship with that of the secondary
research because, in both situations the critical causes of delay and effects are common even
though the rank order of positions are very slightly changed. On the other hand, the
recommendations found in the secondary research were also more similar to that of the
interviewees in the primary research.

The hypothesis was developed from the secondary data that indicated that the Contractors are
the main contributors to the delays. This agreed with the questionnaire data from the primary
research. However, for testing the hypothesis, ranking of delay causing categories as shown in
Table 4.9 was utilized. In this scenario, the Contractors were not found as the main contributors
to the delays from the interview data. Therefore, the hypothesis is rejected.

Although this study is concluded at this point, it is necessary to discuss its limitations and also
the recommendations drawn from the research.

5.3 Limitations
Results are purely based on the data obtained from the questionnaires and interviews, but
according to this researcher’s observation and the Supervisor’s experience, designer’s
contribution for the project delays are very high since most of the delays occur due to the design
errors and late submission of design works that occur very often and affectively. However, it
was highlighted neither in quantitative data collection nor in qualitative data collection since it
was neither drawn from the literature review nor raised by the respondents. Therefore, in this
scenario the designer is not considered as a major party to contribute for delays since inclusion
of such personal opinions are not in line with research regulations or protocols.

Although, interviews produce better quality data than questionnaires, the number of
interviewees was limited to six considering the limited duration available for this research and
the time consumption to conduct the interviews as well.

As illustrated in Figures 4.1 and 4.4 of Chapter 04, an equal distribution of occupations and the
number of years experienced respectively, could not be achieved from the questionnaire

62
responses since it is uncontrollable to the researcher. Although, such a balance was achieved in
the number of years experienced by the interviewees, their occupations were unable to balance
as one planning engineer was interviewed when the five others belong the same professional
category since they are quantity surveying and contract administrative professionals.

5.4 Recommendations
Findings of this research suggest recommendations for both the construction practice in Qatar
and further research.

Construction Practice
The directories of causes of delay, which have been established based on their impact and
frequency of occurrence, and effects of delay to the government funded infrastructure projects
in Qatar can be utilized internationally in order to improve construction practice in the concerned
area through a l t strategy of delay management. Moreover, having shared the knowledge
obtained from this research, construction professionals and firms practicing in Qatar will be able
to mitigate the delays as suggested by the interviewees such as having “a comprehensive
master plan”, “prompt decision making of client's representative”, “realistic and explicit contract
duration”, “adequate time for the consultants in designing and planning at any stage”,
“streamlined approval procedure with local authorities”, “proper client’s brief expressing exact
requirements”, “expert representatives selected by the client”, “less interference of the client
during the construction”, “on time payments”, “development and finalization of design at the
initial stage”, “timely inspecting, reviewing, certifying and responding of the ongoing works by
the consultants”, “thorough contractual knowledge and documentation”, “awareness of
government procedures” and “financial strength”.

This researcher concurs with those suggestions and recommends that other professionals
consider the same during construction practice in Qatar. These recommendations can be
generalized as necessary and check lists can be developed from them.

Further research
Similar sorts of studies, narrowed down to any particular geographical area and sub-sector can
be carried out in order to establish a common directory of causes of delay. For example, a
group of scholars can identify a common set of causes of delay pertaining to government
funded projects in Qatar, by carrying out researches for different types of projects such as
commercial buildings, residential buildings, hospital buildings, school buildings, recreation and
sports complexes etc. simultaneously. This will allow them to compare results obtained for each

63
type of construction and identify what is in common and what makes the differences in each
scenario.

On the other hand, this research can be repeated simultaneously within other countries around
the globe to find out the similarities and differences of the results. This would allow the
researchers to discover whether any significant deviations exist due to the change of
geographical area and the countries’ economic, cultural and political environments.

Moreover, it is recommend to conduct comparative studies to identify different sets of causes of

delay based on alternative procurement methods.

Finally, scholars must be encouraged to collect more reliable and valid data while minimizing
bias and errors at their best for the successfulness of the researches.

5.5 Researcher’s reflections

Studies relating to construction delays cover a vast area of the subject and they require an
ample amount of time and resources. Therefore, this research was narrowed down to a small
area to investigate.

Although, this researcher intended to investigate the causes of delays pertaining to villa
construction in Qatar, it was decided to change the topic towards infrastructure considering the
availability of data.

During the initial stages of the study, this researcher felt that questionnaires would be more
appropriate for the data collection. However, with the guidance of the supervisor and further
reading of the subject it was realized that the interviews are the most appropriate method due to
their better quality.

Finally, it is important to mention that the knowledge gain from this research is crucial.
Additionally, the developed confidence will enable this researcher to conduct further studies that
will simultaneously enhance this researcher’s career prospects and contribute values to the
wider society.

64
References

African Manager (2015) 32% Qatar infrastructure projects delayed. Available at:
http://www.africanmanager.com/site_eng/detail_article.php?art_id=14137. [Accessed 11
September 2015].

Afshari H, Khosravi S, Ghorbanali A, Borzabadi M, Valipour M (2011) ‘Identification of

Causes of Non-excusable Delays of Construction Projects’, 2010 International Conference
on E-business, Management and Economics, 3, 42-46. Available at:
http://www.ipedr.com/vol3/9-M00013.pdf [Accessed 04 August 2015].

Ahmed S M, Azhar S, Castillo M and Kappagantula P (undated) Construction Delays in

Florida: An Empirical Study, Florida: Department of Community Affairs. Available at:
https://ohlsc.fiu.edu/pdfs/Research_Reports/Delays_Project.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2015].

Al Jurf N and Beheiry S(2012) ‘Factors affecting cost and schedule in Qatar’s residential
compounds projects’, Int. J. Engineering Management and Economics, 3(1/2),117–
134.Availableat:http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nasser_Jurf/publication/264438829_Fac
tors_affecting_cost_and_schedule_in_Qatar%27s_residential_compounds_projects/links/54
5cf6a40cf27487b44d4656.pdf [Accessed 08 May 2015].

Al-Kharashi A and Skitmore M (2009) Causes of delays in Saudi Arabian public sector
construction projects, Construction Management and Economics, Brisbane: Routledge.
Available at: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/21066/1/c21066.pdf [Accessed 12 May 2015].

Alaghbari W, Razali M A and Ernawati K A S (2007) “The significant factors causing delay of
building construction projects in Malaysia", Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management,14(2), 192 – 206, Available at:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/09699980710731308 [Accessed 23 May
2015].

Alinaitwe H, Apolot R, Tindiwensi D (2013) ‘An Investigation into the Causes of Delay and
Cost Overrun in Uganda’s Public Sector Construction Projects’, Journal of Construction in
Developing Countries, 18(2), 33–47. Available at:
http://web.usm.my/jcdc/vol18_2_2013/JCDC%2018(2)%202013-Art.%203%20(33-47).pdf
[Accessed 04 August 2015].

Alnuaimi A S and Al Mohsin M A (2013) Causes of Delay in Completion of Construction

Projects in Oman, International Conference on Innovations in Engineering and Technology
(ICIET'2013) Bangkok, December 25-26. Available at:
http://iieng.org/siteadmin/upload/9029E1213590.pdf [Accessed 12 May 2015].

Alwi S and Hampson K (2003) IDENTIFYING THE IMPORTANTCAUSES OF DELAYS IN

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, Proceedings of the 9th East Asia-Pacific
Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction, Bali, Indonesia, Available at:
http://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/10875570.pdf[Accessed 12 May 2015].

65
André N M C (2010) ESTIMATION MODEL FOR THE IMPACT OF DELAYS ON THE
COSTS OF A PROJECT, M.Sc. Dissertation (extended abstract), Instituto Superior Técnico,
Universidade Técnica de Lisboa. Available at:
https://fenix.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/downloadFile/395142099141/Extended%20Abstract%20-
%20EN.pdf [Accessed 05 August 2015].

CEM (2013) Time, Paper 0423V4-0, Reading: The College of Estate Management.

Cohen L, Manion L, and Morrison K (2000) Research methods in Education: Fifth Edition
London: Routledge Falmer. Available at: http://research-
srttu.wikispaces.com/file/view/Research+Methods+in+Education_ertu.pdf [Accessed 23
June 2015].

Daniel F Y (2014) KEY CAUSES OF DELAY IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS – VIEWS

OF GHANAIAN D3K3 AND A3B3 CONTRACTORS, M.Sc. Dissertation, College of
Architecture and Planning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi.
Available at:
http://ir.knust.edu.gh/bitstream/123456789/6865/1/FOBI%20YAW%20DANIEL.pdf
[Accessed 05 August 2015].

Dassanayaka C N (2015) Interviewed by the author, 02 November.

Denscombe M (2014) The Good Research Guide: For small-scale social research projects
(5th edn), Berkshire: Open University Press.

Fernando A J (2015) Interviewed by the author, 6 November.

Folahan I (2015) Interviewed by the author, 04 November.

Ghasemzadeh B (2014) Investigating Causes of Delays in Iranian Construction Industry

According to Project Delivery Methods, M.Sc. Dissertation, Institute of Graduate Studies and
Research, Eastern Mediterranean University, Gazimağusa, North Cyprus. Available at:
http://i-rep.emu.edu.tr:8080/jspui/bitstream/11129/1706/1/Ghasemzadeh.pdf [Accessed 05
August 2015].

Gunawardena S (2015) Interviewed by the author, 8 November.

Haseeb M, Lu X, Bibi A, Dyian M and Rabbani W (2011)‘Causes and Effects of Delays in

Large Construction Projects of Pakistan’, Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business
and Management Review, 1(4), 18-42. Available at: http://www.omicsonline.com/open-
access/2224-8358/2224-8358-1-127.pdf?aid=17999 [Accessed 16July 2015].

Jayalath C (2015) Interviewed by the author, 03 November.

66
Kaliba C (2010) COST ESCALATION, SCHEDULE OVERRUNS AND QUALITY
SHORTFALLS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, M.E. Dissertation, University of Zambia,
Lusaka._Available_at:_http://dspace.unza.zm:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/977/
chabota.pdf?sequence=1 [Accessed 05 August 2015].

KILANI M (2014) Building and Construction Sector in Qatar. Available at: http://www.invest-
export.irisnet.be/documents/16349/1298834/Building+and+Construction+Sector+in+Qatar+-
2014.pdf/b976848e-e0cb-4ac3-a1d9-59064aaa6f8d [Accessed 13 May 2015].

Koushki P A, Al-Rashid K and Kartam N (2005) ‘Delays and cost increases in the
construction of private residential projects in Kuwait’, Construction Management and
Economics, 23(March), 285-294. Available at:
http://www.tamu.edu/faculty/choudhury/articles/22.pdf [Accessed 07September 2015].

Kumararathna N (2015) Interviewed by the author, 10 November.

Luu T V, Nguyen M S and Nguyen T V (2015) ‘A Conceptual Model of Delay Factors

affecting Government Construction Projects’, ARPN Journal of Science and Technology,
5(2), 92-100. Available at: http://www.ejournalofscience.org/archive/vol5no2/vol5no2_7.pdf
[Accessed 05 August 2015].

Mahamid I (2013) ‘Common risks affecting time overrun in road construction projects in
Palestine: Contractors’ perspective’, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and
Building, 13(2) 45-53. Available at:
http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/AJCEB/article/viewFile/3194/3492 [Accessed
04 August 2015].

Man N F B N (2013) THE STUDY OF DELAY AND SUCCESS FACTORS IN MALAYSIAN

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY, Bachelor of Engineering Dissertation, Tronoh, Perak,
Malaysia: Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS. Available at:
http://utpedia.utp.edu.my/8191/1/FINAL%20DISSERTATION%20-
%20NIK%20FATIMAH%20BINTI%20NIK%20MAN.pdf [Accesses 21 July 2015].

Marzouk M M and El-Rasas T I (2014) ‘Analyzing delay causes in Egyptian construction

projects’, Journal of Advanced Research,5, 49-55. Available at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S209012321200104X [Accessed 04 August
2015].

MDP&S (2013) Qatar Economic Outlook 2013–2014, Qatar: Ministry of Development

Planning and Statistics. Available at:
http://www.gsdp.gov.qa/portal/page/portal/gsdp_en/knowledge_center/Tab2/QatarEconomic
Outlook2013-2014.pdf [Accessed 05 September 2015].

MECONSTRUCTIONNEWS.COM (2015) Foreign contractors in Qatar ‘hit by delays,

mothballed projects’. Available at: http://meconstructionnews.com/story/4706/foreign-
contractors-in-qatar-hit-by-delays-mothballed-projects [Accessed 11 September 2015].

67
Mohammad K A and Isah A D (2012) ‘CAUSES OF DELAY IN NIGERIA CONSTRUCTION
INDUSTRY’, INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN
BUSINESS, 4(2), 785-794. Available at: http://journal-archieves19.webs.com/785-794.pdf
[Accessed 03 August 2015].

Motaleb O and Kishk M (2010) An investigation into causes and effects of construction
delays in UAE, in Egbu C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8
September 2010, Leeds, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management,
1149-1157. Available at: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2010-1149-
1157_Motaleb_and_Kishk.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2015].

Mukuka M, Aigbavboa C O and Thwala W D (undated) CONSTRUCTION

PROFESSIONALS’ PERCEPTION ON THE CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF PROJECT
DELAY IN LUSAKA, ZAMBIA; South Africa: University of Johannesburg. Available at:
https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10210/12597/CIB_DC26253.pdf?sequence=1
[Accessed 04 August 2015].

Naoum S G (2014) Dissertation Research & Writing for Construction Students (2ndedn),
Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Norris N (1997) Error, bias and validity in qualitative research, Educational Action Research,
5:1, 172-176. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09650799700200020
[Accessed 15 October 2015].

Olatunji A A (2010) Influences on Construction Project Delivery Time, PhD Thesis, Faculty
of Engineering, The Built Environment and Information Technology, The Nelson Mandela
Metropolitan University. Available at:
http://dspace.nmmu.ac.za:8080/jspui/bitstream/10948/1548/1/AIYETAN%20AYODEJI%20O
LATUNJI.pdf [Accessed 04 August 2015].

Owolabi J D, Amusan L M, Oloke C O, Olusanya O, Olayeni T P, Owolabi D, Peter J and

Ignatious O (2014) ‘CAUSES AND EFFECT OF DELAY ON PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
DELIVERY TIME’, International Journal of Education and Research, 2(4), 197-208.
Available at: http://www.ijern.com/journal/April-2014/19.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2015].

Pethkar P M and Birajdar B V (2014) ‘LITERATURE REVIEW ON CAUSES OF DELAY IN

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS’, JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE
AND RESEARCH IN CIVIL ENGINEERING,3(2), 217-220. Available at:
http://www.ejournal.aessangli.in/ASEEJournals/CIVIL41.pdf [Accessed 16July 2015].

Pham L H and Hadikusumo H (2014) ‘Schedule delays in engineering, procurement, and

construction petrochemical projects in Vietnam’, International Journal of Energy Sector
Management, 8(1), 3 - 26. Available at:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/IJESM-06-2013-0009 [Accessed 19 July
2015].

68
Pourrostam T and Ismail A (2012) ‘Causes and Effects of Delay in Iranian Construction
Projects’ IACSIT International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 4(5), 598-601.
Available at: http://www.ijetch.org/papers/441-P10022.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2015].

Rahsid Y, Haq S and Aslam M S (2013) ‘Causes of Delay in Construction Projects of

Punjab-Pakistan: An Empirical Study’, Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research,
3(10), 87-96. Available at:
http://textroad.com/Old%20version/pdf/JBASR/J.%20Basic.%20Appl.%20Sci.%20Res.,%20
3(10)87-96,%202013.pdf [ Accessed 05 August 2015].

Ramanathan C, Narayanan S P and Idrus A B (2012) ‘Construction Delays Causing Risks

on Time and Cost – a Critical Review’, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and
Building, 12 (1) 37-57. Available at:
http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/ajceb/article/download/2330/2811 [Accessed
09 May 2015].

Ren Z, Atout M and Jones J (2008) Root causes of construction project delays in Dubai, in
Dainty A (ed.) Proceedings of 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008,
Cardiff, UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 749-757. Available
at: http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2008-749-757_Ren_Atout_and_Jones.pdf
[Accessed 04 August 2015].

Saunders M, Lewis P and Thornhill A (2009) Research Methods for Business Students (5th
edn), Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited. Available at:
http://is.vsfs.cz/el/6410/leto2014/BA_BSeBM/um/Research_Methods_for_Business_Student
s__5th_Edition.pdf [Accessed 04 September 2015].

Shebob A, Dawood N, Shah R K and Xu Q (2012) ‘Comparative study of delay factors in

Libyan and the UK construction industry’, Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 19(6), 688 – 712. Available at:
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/09699981211277577 [Accessed 19 July
2015].

The Commercial Bank of Qatar (2012) Qatar Construction Sector. Available at:
http://www.ifpinfo.com/getpdf.php?pdf=Qatar%20Construction%20Sector.pdf[Accessed 13
May 2015].

Trauner T J, Manginelli W A, Lowe J S, Nagata M F and Furniss B J (2009) Construction

Delays: Understanding Them Clearly, Analyzing Them Correctly (2nd edn),Burlington, USA:
Elsevier Butterworth–Heinemann.

Ventures – Middle East (2015) QATAR CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY – THE WORLD CUP
2022 AND BEYOND. Available at: http://projectqatar.com/pdf/Qatar%20
Construction%20Industry-Feb%202015.pdf [Accessed 13 May 2015].

69
Bibliography

AECOM (2014) Middle East Handbook: Property and Construction Handbook. Available at:
http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/Internet/Geographies/Middle%20East/Middle%20East
%20Handbook%202014.pdf [Accessed 05 September 2015].

Apolot R, Alinaitwe H, Tindiwensi D (undated) An Investigation into the Causes of Delay and
Cost Overrun in Uganda’s Public Sector Construction Projects, Second International
Conference on Advances in Engineering and Technology, 305-311. Available at:
http://mak.ac.ug/documents/Makfiles/aet2011/Apolot.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2015].

Bhatia N (2015a) Foreign contractors fear Qatar project delays. Available at:
http://www.arabianindustry.com/construction/qatar/news/2015/jul/6/foreign-contractors-fear-
qatar-project-delays-5088889/ [Accessed 11 September 2015].

Bhatia N (2015b) Qatar says no to project delays and subsidy cuts. Available at:
http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-35303-qatar-says-no-to-project-delays-and-
subsidy-cuts/ [Accessed11 September 2015].

Fugar F D K and Agyakwah‐Baah A B (2010) ‘Delays in building construction projects in

Ghana’, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 10 (1/2)
103‐116.Availableat:http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/AJCEB/article/download/
1592/1737 [Accessed 10 May 2015].

Hendrickson C and Au T (2003), Project Management for Construction: Fundamental

Concepts for Owners, Engineers, Architects and Builders, Version 2.1, Pittsburgh: Carnegie
Mellon University. Available at: http://www.ce.cmu.edu/pmbook [Accessed 10 September
2015].

Kamanga M J and Steyn W J vd M (2013) Causes of delay in road construction projects in

Malawi, JOURNAL OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERING Vol
55 No 3, October 2013, Pages 79–85, Paper 954. Available at:
http://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/37236/Kamanga_Causes_2013.pdf?seque
nce=1 [Accessed 12May 2015].

Majid I A (2006) Causes and Effects of Delays in Aceh Construction Industry, Johor:
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Available at:
http://eprints.utm.my/5304/1/IbnuAbbasMajidMFKA2006TTT.pdf [Accessed 30 September
2015].

Muhwezi L, Acai J and Otim G (2014) An Assessment of the Factors Causing Delays on
Building Construction Projects in Uganda, International Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, 3(1): 13-23.Available
at:http://www.sapub.org/global/showpaperpdf.aspx?doi=10.5923/j.ijcem.20140301.02
[Accessed 11 May 2015].

70
Niazai A G and Gidado K (undated) Causes of Project Delay in the Construction Industry in
Afghanistan. Available at:http://eprints.brighton.ac.uk/11129/1/7%20E110.pdf [Accessed
12May 2015].

Odeh A M and Battaineh HT (2002) ‘Causes of construction delay: traditional contracts’,

International Journal of Project Management, 20, 67‐73.Available
at:http://www.tamu.edu/faculty/choudhury/articles/48.pdf[Accessed 11May 2015].

Reuters (2015) Qatar building boom proves a challenge for foreign construction firms.
Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/23/qatar-construction-
idUSL5N0YU1BK20150623 [Accessed 11 September 2015].

Saeed S A A (2009) DELAY TO PROJECTS – CAUSE, EFFECT AND MEASURES TO

REDUCE DELAY BY MITIGATION OR ACCELERATION, Dissertation: Project
Management Programme – Institute of Business, Dubai: The British University in Dubai.
Available at: http://bspace.buid.ac.ae/bitstream/1234/234/1/60046.pdf [Accessed 03 August
2015].

Sambasivan M and Soon YW (2007) Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction
industry, International Journal of Project Management 25, 517–526. Available at:
http://www.nosazimadares.ir/fanni/doclib7/causes%20and%20effects%20of%20delays%20i
n%20malaysian%20construction%20industry.pdf [Accessed 11May 2015].

Seboru M A (2015) ‘An Investigation into Factors Causing Delays in Road Construction
Projects in Kenya’, American Journal of Civil Engineering, 3(3), 51-63. Available at:
http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajce.20150303.11.pdf [Accessed 11
September 2015].

Trenwith C (2015) Qatar delays Sharq crossing project until after 2022 World Cup. Available
at: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/qatar-delays-sharq-crossing-project-until-after-2022-
world-cup-579221.html [Accessed 11 September 2015].

WEI S K (2010) Causes, Effects and Methods of Minimizing Delays in Construction Projects,
Johor: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Available at:
http://www.efka.utm.my/thesis/IMAGES/3PSM/2010/JSB-3/kangsikweiaa060080d10ttt.pdf
[Accessed 12 May 2015].

71
 Appendix – A

Questionnaire Sample

72
Appendix - A: Questionnaire Sample

Dear Sir/ Madam,

I kindly request you to support me by participate to this survey which is required for the fulfillment
of my Masters Degree in Surveying at the University of Reading UK.

1. Contact details (Optional). Please note that the information given will be treated as confidential and will
not be appeared in the submission. Nevertheless, the researcher may use it to communicate with the
respondent.

Name

Company

Address

Email Address

Phone Number

2. Please specify your profession

Engineer (Civil/ MEP)

Project Director / Manager

Designer / Architect

Contract Administrator / Manager

Supervision Consultant

Arbitrator

Commercial Manager

Quantity surveyor

Other (please specify)

73 1
3. Please indicate the type of organization you are engaged with

Client

Contractor

Engineering Consultant

Cost Consultant

Other (please specify)

4. In what sector you are working?

Public

Private

5. State the type of projects that you have experienced

Infrastructure

Sports / recreation facility

Commercial Buildings

Residential Buildings

Industrial

Hotel

Other (please specify)

74 2
 6. Years of your construction experience in Qatar

Less than 5 years

5 - 10 years

11 - 15 years

Over 15 years

* 7. Please rate the causes of delay (based on impact) to the government funded infrastructure Projects in
Qatar as stated below. [Very High(4), High(3), Medium(2), Low(1), Very Low(0)]

Very High High Medium Low Very Low

Frequent changes in
specification and/or
quantity during
construction by Client

Slow decision making by

Client

Unrealistic contract
duration by Client

Poor finance and late

payments by Client

Inadequate skill and

experience of Client's
representative

Suspension of works by
Client

Contractor's financing
problems and late
payment to the
subcontractors/
suppliers

Inadequate Contractor's
experience and
competence

Poor site management

and supervision by the
Contractor

Improper planning and

scheduling by the
Contractor

Contractor's poor
coordination

75 3
 Very High High Medium Low Very Low

Poor performance of the

Subcontractor

Inadequate Consultant's
experience and
competence

Wrong, inappropriate or
incomplete design by the
Consultants

Late design works by the

Consultants

Slow inspection and late

approval by the
Consultants

Consultant's poor
contract management

Insufficient inspectors or
poor inspection by the
Consultants

Delay in material
delivery

Shortage of material

Fluctuation of material
prices

Poor quality of material

Shortage of labour

Low productivity of
labour

Labour injuries

Labour disputes and

strikes

Shortage of Equipment

Equipment breakdowns

Lack of equipment
efficiency

Late delivery of
equipment to site

Adverse weather
conditions (sand storm,
heavy rain and flood
etc.)

76 4
 Very High High Medium Low Very Low

Unforeseen poor ground

conditions

Social, economic or
political
insecurity/instability
(Cultural issues, inflation
and war etc.)

Visa approval, building

approval and utility
connection delay

* 8. Please rate the causes of delay (based on frequency of occurring) to the government funded
infrastructure Projects in Qatar as stated below. [More Frequently(4), Frequently(3), Normal(2), Little(1),
Very Little(0)]

More Frequently Frequently Normal Little Very Little

Frequent changes in
specification and/or
quantity during
construction by Client

Slow decision making by

Client

Unrealistic contract
duration by Client

Poor finance and late

payments by Client

Inadequate skill and

experience of Client's
representative

Suspension of works by
Client

Contractor's financing
problems and late
payment to the
subcontractors/
suppliers

Inadequate Contractor's
experience and
competence

Poor site management

and supervision by the
Contractor

Improper planning and

scheduling by the
Contractor

77 5
 More Frequently Frequently Normal Little Very Little

Contractor's poor
coordination

Poor performance of the

Subcontractor

Inadequate Consultant's
experience and
competence

Wrong, inappropriate or
incomplete design by the
Consultants

Late design works by the

Consultants

Slow inspection and late

approval by the
Consultants

Consultant's poor
contract management

Insufficient inspectors or
poor inspection by the
Consultants

Delay in material
delivery

Shortage of material

Fluctuation of material
prices

Poor quality of material

Shortage of labour

Low productivity of
labour

Labour injuries

Labour disputes and

strikes

Shortage of Equipment

Equipment breakdowns

Lack of equipment
efficiency

Late delivery of
equipment to site

78 6
 More Frequently Frequently Normal Little Very Little

Adverse weather
conditions (sand storm,
heavy rain and flood
etc.)

Unforeseen poor ground

conditions

Social, economic or
political
insecurity/instability
(Cultural issues, inflation
and war etc.)

Visa approval, building

approval and utility
connection delay

9. How do you rate the following effects to government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar due to above
causes of delay? [Strongly Agree(4), Agree(3), Neutral(2), Disagree(1), Strongly Disagree(0)]

strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree strongly Disagree

Time overrun

Cost overrun

Quality shortfalls

Disputes

Litigation, adjudication
or arbitration

Tarnishing business
relationships among
parties

Abandonment

79 7
 Appendix – B

Questionnaire Discussion

80
Appendix – B: Questionnaire Discussion
The most important part of the data collection through the distributed questionnaire starts with
question 7.

The causes of delays based on their impact to the projects, are shown in Table B.1.

Table B.1 – Ranking of causes of delay based on impact

Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Impact
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.719 1
Slow decision making by Client Client 0.708 2
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/
Contractor 0.672 3
suppliers
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.656 4
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.646 5
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.641 6
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.641 7
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.635 8
Delay in material delivery Material 0.620 9
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.615 10
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants Consultant 0.615 11
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.604 12
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.604 13
Poor finance and late payments by Client Client 0.589 14
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants Consultant 0.583 15
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative Client 0.552 16
Consultant's poor contract management Consultant 0.552 17
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.547 18
Shortage of material Material 0.542 19
Shortage of labour Labour 0.536 20
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants Consultant 0.531 21
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.510 22
Suspension of works by Client Client 0.505 23
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.474 24
Poor quality of material Material 0.453 25
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.422 26
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.411 27
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.411 28
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.406 29
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.396 30
Labour injuries Labour 0.370 31
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.354 32
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.344 33
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues, inflation
External 0.328 34
and war etc.)

81
The causes of delays based on their frequency of occurrence during the construction period of
the projects, are as shown in table B.2:

Table B.2 – Ranking of causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence

Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Frequency
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.698 1
Slow decision making by Client Client 0.625 2
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.625 3
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.620 4
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.609 5
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.609 6
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliersContractor 0.599 7
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.578 8
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.563 9
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.557 10
Delay in material delivery Material 0.536 11
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants Consultant 0.531 12
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.521 13
Consultant's poor contract management Consultant 0.510 14
Poor finance and late payments by Client Client 0.500 15
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative Client 0.500 16
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants Consultant 0.484 17
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants Consultant 0.474 18
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.464 19
Shortage of material Material 0.464 20
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.458 21
Shortage of labour Labour 0.443 22
Suspension of works by Client Client 0.432 23
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.396 24
Poor quality of material Material 0.391 25
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.385 26
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.385 27
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.385 28
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.375 29
Labour injuries Labour 0.354 30
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.349 31
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.344 32
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.318 33
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues, inflation
External 0.286 34
and war etc.)

The causes of delays based on their combined effect of both the impact to the projects and
frequency of occurrence are shown in Table B.3. RII-combined was determined by multiplying
RII-impact with RII-frequency.

82
Table B.3 – Ranking of causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurring

Responsible
RII- RII- RII-
Cause of Delay Party/ Rank
Impact Frequency Combined
Category
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
Client 0.719 0.698 0.502 1
construction by Client
Slow decision making by Client Client 0.708 0.625 0.443 2
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor Contractor 0.656 0.625 0.410 3
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
Contractor 0.672 0.599 0.402 4
subcontractors/ suppliers
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor Contractor 0.635 0.620 0.394 5
Unrealistic contract duration by Client Client 0.641 0.609 0.390 6
Contractor's poor coordination Contractor 0.641 0.609 0.390 7
Late design works by the Consultants Consultant 0.646 0.563 0.363 8
Poor performance of the Subcontractor Contractor 0.615 0.578 0.355 9
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.604 0.557 0.337 10
Delay in material delivery Material 0.620 0.536 0.332 11
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants Consultant 0.615 0.531 0.326 12
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.604 0.521 0.315 13
Poor finance and late payments by Client Client 0.589 0.500 0.294 14
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants Consultant 0.583 0.484 0.283 15
Consultant's poor contract management Consultant 0.552 0.510 0.282 16
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative Client 0.552 0.500 0.276 17
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants Consultant 0.531 0.474 0.252 18
Shortage of material Material 0.542 0.464 0.251 19
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.547 0.458 0.251 20
Shortage of labour Labour 0.536 0.443 0.237 21
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.510 0.464 0.237 22
Suspension of works by Client Client 0.505 0.432 0.218 23
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.474 0.396 0.188 24
Poor quality of material Material 0.453 0.391 0.177 25
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.422 0.385 0.163 26
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.411 0.385 0.159 27
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.396 0.385 0.153 28
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.406 0.375 0.152 29
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.411 0.344 0.141 30
Labour injuries Labour 0.370 0.354 0.131 31
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood
External 0.354 0.349 0.124 32
etc.)
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.344 0.318 0.109 33
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues,
External 0.328 0.286 0.094 34
inflation and war etc.)

Delay causing categories can be ranked by adding all of the relevant RII-Combined values and
dividing by the number of causes in each category as shown in Table B.4 hereafter.

83
Table B.4 – Ranking of delay causing categories
Responsible
RII-
Cause of Delay Party/ RII-Category Rank
Combined
Category
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.410
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
0.402
subcontractors/ suppliers
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.394 Contractor 0.381
Contractor's poor coordination 0.390
Poor performance of the Subcontractor 0.355
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.337
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
0.502
construction by Client
Slow decision making by Client 0.443
Unrealistic contract duration by Client 0.390
Client 0.354
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.294
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.276
Suspension of works by Client 0.218
Late design works by the Consultants 0.363
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants 0.326
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.283
Consultant 0.290
Consultant's poor contract management 0.282
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the
0.252
Consultants
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence 0.237
Low productivity of labour 0.315
Shortage of labour 0.237
Labour 0.198
Labour injuries 0.131
Labour disputes and strikes 0.109
Delay in material delivery 0.332
Shortage of material 0.251
Material 0.230
Poor quality of material 0.177
Fluctuation of material prices 0.159
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.188
Shortage of Equipment 0.163
Equipment 0.164
Equipment breakdowns 0.153
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.152
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.251
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.141
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and External 0.152
0.124
flood etc.)
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural
0.094
issues, inflation and war etc.)

84
 Appendix – C

Interview Questions

85
Appendix – C: Interview Questions

The title of this research is “An investigation into causes of delay in government funded
infrastructure projects in Qatar and developing guideline to mitigate the delays”

Confidentiality
The following information can be provided as wished by your good self. I hereby assure that the
personal and confidential information provided by you will not be disclosed to any third party and
such information will only be used for academic research purposes and the same would never
be used for any other purpose without your acknowledgement and consent in any case. I also
assure you that my research complies with the laws of the State of Qatar.

Name:………………………………………………………………………………………
Designation:…………………………………………………………………………….
Company Name and Address:………………………………………………….
E-mail:……………………………………………………………………………………..
Telephone:………………………………………………………………………………

Kindly note that all the above information are not compulsory so that you may leave some of the
fields blank.

Questions
1. Do you have either previous or present experience with government funded infrastructure
projects in Qatar?

If “Yes” please answer from question nos.02 to 08.

2. Please state those projects with their approximate details such as original and revised
contract prices and completion dates etc.

3. Have you undergone or likely to undergo any delay in this/these project(s)?

4. How often you have encountered late completion of these projects? (please state the
numbers of projects delayed and not delayed)

5. In the worst scenario, at what duration the project was delayed and what is the fraction of
delay period compared to the original duration?

86
6. At what level of severity your company was affected by such delays? (Very high (4), High
(3), Medium (2), Low (1), Very Low (0)).

7. What are the post delay actions you have taken to recover the delays?

8. What are the precautions you have considered to minimize or eliminate delays?

If your answer is “No” to Question no.01, please answer question no.09.

9. Do you believe that the causes of delays you have encountered within your Qatari
construction career can be the same in government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar?

If your answer is “No” then this will be the end of the interview. Thank you very much for
your kind cooperation in this research.

If your answer is “Yes” then the interview will be continued as follows.

The following questions can be answered either your answer to question 01 is “Yes” or “No”.

10. According to your experience generally, what would be the major causes of delays in
government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar, and which parties are mostly
responsible in causing such delays? (For this question, at the time of interview, this
researcher will guide the interviewee showing a list of 34 causes of delays as included in the
questionnaire)

11. What would be the most significant effects due to above causes of delays? (For this
question, at the time of interview, this researcher will guide the interviewee showing a list of
7 effects due to delays as included in the questionnaire)

12. What would you suggest as methods of mitigating delays of government funded
infrastructure projects in Qatar?

End of the interview.

Thank you very much for your kind cooperation in this research.

87
Appendix – D

Interviews

88
Appendix – D: Interviews

D.1 Data Collection through Interviews and Analysis

The interviewees were selected as shown in TableD.1.

Table D.1 – Selection of interviewees

Representing Position Experience in Qatar Interviewee
Party Reference
Client Contracts Manager More than 10 years Jayalath (2015)
Client Snr. QS Less than 10 years Dassanayaka (2015)
Consultant Snr. Cost Eng. More than 10 years Kumararathna (2015)
Consultant Snr. Planning Eng. Less than 10 years Folahan (2015)
Contractor Contracts Manager More than 10 years Fernando (2015)
Contractor Snr. QS Less than 10 years Gunawardena (2015)

The interviews were started by asking whether the respondents have experience with
government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar. All the above respondents answered “Yes”
to this question. Therefore, all of them were able to provide approximate details such as original
and revised contract prices and completion dates etc. of the projects within the concerned
category as the answer to the second question. The content of this answer could automatically
derive answers to the third, fourth and fifth questions.

According to Jayalath (2015), every government funded infrastructure project in Qatar was
delayed during his 17 years’ experience. Dassanayake (2015), Kumararathna (2015), Folohan
(2015) and Fernando (2015) also agreed with Jayalath (2015). However, Gunawardena (2015)
stated that only 80% of his projects of the concerned category were unable to complete on time.

According to all of them except Folohan (2015) and Gunawardena (2015), in the worst scenario,
projects were prolonged more than 100% of the original project duration. Folohan (2015) and
Gunawardena (2015) stated that lesser time overruns than the other respondents such as 40%
and 50% respectively as the worst situation they have faced in this regard. Table D.2 illustrates
details of the 3 key projects of Jayalath (2015) having major delay impacts.

89
Table D.2 – Details of three key infrastructure projects in Qatar
Infra Structure Project Name Doha Al Mana Lusail
Expressway Interchange Infrastructure
Original Contract Value (QR 600 280 1,200
Million)
Final Contract Price (QR Million) 1800 340 4,000
Cost Overrun (QR Million) 1200 60 2,800
% of Cost Overrun 200% 21% 233%
Original Construction Duration 2.5 years 2.0 years 2.5 years
Actual Construction Duration 5.0 years 2.2 years 4.0 years
Time Overrun 2.5 years 0.2 years 1.5 years
% of Time Overrun 100% 10% 60%
Note: the above figures are only approximate
Source: Jayalath (2015)

Answering the sixth question, Jayalath (2015), Dassanayaka (2015) and Fernando (2015)
agreed that their companies were affected by the concerned project delays with “very high”
severity whereas Folahan (2015),Gunawardena (2015) agreed that such delays were just “high”
in severity in their situations. However, Kumararathna (2015) stated that it was medium for his
company.

Folahan (2015), Gunawardena (2015) and Fernando (2015) agreed in answering the seventh
question that as a post delay action, the resources were increased so that the delays were
recovered. In addition to that Fernando (2015) had increased the number of working hours
whereas Gunawardena (2015) had introduced night shifts, and Folahan (2015) had
implemented numerous parallel activities as methods of recovering incurred delays.
Kumararathna (2015) had focused on certain areas of infra structure projects where the
Civil/Building Contractors were affected and minimized such effects by thinking globally to
minimize the overall project delay. Design changes also were further implemented as another
solution for the recovery of delay in his projects. Monthly meetings were changed to bi-weekly
meetings in most of the infra structure project of Dassanayaka (2015) for more close monitoring
of the program and taking actions to lessen the effect of incurred delays such as acceleration of
critical activities, in addition to the implementation of value management techniques to identify
and omit unnecessary activities without sacrificing the originally intended function and purpose.

90
The approach explained by Jayalath (2015) in this regard was different to all the others. In most
of his projects, the owner had deployed his own staff to accelerate the progress, closely monitor
and reduce the effect of delay while assisting the contractor in the cash flow as well.

Answering the eighth question, Jayalath (2015) stated that as a precaution to minimize or
eliminate infra structure project delays, notices were issued in all his projects as an early
warning mechanism. This was agreeable to Folahan (2015) as well. In addition to that Folahan
(2015) considered acceleration of predecessor activities too. According to Kumararathna
(2015), the entire planning process from the inception to the completion of the project and also
the variation order procedure were improved in this scenario. Gunawardena (2015) stated that
as soon as the possibility of delays was identified, delay recovery plans were implemented in
advance while resource plans were revised accordingly. According to Fernando (2015),
procurement methods were immediately changed i.e. from sea freight to air freight as a
precaution for foreseeable project delay due to the client’s change in imported material
specification change. Dassanayaka (2015) had followed up the main contractors to finalize the
sub-contract agreements because the approval procedures of the Qatari government are very
time-consuming. He further stated that the contractors were always advised to expedite the
submission of shop drawing in order to get rid of possible delays.

Answers for the ninth question were not required since everyone said “Yes” to the first question.

Interviewees answered the tenth question based on their experience and knowledge about
major causes of delays as regards their impact and frequency of occurrence as well.
Accordingly, the causes of delay were ranked using the Relative Importance Index (RII) method
as described below.

91
The causes of delays based on their impact to the projects, frequency of occurrence and the
combined effect of the both are shown in table D.3. RII-combined was determined by multiplying
RII-impact with RII-frequency.

Table D.3 – Ranking of the causes of delay based on impact

Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Impact
Slow decision making Client 0.875 1
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.833 2
Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers Contractor 0.833 3
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.833 4
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.792 5
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.750 6
Poor subcontractor performance Contractor 0.750 7
Delay in material delivery Material 0.750 8
Shortage of material Material 0.750 9
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.750 10
Late design works Consultant 0.708 11
Shortage of labour Labour 0.708 12
Poor site management and supervision Contractor 0.667 13
Slow inspection and late approval Consultant 0.667 14
Poor quality of material Material 0.667 15
Poor finance and late payments Client 0.625 16
Suspension of works Client 0.625 17
Improper planning and scheduling Contractor 0.625 18
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design Consultant 0.625 19
Poor contract management Consultant 0.625 20
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection Consultant 0.625 21
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.625 22
Inadequate contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.583 23
Poor coordination Contractor 0.583 24
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.542 25
Labour injuries Labour 0.500 26
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.500 27
Inadequate consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.458 28
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.458 29
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.417 30
Inadequate skill and experience of client's representative Client 0.375 31
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues, inflation
External 0.375 32
and war etc.)
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.292 33
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.250 34

92
Table D.4 – Ranking of the causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence
Responsible RII-
Cause of Delay Rank
Party/ Category Frequency
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction Client 0.833 1
Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers Contractor 0.833 2
Slow decision making Client 0.792 3
Poor finance and late payments Client 0.708 4
Delay in material delivery Material 0.708 5
Late design works Consultant 0.667 6
Shortage of material Material 0.667 7
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) External 0.667 8
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.625 9
Improper planning and scheduling Contractor 0.625 10
Poor subcontractor performance Contractor 0.625 11
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design Consultant 0.625 12
Poor site management and supervision Contractor 0.583 13
Poor coordination Contractor 0.583 14
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.542 15
Suspension of works Client 0.500 16
Slow inspection and late approval Consultant 0.500 17
Poor contract management Consultant 0.500 18
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.500 19
Inadequate contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.458 20
Shortage of labour Labour 0.458 21
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.458 22
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.417 23
Inadequate skill and experience of client's representative Client 0.375 24
Poor quality of material Material 0.375 25
Inadequate consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.333 26
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection Consultant 0.333 27
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.333 28
Labour injuries Labour 0.250 29
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.250 30
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.208 31
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.125 32
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.125 33
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues, inflation
External 0.125 34
and war etc.)

93
Table D.5 – Ranking of the causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurrence
Responsible
RII- RII- RII-
Cause of Delay Party/ Rank
Impact Frequency Combined
Category
Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/
Contractor 0.833 0.833 0.694 1
suppliers
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
Client 0.833 0.833 0.694 2
construction
Slow decision making Client 0.875 0.792 0.693 3
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood
External 0.833 0.667 0.556 4
etc.)
Delay in material delivery Material 0.750 0.708 0.531 5
Shortage of material Material 0.750 0.667 0.500 6
Late design works Consultant 0.708 0.667 0.472 7
Unrealistic contract duration Client 0.750 0.625 0.469 8
Poor subcontractor performance Contractor 0.750 0.625 0.469 9
Poor finance and late payments Client 0.625 0.708 0.443 10
Unforeseen poor ground conditions External 0.792 0.542 0.429 11
Improper planning and scheduling Contractor 0.625 0.625 0.391 12
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design Consultant 0.625 0.625 0.391 13
Poor site management and supervision Contractor 0.667 0.583 0.389 14
Low productivity of labour Labour 0.750 0.500 0.375 15
Poor coordination Contractor 0.583 0.583 0.340 16
Slow inspection and late approval Consultant 0.667 0.500 0.333 17
Shortage of labour Labour 0.708 0.458 0.325 18
Suspension of works Client 0.625 0.500 0.313 19
Poor contract management Consultant 0.625 0.500 0.313 20
Inadequate contractor's experience and competence Contractor 0.583 0.458 0.267 21
Equipment breakdowns Equipment 0.625 0.417 0.260 22
Poor quality of material Material 0.667 0.375 0.250 23
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay External 0.458 0.458 0.210 24
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection Consultant 0.625 0.333 0.208 25
Shortage of Equipment Equipment 0.542 0.333 0.181 26
Inadequate consultant's experience and competence Consultant 0.458 0.333 0.153 27
Inadequate skill and experience of client's representative Client 0.375 0.375 0.141 28
Labour injuries Labour 0.500 0.250 0.125 29
Late delivery of equipment to site Equipment 0.417 0.250 0.104 30
Lack of equipment efficiency Equipment 0.500 0.208 0.104 31
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues,
External 0.375 0.125 0.047 32
inflation and war etc.)
Labour disputes and strikes Labour 0.292 0.125 0.036 33
Fluctuation of material prices Material 0.250 0.125 0.031 34

Delay causing categories can be ranked by adding all the relevant RII-Combined values and
dividing with number of causes in each category as shown in table D.6.

94
Table D.6 – Ranking of delay causing categories
Responsible
Cause of Delay RII-Combined RII-Category Rank
Party/ Category
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction 0.694
Slow decision making 0.693
Unrealistic contract duration 0.469
Client 0.459 1
Poor finance and late payments 0.443
Suspension of works 0.313
Inadequate skill and experience of client's representative 0.141
Financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers 0.694
Poor subcontractor performance 0.469
Improper planning and scheduling 0.391
Contractor 0.425 2
Poor site management and supervision 0.389
Poor coordination 0.340
Inadequate contractor's experience and competence 0.267
Delay in material delivery 0.531
Shortage of material 0.500
Material 0.328 3
Poor quality of material 0.250
Fluctuation of material prices 0.031
Late design works 0.472
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design 0.391
Slow inspection and late approval 0.333
Consultant 0.312 4
Poor contract management 0.313
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection 0.208
Inadequate consultant's experience and competence 0.153
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.556
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.429
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.210 External 0.310 5
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues, inflation and
0.047
war etc.)
Low productivity of labour 0.375
Shortage of labour 0.325
Labour 0.215 6
Labour injuries 0.125
Labour disputes and strikes 0.036
Equipment breakdowns 0.260
Shortage of Equipment 0.181
Equipment 0.162 7
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.104
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.104

Further to the above information, the interviewees added some other information as well.
According to Jayalath (2015), approval delays and poor planning by the client are also major
causes of delays. He said ‘adverse weather conditions cannot be considered as a critical cause
since it is foreseeable’. Dassanayake (2015) emphasized that many client-related causes such
as slow mechanisms for problem solving, lengthy approval processes as regards payments and
variations, poor planning at all stages, poor coordination between parties and client’s internal
departments, and confrontational behavior.

95
He further highlighted that contractor’s improper planning and scheduling has a significant
contribution to the delay especially when changes occur. Fernando (2015) stated that the client
was the most delay contributing party followed by the contractor in the concerned projects.

According to the answers for the eleventh question, most significant effects due to the causes of
delays pertaining to the government funded infrastructure projects in Qatar are shown in Table
D.7 below.

As everyone agreed during the interviews, Time Overrun and Cost Overrun are the most
significant effects of delay. Disputes show a moderate effect. Quality shortfalls, tarnishing
business relationships among parties and litigation, adjudication or arbitration are rare while
abandonment is very rare.

Table D.7 – Ranking of effects of delay based on interviews

Effect of Delay RII Rank

Time overrun 1.000 1

Cost overrun 1.000 2

Disputes 0.750 3

Quality shortfalls 0.208 4

Tarnishing business relationships among

0.208 5
parties
Litigation, adjudication or arbitration 0.167 6

Abandonment 0.083 7

Answering the twelfth question, the respondents suggested methods of mitigating delays in
government funded infrastructure construction project, which can be considered by the client as
‘having a comprehensive master plan’ (Dassanayake 2015), ‘prompt decision making of client's
representative’ (Dassanayake 2015; Folohan 2015; Kumararathna 2015), ‘the contract duration
should be realistic and explicit’ (Folohan 2015; Jayalath 2015), ‘adequate time should be
provided for the consultants for designing and planning at any stage, and approval procedures
with local authorities should be streamlined’ (Jayalath 2015), ‘the client's brief must be proper in
expressing exact requirements, expert representatives should be selected by the client, and
clients should not unnecessarily interfere during the construction’ (Fernando 20150), and ‘clients
should make payments on time’ (Gunawardena 2015).

96
In the same context Folohan (2015) suggested that the design should be developed and
finalized during the initial stage by the consultants. Gunawardena (2015) and Kumararathna
(2015) agreed that consultants should inspect on time and be quick in reviewing, certifying and
responding.

‘Contractors should be thorough with their contractual knowledge and documentation’

(Dassanayake 2015) and ‘financially sound’ (Gunawardena 2015) in order to mitigate potential
delays.

Dassanayake (2015) mentioned that all stakeholders should understand the government
requirements thoroughly.

97
 Appendix – E

Triangulation of Interview and Questionnaire Data

98
Appendix – E: Triangulation of Interview and Questionnaire Data

E.1 Causes of delay based on impact

TableE.1illustrates the deviation of ranking of causes of delay based on the impact between the
two sets of data from the questionnaires and the interviews.

Table E.1 – Rank comparison: causes of delay based on impact

Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di di2
Slow decision making by Client 0.875 1 0.708 2 -1 1
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
0.833 2 0.672 3 -1 1
subcontractors/ suppliers
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.833 3 0.354 32 -29 841
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
0.833 4 0.719 1 3 9
construction by Client
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.792 5 0.411 27 -22 484
Unrealistic contract duration by Client 0.750 6 0.641 6 0 0
Delay in material delivery 0.750 7 0.620 9 -2 4
Poor performance of the Subcontractor 0.750 8 0.615 10 -2 4
Low productivity of labour 0.750 9 0.604 12 -3 9
Shortage of material 0.750 10 0.542 19 -9 81
Late design works by the Consultants 0.708 11 0.646 5 6 36
Shortage of labour 0.708 12 0.536 20 -8 64
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.667 13 0.635 8 5 25
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants 0.667 14 0.615 11 3 9
Poor quality of material 0.667 15 0.453 25 -10 100
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.625 16 0.656 4 12 144
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.625 17 0.589 14 3 9
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.625 18 0.583 15 3 9
Consultant's poor contract management 0.625 19 0.552 16 3 9
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants 0.625 20 0.531 21 -1 1
Suspension of works by Client 0.625 21 0.505 23 -2 4
Equipment breakdowns 0.625 22 0.396 30 -8 64
Contractor's poor coordination 0.583 23 0.641 7 16 256
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.583 24 0.604 13 11 121
Shortage of Equipment 0.542 25 0.422 26 -1 1
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.500 26 0.406 29 -3 9
Labour injuries 0.500 27 0.370 31 -4 16
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.458 28 0.547 18 10 100
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence 0.458 29 0.510 22 7 49
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.417 30 0.474 24 6 36
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.375 31 0.552 17 14 196
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues,
0.375 32 0.328 34 -2 4
inflation and war etc.)
Labour disputes and strikes 0.292 33 0.344 33 0 0
Fluctuation of material prices 0.250 34 0.411 28 6 36
Σdi2 2732
N 34
rho = 1 - 6*2732/39270 = 0.583
N3 39304
3
N -N 39270

For the N value 34 the calculated rho is 0.583 which is greater than the critical value of 0.478 for
0.5% level of significance in the one-tailed test according to Table F.1 of Appendix F. Hence,
the ranking of causes of delay based on impact derived through the respondents of the

99
questionnaires and the interviews are strongly correlated. Interviewees ranked “Slow decision
making by Client”, “Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the subcontractors/
suppliers” and Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction by Client
as the first, second and fourth causes of delay based on the impact while the respondents to the
questionnaires ranked them in second, third and first positions respectively as shown in Table
E.1 strengthening the correlation of the two sets of data.

However, causes of delay such as “Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and
flood etc.)”, “Unforeseen poor ground conditions” and “Contractor's poor coordination” etc. were
found as outliers to the correlation since their ranks are highly deviated between the two sets as
shown in Table E.2 which is extracted from Table E.1.

Table E.2 – Ranking of deviation in causes of delay based on impact

Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.833 3 0.354 32 -29
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.792 5 0.411 27 -22
Contractor's poor coordination 0.583 23 0.641 7 16
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.375 31 0.552 17 14
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.625 16 0.656 4 12
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.583 24 0.604 13 11
Poor quality of material 0.667 15 0.453 25 -10
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.458 28 0.547 18 10
Shortage of material 0.750 10 0.542 19 -9
Shortage of labour 0.708 12 0.536 20 -8
Equipment breakdowns 0.625 22 0.396 30 -8
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence 0.458 29 0.510 22 7
Late design works by the Consultants 0.708 11 0.646 5 6
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.417 30 0.474 24 6
Fluctuation of material prices 0.250 34 0.411 28 6
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.667 13 0.635 8 5
Labour injuries 0.500 27 0.370 31 -4
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
0.833 4 0.719 1 3
construction by Client
Low productivity of labour 0.750 9 0.604 12 -3
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants 0.667 14 0.615 11 3
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.625 17 0.589 14 3
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.625 18 0.583 15 3
Consultant's poor contract management 0.625 19 0.552 16 3
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.500 26 0.406 29 -3

E.2 Causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence

Table E.3 below illustrates the deviation of ranking of causes of delay based on frequency of
occurrence, between the two sets of data from the questionnaires and the interviews.

100
Table E.3 – Rank comparison: causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence
Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di di2
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
0.833 1 0.698 1 0 0
construction by Client
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
0.833 2 0.599 7 -5 25
subcontractors/ suppliers
Slow decision making by Client 0.792 3 0.625 2 1 1
Delay in material delivery 0.708 4 0.536 11 -7 49
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.708 5 0.500 15 -10 100
Late design works by the Consultants 0.667 6 0.563 9 -3 9
Shortage of material 0.667 7 0.464 20 -13 169
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.667 8 0.349 31 -23 529
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.625 9 0.625 3 6 36
Unrealistic contract duration by Client 0.625 10 0.609 5 5 25
Poor performance of the Subcontractor 0.625 11 0.578 8 3 9
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants 0.625 12 0.474 18 -6 36
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.583 13 0.620 4 9 81
Contractor's poor coordination 0.583 14 0.609 6 8 64
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.542 15 0.344 32 -17 289
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants 0.500 16 0.531 12 4 16
Low productivity of labour 0.500 17 0.521 13 4 16
Consultant's poor contract management 0.500 18 0.510 14 4 16
Suspension of works by Client 0.500 19 0.432 23 -4 16
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.458 20 0.557 10 10 100
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.458 21 0.458 21 0 0
Shortage of labour 0.458 22 0.443 22 0 0
Equipment breakdowns 0.417 23 0.385 28 -5 25
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.375 24 0.500 16 8 64
Poor quality of material 0.375 25 0.391 25 0 0
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.333 26 0.484 17 9 81
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence 0.333 27 0.464 19 8 64
Shortage of Equipment 0.333 28 0.385 27 1 1
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.250 29 0.396 24 5 25
Labour injuries 0.250 30 0.354 30 0 0
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.208 31 0.375 29 2 4
Fluctuation of material prices 0.125 32 0.385 26 6 36
Labour disputes and strikes 0.125 33 0.318 33 0 0
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues,
0.125 34 0.286 34 0 0
inflation and war etc.)
Σdi2 1886
N 34
rho = 1 - 6*1886/39270 = 0.712
N3 39304
3
N -N 39270

For the N value 34 the calculated rho is 0.712 which is greater than the critical value of 0.478 for
0.5% level of significance in the one-tailed test according to Table F.1 of Appendix F. Hence,
the ranking of causes of delay based on impact derived through the respondents to the
questionnaires and the interviews are strongly correlated. Interviewees ranked “Frequent
changes in specification and/or quantity during construction by Client”, “Contractor's financing
problems and late payment to the subcontractors/ suppliers” and “Slow decision making by
Client” as the top three causes of delay based on the frequency of occurrence while the
respondents to the questionnaires ranked them in first, seventh and second positions

101
respectively as shown in Table E.3 highly strengthening the correlation of the first rank followed
by that of the third rank in the interviews, which is the second in the questionnaires.

Table E.4 – Ranking of deviation in causes of delay based on frequency of occurrence

Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.667 8 0.349 31 -23
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.542 15 0.344 32 -17
Shortage of material 0.667 7 0.464 20 -13
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.458 20 0.557 10 10
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.708 5 0.500 15 -10
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.583 13 0.620 4 9
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.333 26 0.484 17 9

It was observed that some frequently occurrence causes of delay such as “Adverse weather
conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.)”, “Unforeseen poor ground conditions” and
“Shortage of material” were found as outliers to the correlation since their ranks are highly
deviated between the two sets as shown in Table E.4 which is extracted from Table E.3.

E.3 Causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurrence

Table E.5 illustrates the deviation of ranking of causes of delay based on both impact and
frequency of occurrence, between the two sets of data from the questionnaires and the
interviews.

For the N value 34 the calculated rho is 0.633 which is greater than the critical value of 0.478 for
0.5% level of significance in the one-tailed test according to Table F.1 of Appendix F. Hence,
the ranking of causes of delay based on impact derived through the respondents of the
questionnaires and the interviews are strongly correlated in the combined situation too.
Interviewees ranked “Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during construction by
Client” and “Slow decision making by Client”, in first and third positions respectively while the
respondents to the questionnaires ranked them as the top two causes of delay as shown in
Table E.5 highly strengthening the correlation of these two causes of delay.

102
Table E.5 – Rank comparison: causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence
Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di di2
Frequent changes in specification and/or quantity during
0.694 1 0.502 1 0 0
construction by Client
Contractor's financing problems and late payment to the
0.694 2 0.390 7 -5 25
subcontractors/ suppliers
Slow decision making by Client 0.693 3 0.443 2 1 1
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.556 4 0.131 31 -27 729
Delay in material delivery 0.531 5 0.332 11 -6 36
Shortage of material 0.500 6 0.251 20 -14 196
Late design works by the Consultants 0.472 7 0.355 9 -2 4
Unrealistic contract duration by Client 0.469 8 0.394 5 3 9
Poor performance of the Subcontractor 0.469 9 0.363 8 1 1
Poor finance and late payments by Client 0.443 10 0.283 15 -5 25
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.429 11 0.124 32 -21 441
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.391 12 0.410 3 9 81
Wrong, inappropriate or incomplete design by the Consultants 0.391 13 0.252 18 -5 25
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.389 14 0.402 4 10 100
Low productivity of labour 0.375 15 0.315 13 2 4
Contractor's poor coordination 0.340 16 0.390 6 10 100
Slow inspection and late approval by the Consultants 0.333 17 0.326 12 5 25
Shortage of labour 0.325 18 0.237 22 -4 16
Consultant's poor contract management 0.313 19 0.294 14 5 25
Suspension of works by Client 0.313 20 0.218 23 -3 9
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.267 21 0.337 10 11 121
Equipment breakdowns 0.260 22 0.153 28 -6 36
Poor quality of material 0.250 23 0.177 25 -2 4
Visa approval, building approval and utility connection delay 0.210 24 0.237 21 3 9
Insufficient inspectors or poor inspection by the Consultants 0.208 25 0.276 17 8 64
Shortage of Equipment 0.181 26 0.159 27 -1 1
Inadequate Consultant's experience and competence 0.153 27 0.251 19 8 64
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.141 28 0.282 16 12 144
Labour injuries 0.125 29 0.141 30 -1 1
Late delivery of equipment to site 0.104 30 0.188 24 6 36
Lack of equipment efficiency 0.104 31 0.152 29 2 4
Social, economic or political insecurity/instability (Cultural issues,
0.047 32 0.094 34 -2 4
inflation and war etc.)
Labour disputes and strikes 0.036 33 0.109 33 0 0
Fluctuation of material prices 0.031 34 0.163 26 8 64
Σdi2 2404
N 34
rho = 1 - 6*2404/39270 = 0.633
N3 39304
3
N -N 39270

103
Table E.6 – Ranking deviation in causes of delay based on both impact and frequency of
occurrence
Cause of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di
Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.) 0.556 4 0.131 31 -27
Unforeseen poor ground conditions 0.429 11 0.124 32 -21
Shortage of material 0.500 6 0.251 20 -14
Inadequate skill and experience of Client's representative 0.141 28 0.282 16 12
Inadequate Contractor's experience and competence 0.267 21 0.337 10 11
Poor site management and supervision by the Contractor 0.389 14 0.402 4 10
Contractor's poor coordination 0.340 16 0.390 6 10
Improper planning and scheduling by the Contractor 0.391 12 0.410 3 9

“Adverse weather conditions (sand storm, heavy rain and flood etc.)”, “Unforeseen poor ground
conditions” and “Shortage of material” were found as outliers to the correlation since their ranks
are highly deviated between the two sets as shown in Table E.6 which is extracted from Table
E.5.

E.4 Delay causing categories based on both impact and frequency of occurrence
Comparing the two sets of data obtained from questionnaires and the interviews, the ranking of
categories of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurrence can be determined.
Table E.7 illustrates the deviation of ranking of delay causing categories based on both impact
and frequency of occurrence.

Table E.7 – Rank comparison: impact and frequency based delay causing categories
Responsible Party/ Category I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di di2

Client 0.459 1 0.354 2 -1 1

Contractor 0.425 2 0.381 1 1 1

Material 0.328 3 0.230 4 -1 1
Consultant 0.312 4 0.290 3 1 1
External 0.310 5 0.152 7 -2 4
Labour 0.215 6 0.198 5 1 1

Equipment 0.162 7 0.164 6 1 1

Σdi2 10
N 7
rho = 1 - 6*10/336 = 0.821 3
N 343
3
N -N 336

For the N value 7 the calculated rho is 0.821 which is greater than the critical value of 0.786 for
2.5% level of significance in the one-tailed test according to Table F.1 of Appendix F. Hence,

104
the ranking of delay causing categories derived from the respondents to the questionnaires and
the interviews are strongly correlated. Interviewees ranked the Client as the top delay casing
party followed by the Contractor. However, the respondents to the questionnaires did exactly
the other way.

E.5 Effects of delay based on both impact and frequency of occurrence

The comparison of ranking of effects of delay as obtained from questionnaires and the
interviews are shown in Table E.8.

Table E.8 – Rank comparison: effects of delay as obtained from questionnaires and the
interviews
Effect of Delay I-RII I-Rank Q-RII Q-Rank di di2
Time overrun 0.852 1 1.000 1 0 0
Cost overrun 0.801 2 1.000 2 0 0
Disputes 0.693 3 0.750 3 0 0
Tarnishing business relationships among parties 0.591 4 0.208 5 -1 1
Quality shortfalls 0.574 5 0.208 4 1 1
Litigation, adjudication or arbitration 0.563 6 0.167 6 0 0
Abandonment 0.477 7 0.083 7 0 0
Σdi2 2
N 7
rho = 1 - 6*2/336 = 0.964
N3 343
3
N -N 336

For the N value 7 the calculated rho is 0.964 which is greater than the critical value of 0.929 for
0.5% level of significance in the one-tailed test according to Table F.1 of Appendix F. Hence,
the ranking of effects of delay based on both responses of the questionnaires and the interviews
are strongly correlated. The only change in this scenario can be observed as the positions of
“Tarnishing business relationships among the parties” and “Quality shortfalls” which are fourth
and fifth under the interviews and they were other way around in the questionnaires.

105
 Appendix – F

Critical Values of rho

106
Appendix – F: Critical Values of rho

Table F.1 – Critical values of ρ (rho) at various levels of probability (Spearman rank correlation
coefficient)

Source: Naoum (2007)

For any N the observed value of ρ, is significant at a given level of significance if it is equal or
larger than the critical values shown in Table F.1.

107
 Appendix – G

Interview Confirmations

108
 Appendix – G (1)

Interview of Dr. Jayalath C.

109
110
111
112
113
114
 Appendix – G (2)

Interview of Mr. Folahan I.

115
116
117
118
119
120
121
 12. What would you suggest as methods of mitigating delays of government funded infrastructure projects in
Qatar?

a. the contract duration should be realistic and explicit

b. prompt decision making of client's representative to finalize the design at the early stages.

End of the interview.

Kanchana Amarasinghe

QSERVE QATAR - Chartered Quantity Surveyors

P.O. Box 457, Doha - Qatar

Tel: (974) 44212867, Fax: (974) 44373709

Mob: (974) 50369446

W. www.qserveqatar.com

Confidentiality & Disclaimer Note: This e-mail and any attachments thereto contain protected and confidential
information intended for the sole use of the addressee individual or organization. If you are not the addressee or
an authorized agent for him/it, or if you have received this message by error please notify the sender immediately
by returning the message, and delete this copy from your system without any illegal use.

The Dar Group shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this
communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system.

7 of 7 12/22/2015 9:16 AM

122
 Appendix – G (3)

Interview of Mr. Fernando A.

123
124
125
126
127
 11. What would be the most significant effects due to above causes of delays?

Effect of delay R(E)

Time overrun 4

Cost overrun 4

Quality shortfalls 0

Disputes 3

Litigation, adjudication or arbitration 0

Tarnishing business relationships among parties 0

Abandonment 0

12. What would you suggest as methods of mitigating delays of government funded infrastructure projects
in Qatar?

a. client's brief must be proper in expressing exact requirements

b. expert representatives should be selected by the client

c. clients should not unnecessarily interfere during the construction

Special notes:

Client is the most delay contributing party followed by the contractor in the concerned projects.

End of the interview.

Kanchana Amarasinghe

QSERVE QATAR - Chartered Quantity Surveyors

P.O. Box 457, Doha - Qatar

Tel: (974) 44212867, Fax: (974) 44373709

Mob: (974) 50369446

W. www.qserveqatar.com

5 of 5 12/23/2015 8:51 AM

128
 Appendix – G (4)

Interview of Mr. Kumararathna N.

129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
 Appendix – G (5)

Interview of Mr. Dassanayaka C.

137
138
139
140
141
142
143
 Appendix – G (6)

Interview of Mr. Gunawardena S.

144
145
146
147
148
149
 Appendix – H

Research Philosophies

150
Appendix – H: Research Philosophies

H.0 Research philosophies

The selection of a research philosophy is debatable issue and leaves the scholar in a position
called “Pragmatism” that argues, ‘the research question is the most vital factor of the
philosophies such as ontology, epistemology and axiology while swinging between the positions
of positivism and interpretivism’ (Saunders et al. 2009).

H.1 Ontology
According to Saunders et al. (2009), ontology deals with examining the characteristics of reality.
It questions the scholar about the assumptions made as regards the actions of the society.

For the researches like this, following two aspects of ontology can be identified.

H.1.1 Objectivism
Objectivism is an ontological position that discusses the existence of the bodies in society,
independent of social players. For example, when testing the teaching method of a
kindergarten, if the scholar assumes that irrespective of the change of teachers from time to
time, the teaching method is unchanged as any teacher who is appointed has to follow the fixed
teaching guidelines of the institute:, he or she will therefore be in the standpoint of an objectivist.

H.1.2 Subjectivism
Subjectivism is the ontological position of a subjectivist who assumes that the social events are
governed by the activities of the players in the society. As a subjectivist, the same scholar of the
previous example of section H.1.1 might study the individual performance of the teachers, which
affects the improvement of the students, irrespective of the school management’s close
monitoring of maintaining the institutional standards.

This researcher’s position would be more objectivistic since in spite of the country of study or
the sector of construction, it was found that some of most critical causes of delay such as
“change orders” can be tested in Qatar’s infrastructure projects too, as they are common in
many other countries and subsectors of construction. However, one can argue from a
subjectivist’s point of view that asking how the shortage of fuel can be a cause of delay in Qatar
since it is an oil rich country.

151
H.2 Epistemology
As defined by Creswell (2003), epistemology is a theory of knowledge entrenched in the
theoretical position. Similarly, Saunders et al. (2009) outlined that epistemology is a part of
philosophy that establishes satisfactory knowledge in the area of study.

It is essential to understand the following three positions of epistemology as they would be

related to this sort of researches.

H.2.1 Positivism
Saunders et al. (2009) outlined that positivism is an epistemological viewpoint that supports the
theoretical perspective of a natural scientist. The research of a positivist will be similar to that of
‘a physical or natural scientist whose outcome could be law-like generalizations after observing
the real facts in the society’ Saunders et al. (2009:113, citing Remenyi et al. 1998:32).

As can be found from the literature review in Chapter 2, research methodologies of most of the
scholars were generated to collect the data using existing principles to develop their
hypotheses. These hypotheses were either accepted or rejected after testing. The results could
be used for future researches to develop the existing theories. In this scenario the scholar acts
as a positivist. For example, in Afshari (2011) the null hypothesis was stated as “between the
panel of experts there is a disagreement in ranking causes of non-excusable delay in
construction”. This null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis, which states
there is an agreement, was accepted. This allows another scholar to identify, for what causes
the experts agree and which parties are more responsible for those causes. If the client was
found to be the most responsible party in the former research then the new scholar might
develop another hypothesis as “Client is the most responsible party to the construction delay” in
the concerned sector and the region. However, the acceptance or the rejection of the
hypothesis will be based on the results of the research.

H.2.2 Realism
The principle of realism is that ‘the existence of objects is independent of the human mind, and
it is contrary to idealism that states that only the objects, which can be sensed by human mind,
exist’ Saunders et al. (2009).

Realism possesses characteristics similar to positivism since both of the positions approach
scientifically in knowledge expansion.

152
The two types of realism can be found as “Direct realism” and “Critical realism”. ‘According to
direct realism, the world can be understood through the experience of our own senses.
However, critical realism argues that the things we experience are not the things of the real
world but we sense only the images of the same’ Saunders et al. (2009).

H.2.3 Interpretivism
As outlined by Saunders et al. (2009) interpretivism is an epistemological viewpoint that clarifies
the differences between carrying out a study in which humans are involved and the one in which
objects such as vehicles and machines are involved.

When social researchers can understand that there is a difference between humans as regards
the way they behave and the way they think, the researcher will find an interpretivist’s approach.

Interpretivism is more appropriate to this study since it deals mostly with humans rather than
objects. As found in the literature review, the delay causative groups such as client, contractor
and consultants are none other than humans. The actions and decisions taken or not taken by
them would have affected the project delivery time. One can argue that causes such as
equipment breakdown and shortage of material are objective related, but another one can say
that all these issues are controllable by humans.

H.3 Axiology
Axiology is a part of philosophy that reviews the opinion about value. Saunders et al. (2009:116,
citing Heron 1996) pointed out that scholars show axiological skills with their ability to express
their values as a foundation for making decisions about what study to be carried out and how
could it be done. For example, a scholar may decide to use case studies as the method of data
collection saying that data collected though the interviews might not be credible since they are
mere answers of humans.

The literature review in Chapter 2 indicated that very few scholars have adopted the philosophy
of axiology, but the majority was in the positions of positivism and Interpretivism which come
under the philosophy of epistemology.

Having discussed the research philosophies in brief as above, it is vital to understand different
research approaches as discussed in Chapter 03.

153
 Appendix – J

Research Methodologies from the Literature Review

154
Appendix – J: Research Methodologies from Literature Review

J.0 Research methodologies

The literature review revealed that the identified researchers used different methodologies for
sampling, data collection and data analysis. Various methodologies were identified from the text
books such as Saunders et al. (2009), Naoum (2014) and Denscombe (2014) etc. and also from
previous studies as available in international conferences, engineering journals, Ph.D. theses,
and M.Sc. dissertations etc. which have been already reviewed initially.

J.1 Sampling
According to Saunders et al. (2009), collecting data from the entire population is possible only
when it is of a controllable size. However, sampling is necessary under the situations where it is
not realistic to survey the entire population, time or cost budget constraints prevent such
surveys or the requirement of results earlier even if the complete data is available; as illustrated
by Saunders et al. (2009). Figure J.1 shows a collection of sampling techniques mostly utilized
by scholars.

Figure J.1 – Sampling methods

Source: Saunders et al. (2009)

155
Of the various sampling techniques illustrated by different authors writing about research
techniques, the following were found to be the most frequently occurring:

a) Random sampling
Koushki (2005), Mohammad and Isah (2012) and Rahsid et al. (2013) used this method.
Koushki used a systematic random sampling method to select 450 private housing projects in
Kuwait and a further random sample of 30 individuals from that were selected to pre-test the
questionnaire. Rahsid also used a systematic random sampling method to select 47
construction companies from 141 in Pakistan Panjab.

b) Purposive sampling
This technique was utilized in the studies of both Pham and Hadikusumo (2014), and
Mohammad and Isah (2012). In Pham’s research multiple case studies were involved and in
each case study, information was gathered from the project manager and the project engineer.

c) Quota sampling
The research of Daniel (2014) was limited to a particular sector of contractors in a particular
region of Ghana. Since the ‘sample is representative and relevant quota variables were
available’ (Saunders et al. 2009), the Quota sampling technique was utilized to select
respondents.

d) Stratified sampling
Kaliba (2010) used disproportionate stratified sampling which allowed any minority to be
represented. Clients, financing groups, consultants and contractors were the four strata in the
research sample.

J.2 Data collection

It was found through the literature review that a majority of the scholars have collected their
primary data by distributing questionnaires followed by conducting interviews and case studies.
Some of the scholars have utilized an alternative method of primary data collection to justify or
compare the results obtained through the main method i.e. those who collected data through
questionnaire have conducted interviews to justify the data collected from the questionnaire and
some examples are Alwi and Hampson (2003), Kaliba (2010) and Ren et al. (2008). In some
studies such as Marzouk and El-Rasas (2014) utilized questionnaire, interviews and case
studies as well. Out of the 30 researches reviewed 26 of them have used a questionnaire, 7 and
5 of them have used interviews and case studies respectively.

156
J.3 Data Analysis
Alaghbari et al. (2007), Kaliba (2010) and Ghasemzadeh (2014) utilized the Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (SPSS) in data analysis. The other scholars have analyzed the data
using ordinary methods such as spread sheets etc.

Most of the data were analyzed using the following statistical indices:
I. Relative Importance Index (RII)
II. Important Weight (IW)
III. Frequency Index (FI)
IV. Severity Index (SI)
V. Average Weight (AW)
VI. Mean Index Score (MIS)
VII. Standard deviation (SD)

It was observed that the following methods were frequently used to test the reliability and
correlation of data by different researcher:.
a) Spearman rank correlation coefficient (rho)
b) Cronbach's alpha
c) Kendall’s Coefficient of concordance (W)

157