Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management

Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Development of Risk-Based Standardized WBS (Work

Breakdown Structure) for Civil and Structural Works of
Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant Construction Project in
Indonesia to Improve Time Performance
Veriza Agistin, Leni Sagita Riantini and Yusuf Latief
Department of Civil Engineering
Universitas Indonesia
Depok, 16424, Indonesia
verizaagistin14@gmail.com, leniarif@gmail.com, yusuflatief73@gmail.com

Abstract

The Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant development project has a crucial role in encouraging economic growth. The Coal-
Fired Steam Power Plant is a complex EPC project that often experiences delays in its completion. One of the factors
influencing delays is scope changes. The delay of this Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant project can be overcome with a
clear scope through the approach of project management tools, called WBS. This study aims to the development of
risk-based standardized WBS for civil and structural works of Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant construction projects in
Indonesia to improve time performance. Work Breakdown Structure is a decomposition of activities so that the project
is easier to manage, and it can increase the probability of project success. The development of WBS standards using
expert surveying and validation methods includes the highest risks affecting project time performance. The standard
WBS for civil and structural works of the CFSPP project consists of 9 levels and 14 dominant risks to time
performance. The recommended risk response is preventive and corrective measures to analyze the impact of dominant
risks on-time performance.

Keywords.
WBS, Risk factor, Civil and structural, Time performance, Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant

1. Introduction
According to Indonesian Act, No. 14 of 2017, electricity infrastructure is anything related to the power plant,
electricity transmission, electricity distribution, substation, and other supporting facilities. Power plant development
has a crucial and strategic role in realizing national development goals. The provision of power plants goes hand in
hand with the development progress to be available in an even amount. The power plant project is a project that
implements EPC contracts (Tsolas, 2020). According to Soeharto (2001), the EPC project is complex, complicated,
and full of problems. The contract with the EPC model is unique because the contractor's function on the EPC project
starts from the planning, procurement, and construction phase (Yasin, 2014).

The development of 10,000 MW steam power plant in its implementation has faced many problems, one of which is
dominated by delays in project completion (Sudirman and Simanjuntak, 2018). Some Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant
projects are delayed, namely the Tembilahan Power Plant and Teluk Sirih Power Plant (Putri et al., 2017; Safira et al.,
2020). Both projects are subject to constraints on civil and structural works. Based on RUPTL data, the Tembilahan
Power Plant project can only reach Commercial Operation of Date or COD in 2018. This is due to the delay in the
work of the foundation which is an item of civil work and structure. Items of civil and structural works in the
Tembilahan Power Plant project are experiencing delays that have not been resolved.

Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and evaluate the risks of this work item (Putri et al., 2017). In addition, the Teluk
Sirih Power Plant project is experiencing an extension of time due to the difference in pile depth between field work
and planning (Safira et al., 2020). Clear scope definitions and well-structured configuration management can address
project delays through a project management approach (Yang and Wei, 2010). Gladysz (2015) explains that the lack
of standardization causes the control elements to time and cost not be fully defined. WBS in formal form as a project
management tool has an important role in the project from the planning stage to the implementation stage (Suanda,

© IEOM Society International 661

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

2016). A work breakdown structure is a comprehensive system of classifying project scope. The use of WBS is
required by owners and project managers to facilitate the management of complex projects by dividing them into
smaller work package components (Devi and Reddy, 2012). Risk-based WBS planning can reduce, prevent, and
eliminate work accidents in the implementation of construction projects (Elsye et al., 2018). In addition, risk-based
WBS needs to be created taking into account risks in the specified level category, so that it can be known the dominant
work on the project against time performance (Rianty et al., 2018).

Only being aware of risk exposures and risk management methods can make project management more effective and
efficient. Good risk management is required in handling the complexity of the implementation of the Coal-Fired Steam
Power Plant (Indra, 2011). The implementation of risk management and risk-based WBS development has often been
done but no one has developed it from the side of the Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant project. Thus, the novelty of this
research is the need for "Development of Risk-Based Standardized WBS for Civil and Structural Works of Coal-Fired
Steam Power Plant Construction Project in Indonesia to Improve Time Performance".

1.1 Objectives
The purpose of research based on the problem of development risk-based WBS standards (Work Breakdown Structure)
for civil and structural works of CFSPP project is as follows:
1. To obtain WBS standards for civil and structural works for Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant construction project
2. Identify risk factors that can affect the time performance for civil and structural works of the Coal-Fired
Steam Power Plant project
3. Develop a risk-based WBS for civil and structural works for the Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant project
to improve time performance

1.2 Research Model

The model of this research consists of variable X and variable Y. Variable x consists of X1, X2, and X3, and variable
Y is the time performance of civil and structural works for the CFSPP development project. The model carried out in
this research is to make several variables studied, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Research model

2. Literature Review
2.1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
An increasingly detailed work description of the project is reflected in the breakdown of the WBS into minor sections
that are helpful in project control (Project Management Institute, 2017). WBS is the most valuable project management
tool because it can serve as the foundation for planning, budgeting, responsibility assignment, project control, and
management (García-Fornieles et al., 2003). The WBS planning tool allows managers to assign task owners to each
task group. As the completion of the main tasks represents the major milestones of the project, the WBS is ideally
suited for reporting progress upward to senior management. Therefore, it is important to regularly update the status of
each work package and task. The task owners are responsible for allocating tasks based on project time, cost, and

© IEOM Society International 662

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

quality criteria. WBS can then be broken down and coded with the project cost system (Lester, 2017). The lowest
WBS component level in a planned work is known as a work package. Work packages serve to group activities in
which work is scheduled, estimated, monitored, and controlled. The work refers to products or work results that are
the result of activities in the context of WBS (Project Management Institute, 2017).

The WBS identifies key milestones and project control points. Specific milestones exist to make the project easy,
reduce project risk, and make it easy to achieve team goals. WBS disregard could lead to project delays, errors in task
assignments by team members, and overruns (Devi and Reddy, 2012). Essentially, the WBS is the cornerstone of the
project and is the backbone that supports transitioning the project work from passive to active. A WBS is measured
in terms of two quality principles: To meet all of the requirements of the project and to ensure that the quality
characteristics apply to all levels of scope definition, both for the work to create the project's product and for the work
required to develop it.WBS can be displayed as a network diagram, which shows how the work defined by WBS is
arranged in a logical order (Brotherton et al., 2008). The latest WBS representation at the Project Management Institute
(2019) is by combining phase and deliverable. The merger between phase and deliverable is also supported by research
(Baharmand et al., 2013), as shown in Figure 1.

Figure. 1 Hierarchy of the EPC WBS project

Jung and Kang (2007) argue that the unique nature of the construction project will make WBS standardization very
difficult to achieve. However, managerial similarities in certain types of construction between buildings can be
developed with grouping activities. The similarity of these standards will provide the basis for the company to build
the project. WBS elements are used to determine which activities to include in the project schedule (Brotherton et al.,
2008).

2.1 Risk Factors Affecting Time Performance on Civil and Structural Works of CFSPP Projects
Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant (CFSPP) generates electricity by burning coal. Some physical, chemical, and
mechanical processes are used in Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant to convert the energy stored in fossil fuels into
electrical energy. Electrical energy is generated by combining generators and turbines Transformer distributes
electricity generated by generators to the electricity distribution network Turbine exhaust vapor is further condensed
and pumped back into the boiler for recirculation (Kumar et al., 2014; Mahamud et al., 2013). EPC is a form of
construction contract in which the contractor is responsible for engineering, material procurement, and construction
(Hansen, 2015). Below are the definitions of EPC according to Masterman (2002), Blanchard (2014), and Iranmanesh
et al., 2007):
a) Engineering phase is the process of defining, measuring, and qualifying the needs, wants, and desires of owners or
developers into the form of specifications and technical requirements from which to be communicated to builders
or contractors.

© IEOM Society International 663

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

b) Procurement phase is the process of obtaining and providing materials, tools, and services from pre-construction
to post-construction
c) Construction phase is the stage in which contractors begin to build certain facilities tailored to the work packages
prepared during the engineering phase and use material and equipment obtained at the procurement stage.

EPC is applied to construction work for large-scale infrastructure projects such as power plants. Therefore, power
plants have great complexity (Pícha et al., 2015). EPC projects have a degree of difficulty where time pressures from
design, procurement, and construction overlap, adding uncertainty and complexity in managing the various interests
of interacting parties (Shen et al., 2017). Time performance is one of the important benchmarks in project management
(Le-Hoai et al., 2013). Where time performance can be used as a fundamental criterion in project success (Memon et
al., 2019). Many significant factors arise during project implementation that can affect project time and cause delays,
so identifying these problems is very important in project implementation (Le-Hoai et al., 2013).

Factors that affect delays in the Jeranjang Power Plant Project are the order of activities or jobs that change due to
shifts in development locations, changes and design additions that cause changes in scope, the process of delivering
equipment that takes a long time, lack or absence of materials and the absence of experienced labor (Noviyanthi et al.,
2018). The factors that affect the delay of the EPC project are rework due to inappropriate design and field conditions
(Ghaithi, 2017), design differences between owners and stakeholders (Safira et al., 2020), poor communication and
coordination by contractors with other parties (Pham and Hadikusomo, 2014), the late material delivery from the
planning schedule (Banobi and Jung, 2019), environmental conditions which can also affect such errors as weather
(Zegordi, et al., 2012; Durdyev and Hosseini, 2018; Sistarani and Bekti, 2012), and project location in a remote area
(Shanmugapriya and Subramanian, 2013). According to Burghate (2018), WBS projects can be used to identify
potential risks.

Risk management is a systematic control procedure for estimating the risks that a project may face. This is a step-by-
step process consisting of risk identification, risk classification, risk analysis, and risk response (Nurdiana and Susanti,
2020). Risk identification is an iterative method that involves the project team, stakeholders, and other managers who
are affected by or who affect the project and then outside individuals who can comment on the depth of the risk
identification based on their own experience. Early identification of risks during the planning of a construction project
or a tender and estimation of their relative importance, so that project management can be adjusted to reduce and share
them between parties. Project Management will be effective and efficient only if there is awareness of risk exposure
and risk management methods (Bali and Apte, 2014). Projects that use a systematic risk assessment process are more
likely to achieve scheduling targets and other stakeholders (Bakr et al., 2012)

2.1 Developing a standardized WBS based on risk

Risk-based WBS can be developed by establishing a standard WBS and identifying risks in order to analyze the risk
response (Jati and Latief, 2020; Supriadi et al., 2017). Risk response analysis consisting of preventive and corrective
measures is added as a development action. this risk response is categorized into 5 categories (Nugroho and Latief
2021; Rianty et al., 2018), as follows:
1. Addition to management: In the form of preventive and corrective risk management beginning with the planning
and implementation stages of the project. Additionally, management or project organizations can apply additional
management as a standard.
2. Addition to other WBS elements: the result of the risk response is added to the sub-work. Sub-works are added
to the WBS in question that is still within the WBS work structure such as civil and structural works.
3. Addition to relevant WBS elements: If the risk response item is a specific item for the work on the WBS and
represents a considerable percentage of the project costs, the policy of the firm or organization may take it into
account as a relevant WBS element.
4. Addition to work requirements or work instructions: In the case of risk responses that can affect material
resources, equipment, and labor under certain conditions and do not significantly change the percentage of costs,
they can be included in the work instructions. The requirements of the work can be owed to other parties or
subcontractors.
5. Addition to production coefficient: Risk response to these additions is used to anticipate risks related to resource
productivity. The coefficient on material resources is related to the composition of materials and residual waste,
the coefficient of equipment is related to the capacity of tools, and the coefficient of labor is related to labor
productivity

© IEOM Society International 664

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

3. Methods
The right strategy is needed in a study to get relevant research results and by the goals to be achieved (Rianty et al.,
2018). The research strategies used in this study are archival analysis (library review), surveys, case studies, and
interviews. The research stages for this research question, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Research flow diagram

Identifying standard WBS using secondary data in the form of bid documents, BoQ while primary data using expert
interviews with more than 10 years of experience. Practitioner or expert resource persons have a minimum of 10 years
of experience for an undergraduate education background and a minimum of 7 years of experience for a master’s
education background. Where it is required to have handled a CFSPP project and have an understanding of the concept
of WBS (Work Breakdown Structure) in general construction work. Validation is carried out at the stage of WBS
development results starting from the initial and final stages, and highest risk. The expert profiles on the CFSPP project
as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Expert Profile

No Expert Position Experience Education

Principal For Project
1 Expert 1 33 S2
Management
2 Expert 2 Partner Project Advisory Group 25 S2
3 Expert 3 Managing Director 35 S3

Experts have positions ranging from principal project management with a master's education background and more
than 30 years of experience, partner project advisory group with a master's degree background and 25 years of
experience, and The Managing Director has a doctoral education and more than 30 years of experience. Research
question 2, namely risk identification obtained from literature analysis which is then distributed to respondents who
have the criteria of having at least 2 years of experience and statistical tests. The respondents obtained were 29 people.
The profiles of respondents who participated in filling out questionnaires according to their institution, position,
experience, and education, as shown in Table 2.

© IEOM Society International 665

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Table 2. Respondent profile

No Description Total No Description Total

1 Position 3 Education
Project Manager 3 D3 1
Project Control Manager 1 S1 24
Construction manager 3 S2 4
Construction Planner 2 4 Experience
Engineering 15 5 years 11
P3 Project 1 6-10 years 8
Quantity surveyor 2 11-15 years old 7
SOM 2 16 years old 3
2 Institution
A 2
B 14
C 4
D 4
E 2
F 3

Figure 3 there are three categories of risk: high, medium, and low. These risk categories can be calculated by
probability multiplied impact or using the following formulas:
R= P x I
Where: R = risk factor, P = Probability, I= Impact
Risk analysis is carried out qualitatively by using a probability and impact matrix (Project Management Institute,
2017), as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Matrix Probability and Impact

Then, the results of the risk ranking are re-validated by the expert whether agreed or not. The third research objective
is the development of risk-based WBS by mapping risk response. Mapping the risk response is in the form of
preventive and corrective actions against risk variables.

4. Result and Discussion

4.1 Standardized WBS
The development of this WBS is based on Phase – Deliverable. This is supported in the latest WBS representation at
the Project Management Institute (2019) by combining phase and deliverable. The standard WBS results of the CFSPP
project consist of 9 levels, as shown in Figure 4.

© IEOM Society International 666

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Figure 4. Standard WBS for civil and structural works of CFSPP project

1. WBS Level 0: system

The highest level of the WBS structure is a representation of the entire project. The system is level 0 of WBS
CFSPP construction.
2. WBS Level 1: Sub-system
Sub-system is a breakdown of the CFSPP system which consists of the main process, utility, and offsite area. The
main process is a system/facility related to the conversion of steam energy into electricity while Utility is the main
process support system/facility such as clean water treatment, wastewater treatment, fuel, coal, and ash. Offsite
facilities which are subsystems / public facilities are required in the operation of power plants such as labs and
control rooms.
3. WBS level 2: Sub-Sub System
There are 2 sub-systems in the main process area, namely boiler and auxiliaries system and turbine and auxiliaries
system.
4. WBS Level 3: Phase
Level 3 is a continuation of the details of the sub-sub system. Where this phase consists of 3 stages, namely
engineering, procurement, and construction.
5. WBS Level 4: Discipline
The civil and structural works are the focus of the object of this research. Civil and structural works are a work for
the construction of CFSPP building facilities.
6. Level 5: Sub work
Level 5 consists of 11 sub-works on boilers and auxiliaries systems while turbine and auxiliaries systems consist
of 11 sub-works.
7. WBS Level 6: Sub-Sub work
After being grouped by sub-work, it is broken down into sub-work where in boiler and auxiliaries system consists
of 73 sub-sub works while in turbine and auxiliaries system consists of 40 sub-sub works.
8. WBS Level 7: Work package
Level 7 is the lowest level in the WBS where in boilers and auxiliaries systems there are 233 work packages and
in turbine and auxiliaries systems there are 98 work packages.
9. Level 8: Activity
Work packages that have been decomposed can be project activities. Where in boilers and auxiliaries system there
are 796 activities while in turbine and auxiliaries systems there are 377 activities.
10. Level 9: Resources
Resources for the implementation of work activities are generally in the form of materials, equipment, and
manpower. The WBS standard on resources is complementary.

© IEOM Society International 667

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Figure 5. Standard WBS for civil and structural work of CFSPP project engineering phase level 1 – 9

Figure 5 is an example of WBS development in the engineering phase. A techincal site survey on WBS is needed as
a supporter of planning alternative structural design and implementation methods. Where the technical site survey
consists of topography survey and soil investigation, bathymetry survey, geotechnical condition survey, and climate
condition survey.

4.2 Dominant risks on-time performance

Risk identification is categorized based on work packages, activities, material resources, equipment resources, and
manpower resources. Researchers distributed questionnaires to respondents who were involved in the implementation
of the CFSPP project through an online questionnaire. The environmental category is added to anticipate risks that
occur, such as remote project locations, natural disasters, and weather conditions. The total risks for civil and structural
works in the CFSPP construction project are 68 risks. Where the risk identification made must be linked or
synchronized with the WBS. In addition, the risks created must be specific and detailed. The following is a risk rank
in civil and structural works CFSPP projects based on the results of expert validation and qualitative risk analysis.

Table 3. Ranking of Risk Factor

Variable Risk Variables Affecting Civil and Structural Works Performance of CFSPP Construction Project
Category: Work Package
Changes in the scope of work in the boiler and auxiliaries area along with steam turbine generator and
X1
auxiliaries
Civil design basis is late for boiler area and auxiliaries along with steam turbine generator and
X14
auxiliaries
Category: Activity
The construction method applied to the foundation work is not in accordance with field conditions in
X17
the boiler and auxiliaries area along with the steam turbine generator and auxiliaries
Steel frame design in the boiler and auxiliaries area along with steam turbine generator and auxiliaries
X19
not in accordance with contract/planning specifications
Category: Alternative Method/ Design
Delays in the procurement of steel structures in the boiler and auxiliaries area along with steam turbine
X40
generator and auxiliaries

© IEOM Society International 668

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Variable Risk Variables Affecting Civil and Structural Works Performance of CFSPP Construction Project
Documentation and approval studies are late for structural design calculations in the boiler and
X46
auxiliaries area along with steam turbine generator and auxiliaries
Category: Material Resource
Damage to the foundation material for the boiler area and auxiliaries system along with steam turbine
X53
generator and auxiliaries system
Steel structure material specifications for area boiler and auxiliaries system along with steam turbine
X52
generator and auxiliaries system are not in accordance with planning
Category: Equipment Resource
Damage to foundation equipment for area boiler and auxiliaries systems along with steam turbine
X58
generator and auxiliaries system
Specifications of steel structure equipment (steel structure lifting equipment: crane) for boiler and
X57 auxiliaries system along with steam turbine generator and auxiliaries system are not in accordance
with planning
Category: Manpower Resource
Manpower productivity at the construction stage (civil and structural works) is not in accordance with
X65
the plan
Vendor/subcontractor qualifications and specializations (civil and structural works) are incompatible
X61
with planning
Category: Environment
X66 Project locations in remote areas
X67 There is a natural disaster

4.3 Risk-based standardized WBS

Risks that can be anticipated at the beginning can improve project time performance and lead to successful completion
of the project. The best way to anticipate the dominant risk in each of these categories is by taking preventive and
corrective action. Research question 3 resulted in 33 preventive actions and 29 corrective actions. Where these two
risk response categories will help to reduce the risks that occur so that they do not have an impact on the delay in the
implementation of work. Table 4 and Table 5 show that preventive and corrective actions are grouped based on the
highest risks.

Table 4. Preventive actions as recommendations for the development of risk-based WBS standard

Category
No Preventive Action Recommendation
1 2 3 4 5
P1 Assign a competent project team V Additional management
P2 Tighten supervision V Additional work instructions

Table 5. Corrective actions as recommendations for the development of risk-based WBS standard

Category
No Corrective Action Recommendation
1 2 3 4 5
Additional
C1 Identification of design linkages to critical activity path plans V
management
Conduct joint evaluation meetings with relevant stakeholders Additional
C2 V
to ensure design improvements to the critical activity path plan management

14 dominant risk variables can be categorized: additional management, other WBS elements, the relevant WBS, work
requirements or work instructions, and productivity coefficients. The dominant risk variable becomes the Risk
breakdown structure (RBS) input, as shown in Table 6.

© IEOM Society International 669

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Table 6. Mapping of risk response categories (Risk Breakdown Structure x Work Breakdown Structure matrix)

Risk Category
No RBS WBS Recommendation
Response 1 2 3 4 5
Delay Civil design basis for Additional management,
Assign a
boiler and auxiliaries area category WBS level work
1 X14 competent V
along with steam turbine packages in Engineering
project team
generator and auxiliaries Phase

These preventive actions become recommended activities for additional management. Where the additional
management activities do not directly become a new WBS but become an adoption in the management of a company
or organization that is adjusted to the level of the WBS package so that it can improve time performance. Table 7
shows a sample of Risk-based standardized WBS in the Sub-Sub Work sections: Civil design basis.

Table 7. Risk-based standardized WBS for sub-work basic design

Recommended actions or additions

Level 5 Level 6 – to improve project time performance
Level 4 – Level 7 – Work Addition
- Sub Sub-Sub Level 8 - Activity Addition
Discipline Package Addition other
Work Work work
management WBS
instructions
elements
Civil design basis for Documentation and
Civil and Civil
Basic Boiler area (Boiler approval of civil design
structural design
design and auxiliary basis for Boiler area
works basis
equipment) foundation
Documentation and
approval of civil design
basis for Boiler area steel Assign a
structure competent
Documentation and project
approval of civil design team
basis for Boiler area
concrete
Documentation and
approval of civil design
basis for boiler area
architecture

5. Conclusions
The purpose of the first research shows the results of the development where the CFSPP as System Level 0 will form
the WBS level into 9 levels. The development of this standard WBS can assist managers in project planning and
control. The second objective of the research resulted in 14 dominant risks and the highest risk score was obtained
from the work package category at Level 7 WBS. The third research objective shows that there are 33 preventive
actions and 29 corrective actions which are then grouped into 5 categories. Each additional risk response cannot be
adopted directly into the WBS structure but can be a prerequisite as an additional management or work plan
requirement in this study. Recommendation additional prerequisites/response actions depend on the policies and
decisions of the company or project to what extent it wants to control the work. The standard risk-based WBS can be
used as the basis for time planning to assist project implementation. In addition, a risk-based WBS can be developed
to minimize the impact of each risk, such as delayed work, design changes, to imperfect work results.

References
Baharmand, H., Zad, M. A. V., & Hashemi, S. H., Prioritization of effective risk factors on oil industry construction
projects (by PMBOK standard approach), Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology,
vol. 6. no. 3, pp. 521–528, 2013
Bakr, A. F., El Hagla, K., and Abo Rawash, A. N., Heuristic approach for risk assessment modeling: EPCCM
application (Engineer Procure Construct Contract Management), Alexandria Engineering Journal, vol. 51, no. 4,
pp. 305–323, 2012.

© IEOM Society International 670

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

Bali, R., & Apte, P. M., Risk management in EPC contract - risk identification, Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 07–12, 2014.
Blanchard B.S., Logistics engineering and management, 6th Edition, Pearson Education, 2014.
Banobi, E. T., and Jung, W., Causes and mitigation strategies of delay in power construction projects: Gaps between
owners and contractors in successful and unsuccessful projects, Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 21, pp. 1-12, 2019.
Brotherton, S. A., Fried, R. T., and Norman, E. S., Applying the work breakdown structure to the project management
lifecycle, Available: http://www.pmi.org/learning/applying-work-breakdown-structure-project-lifecycle-6979,
October 19, 2008.
Burghate, N., Work breakdown structure: simplifying project management, International Journal of Commerce And
Management Studies, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-5, 2018.
Devi, T. R.,and Reddy, V. S., Work breakdown structure of the project, International Journal of Engineering
Research and Applications, vol.2, no. 2, 683–686, 2012.
Durdyev, S., and Hosseini, M. R., Causes of delays on construction projects: a comprehensive list, International
Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 20–46, 2018.
Elsye, V., Latief, Y., and Sagita, L., Development of Work Breakdown Structure ( WBS ) standard for producing the
risk based structural work safety plan of building, The Third International Conference on Sustainable
Infrastructure and Built Environment, vol. 147, no. 06003. pp. 1- 12, 2018.
García-Fornieles, J. M., Fan, I. S., Perez, A., Wainwright, C., & Sehdev, K., A., Work breakdown structure that
integrates different views in aircraft modification projects, Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications,
vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 47–54, 2003.
Ghaithi, A. K. Al., Delay analysis in EPC projects using Ishikawa diagram, International Journal Of Advanced
Engineering, Management And Science, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 750–55, 2017.
Gladysz, B., Skorupka, D., Kuchta, D., and Dutchasek, A., Project risk time management-a proposed model and a
case study in the construction industry, Procedia Computer Science, vol. 64, pp. 24-31, 2015.
Indrawan, M. A., Identification of EPC project risk sources (Project case study A, B, C PT. X), 1st Edition, Universitas
Indonesia, Jakarta, 2005.
Iranmanesh, H., Jalili, M., and Pirmoradi, Z., Developing a new structure for determining time risk priority using risk
breakdown matrix in EPC projects, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 999–1003, 2007.
Jati, D. B., and Latief, Y., Development of risk-based standardized Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) to improve
time performance on high-speed railway construction project. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering, vol. 930. no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2020.
Jung, Y., dan Woo, S., Flexible work breakdown structure for integrated cost and schedule control. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130 No. 5, pp. 616-2, 2004.
Kumar, R., Sharma, A. K., and Tewari, P. C., Thermal performance and economic analysis of 210 MWe Coal-Fired
Power Plant, Journal of Thermodynamics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-10, 2014.
Lester, E. I. A., Work Breakdown Structures, 7th Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2017.
Lanford, H. W., and McCann, T. M., Effective planning and control of large projects—using work breakdown
structure, Journal of Long Range Planning, vol.16, no.2, pp. 38–50, 1983.
Mahamud, R., Khan, M. M. K., Rasul, M. G., and Leinster, M. G., Exergy Analysis and Efficiency Improvement of a
Coal Fired Thermal Power Plant in Queensland, 1st Edition, In Tech, Croatia, 2013.
Masterman, J. W. E., An Introduction to Building Procurement Systems, 2nd Edition, Spon Press, London, 2002.
Memon, A. Q., Memon, A. H., Soomro, M., and Rahman, I. A., Common factors affecting time and cost performance,
Pakistan Journal of Science, vol. 71, no. 41, pp.64–68, 2019.
Nugroho, D. B., & Latife, Y., Development of Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) for Safety Planning on Tunneling
Work Projects Based on Risk, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1858, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2021
Nurdiana, A., & Susanti, R, Assessing risk on the Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) project from the
perspective of the owner: a case study, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 506, no.1,
pp. 1-7, 2020.
Pham, L. H., and Hadikusumo, H., Schedule delays in engineering, procurement, and construction petrochemical
projects in Vietnam: a qualitative research study, International Journal of Energy Sector Management, vol. 8, no.

© IEOM Society International 671

Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harbin, China, July 9-11, 2021

1, pp. 3–26, 2014.

Pícha, J., Tomek, A., & Löwitt, H., Application of EPC contracts in international power projects, Procedia
Engineering, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 397–404, 2015.
Putri, R. N., Sandhyavitri, A., Malik, A., Evaluation of delay risk in the Tembilahan Power Plant construction project,
Journal of Riau engineering faculty, vol 4, no. 2, pp. 1-2, 2017.
Project Management Institute, Project Management Body of Knowledge, 6th Edition, Project Management Institute
Inc, Pennsylvania, 2017.
Project Management Institute, Project Management Body of Knowledge, 3th Edition, Project Management Institute
Inc, Pennsylvania, 2019.
Rianty, M., Latief, Y., and Riantini, L., Development of risk-based standardized WBS (Work Breakdown Structure)
for quality planning of high rise building architectural works, MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 159, no. 01019,
pp. 1-6, 2018.
Safira, D., Safitri, F., Kamal, H., Meilani, Sujana, C. M. and Andika, A., Time acceleration of offshore EPC project
using FMEA, FTA, CPM and crashing method at PT XYZ, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Science, vol.426, no. 1, pp. 1 -7, 2020.
Shanmugapriya, S., and Subramanian, K., Investigation of significant factors influencing time and cost overruns in
Indian construction projects, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, vol. 3,
no. 10, pp. 734–740, 2013.
Shen, W., Tang, W., Wang, S., Duffield, C. F., Hui, F. K. P., and You, R., Enhancing trust-based interface management
in international Engineering-Procurement-Construction projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, vol. 143. no. 9, pp. 1-12, 2017.
Sistarani, M., and Bekti, R., Proposed actions for the completion of PLTU Lampung/Tarahan Baru project effectively,
The Indonesian Journal of Business Administration, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 195–201, 2012.
Soeharto, I., Project Management (From Conceptual to Operational),7th Edition, Penerbit Erlangga, Jakarta, 2001
Suanda, B., Advance and Effective Project Management, PT PP Construction, Jakarta. 2016.
Sudirman, W. B., and Simanjuntak, M. R. A., Risk factor identification for EPC contract of power plant projects
using In-House Form of General Conditions of Contract in Indonesia, Journal of Scientific and Engineering
Research, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 309–319, 2018.
Supriadi, L. S. R., Latief, Y., Susilo, B., and Rajasa, M., Development of risk-based standardized WBS (Work
Breakdown Structure) for cost estimation of apartment’s project, International Journal of Civil Engineering
and Technology, vol. 8, no.10, pp. 822–833, 2017.
Tsolas, I. E., Benchmarking Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) power plant projects by means of
series two-stage DEA, Journal of Electricity, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2020.
Yang, J. B, and Wei, P.W., Causes of delay in the planning and design phases for construction projects, Journal of
Architectural Engineering, vol. 16. no. 2, pp. 80–83, 2010,
Yasin, N., Construction Contracts in Indonesia, Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta, 2014.
Zegordi, S. H., Rezaee Nik, E., and Nazari, A., Power plant project risk assessment using a fuzzy-ANP and fuzzy-
TOPSIS method, International Journal of Engineering, Transactions B: Applications, vol. 25. no. 2, pp. 107–120,
2012.

Biographies
Veriza Agistin is a student from Universitas Indonesia majoring Construction Management, from Department of Civil
Engineering. She has published a journal with specification in the area of construction materials science.

Leni Sagita Riantani is a lecturer and serves as head of the management specialty association in 2021 at the Faculty
of Engineering, University of Indonesia. She actively writes articles in national and international journals with
specification in the areas of Project Management and Construction.

Yusuf Latief is a Professor at the Faculty of Engineering, University of Indonesia. He teaches for Undergraduate,
Graduate and Doctoral Programs. He has published journal and conference papers with specification in the areas of
Project Management and Construction. He has served as head of the management specialty association at the Faculty
of Engineering, University of Indonesia.

© IEOM Society International 672