This research addresses the issue of hold factors in big industrial undertakings during technology stage of undertaking ‘s life rhythm used by undertaking directors. It examines frequence, badness, extent, and importance of the hold causes in technology stage of big industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. A considerable figure of research on holds in building undertakings have been conducted in the literature, yet delay in technology stage of undertaking ‘s life rhythm has non been the focal point of much surveies. In recent old ages, hold causes in technology stage have been tackled merely in two plants ( Yang and Wei, 2010 ; and Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey and El-Said, 2008 ) . In the 2008 survey, twenty two causes were identified and classified into three groups. Extra diggings about more causes of hold was conducted by the research worker through questioning adept undertaking directors in Saudi Arabian companies. The research worker found 30 causes of hold and were categorized into five chief factors of undertakings delay. In this survey, a field study is accomplished through a structured questionnaire to prove these causes. It covers 11 multi-discipline technology adviser houses which provide general technology services to the major Owner of industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. Frequency and extent of undertaking hold in technology stage are examined utilizing simple statistical computations such as mean and standard divergence. The causes of hold so ranked based on importance index ratios. Analytic Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) is besides used to rank the categorised factors of hold.
In technology stage of industrial undertakings, there are two chief parties. First party is Owner of industrial undertakings while the 2nd party is technology adviser house who designs industrial undertakings. First party refers to in this research as ( Owner ) , while the 2nd party refers to in this research alternately as ( Engineer ) or ( Designer ) . A secondary 3rd party exists seldom in a signifier such as contractor, subcontractor, provider, and governmental authorization.
In industrial undertakings, clip is more critical than any other sort of undertakings. This is for the ground that hold could do a large loss of money. Furthermore, economic systems of states depend chiefly on the industrial field. Therefore, undertaking agenda clip is enormously important: “ Time is Money ” , or “ Time is of the Kernel ” ( Randall Bell, 2011 ) . In fact, money and clip thrust and motivate contract parties to work hard. Successful undertaking directors ever think about the public presentation step, which are clip, cost, and quality ( Doyle, Nardone, & A ; Krisnan, 2005 ) .
With respects to detain, it means devouring excess clip than it is scheduled for or budgeted to. Time public presentation in the technology stage of industrial undertakings is significantly of import to both Owner and Designer. It is good established that the most distressing industrial design differences involve failure to carry through the plants within its timeframe ( Assaf & A ; Al-Hejji, 2006 ) .
Even though industrialisation in Saudi Arabia is relatively new, it is traveling through a rapid growing. Industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia play a great function in back uping the authorities schemes to accomplish Saudi economic ends. Table aˆZ1. Industrial Factories Sizes and Investments ( 1974 – 2010 ) indicates the increased advancement in the figure of major sectors in industry and volume of their investings during the period from 1974 to 2010.
Table aˆZ1. Industrial Factories Sizes and Investments ( 1974 – 2010 )
Figure aˆZ1. Growth of Industrial Sector in Saudi Arabia
As illustrated in the tabular array, the figure of industries has jumped dramatically from 198 to 4,645 in less than four decennaries. As a consequence, the capital of investing was increased as of SR 12 billion to about SR 404 billion ( SIDF, 2012 ) .
Petrochemicals, Oil, and gas are the chief and largest industries in Saudi Arabia ( see Figure aˆZ1. Growth of Industrial Sector in Saudi Arabia ) . For this ground, the research worker focuses merely on this line of industries. This research pays attending to Saudi Aramco as the Owner of the largest industrial undertakings in the land. Saudi Arabian Oil Company ( Aramco ) is the figure one oil manufacturer company all over the universe. It launched a new contract called General Engineering Services Plus ( GES Plus ) . This contract has been activated get downing from the beginning of 2012. It aims to carry on all technology services in-Kingdom and to heighten the preparation and domestic enlisting. Saudi Aramco identifies technology adviser companies which are capable to transport out Front End Engineering Design ( FEED ) and elaborate technology design to present them GES Plus contracts. The sanctioned Engineers should supply item technology drawings, Project Management Services ( PMS ) , and material procurance to better its plan. So far, There are four pools are already awarded GES Plus contracts affecting eleven qualified entities. Additional contracts will be signed with other undertaking companies that involved in GES Plus commands one time they fulfilled its demands.
Any undertaking with Saudi Aramco has to follow a pre-defined process. First stage of this process is the readying of undertaking ‘s papers which named Design-Basis-Scoping-Paper ( DBSP ) . It represents the range of work, and it is prepared by Facility Planning Department ( FPD ) . Once DBSP is issued for a particular undertaking, Aramco after that invites contractors to make the undertaking proposal of this undertaking. Contractors so have to make kind of preliminary technology for the undertaking by bring forthing some cardinal drawings for the undertaking harmonizing to Aramco Standard SAEP-14. This standard lists down all of deliverables which is required to fulfill the undertaking proposal. The preliminary drawings take history of basic drawings including but non restricted to Process flow diagram ( PFD ) , some of Pin IDs for shrieking instrument diagram, Block Plan, really preliminary one line electrical diagram, and Facility Floor Plans. The undertaking proposal is non plenty to construct the installations because it has no adequate inside informations. So, as Engineer done with undertaking proposal, the Owner has two options:
he can either continue with Engineering Procurement and Construction ( EPC ) under Lump Sum Turn Key bringing system ( LSTK )
or he can travel for elaborate technology design under Lump Sum Procure and Build bringing system ( LSPB ) , see.
If the Owner proceed with the first pick, so Owner will take less concern. This is because the contractor has to make everything get downing from the elaborate technology, go throughing through procurance and stop up with the building of the undertaking. But if the Owner went to the 2nd pick, it means the Owner has to go on the undertaking proposal bundle and finish the elaborate technology design to be able to construct the undertaking ( Abu Zaid, 2012 ) .
Figure aˆZ1 Project lifecycle overview
The term “ Delay ” in technology stage of any undertaking means that the clip is overrun the due day of the month of subjecting the design deliverable for that undertaking. In other words, hold represents an drawn-out clip required in order to finish the design ( Andi & A ; Lalitan, 2010 ) . The “ hold ” used in this research means the clip is overrun the scheduled clip even though the Owner approved the clip extension or alteration order.
Statement of the Problem
In the literature, it is good recognized that holds have negative effects on building undertakings in general and industrial undertakings in peculiar. When technology stage is considered, detain leads to struggles between Owner and Designer. In add-on, hold additions costs, loss of efficiency and productiveness, and could stop up with contract expiration ( Tumi, Omran, & A ; Pakir, 2009 ) . The research worker works in an technology adviser house that provides general technology services to industrial companies. It is apparent that hold can be found in many industrial undertakings in the technology stage. Consequently, parties who suffer from holds need to be cognizant of the factors that affect holds. The demand to analyze the causes of hold and seek to happen serious practical solutions is presently demanding. The present survey brings these causes along with their frequence, badness and the extent of holds to the attending of the involved parties which can assist to take necessary actions and safeguards to forestall any hold.
The holds in technology stage of industrial undertakings could raise several inquiries such as:
What are the chief factors and causes of hold?
How much is the frequence of hold?
What are the effects of hold on industrial undertakings?
How sever and to which extent is the hold?
Which party is responsible for hold? ( Doyle, Nardone, & A ; Krisnan, 2005 )
This survey is, in fact, trying to make full out the spread in the literature by replying the antecedently mentioned inquiries in order to find the frequence, badness, extent, and causes of hold in the technology stage of industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia.
Aims of the Research
The chief aims of the research can be summarized in the undermentioned points:
To place and name the factors impacting hold in the technology stage of big industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia.
To analyze the frequence, badness and the extent of each factor.
To find the importance of the factors impacting hold.
To rank the factors impacting hold based on the badness of the factors and the frequence of happening utilizing the Quantitative method of Analytical Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) .
To look into and propose schemes to avoid holds in the technology stage of industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia.
Scope and Restrictions
This survey focuses on researching the factors impacting holds in the technology stage of industrial undertakings ( petrochemicals, oil, and gas ) in Saudi Arabia. Based on a constructed questionnaire, this survey examines the hold causes in different facets, which are more frequent, grade of badness, and the extent of hold. The targeted companies are eleven, which are the companies that freshly awarded a GES Plus contract with Saudi Aramco as the Owner of largest industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. This survey will merely cover the stage of fixing design of undertaking proposal what so called FEED.
Consequences of the questionnaire are limited to simple statistical computations such as mean, and importance index. To rank the factors of hold, AHP analysis will be applied utilizing Expert Choice computing machine package.
In industrial undertakings, as for other building undertakings, the cardinal aim is to present a successful high quality and safe merchandise with a time-cost effectivity ( Randall Bell, 2011 ) . Undertaking directors ever aim to cut down both clip and cost. There are different influences on the cost for every stage of industrial undertakings. It is obvious that the cost influence in the technology stage is manner greater than it is in the building stage. Additional to the cost, the hold in the pre-engineering stage impact the building agenda in instance it is already predetermined. The importance of the hold analysis comes when analyzing its effects on the critical way and hence the undertaking completion day of the month. So, finding and analyzing the factors impacting holds is indispensable in order to work out holds ( Yang & A ; Wei, 2010 ) . Therefore, foretelling the opportunities of holds may assist to avoid them and successfully submit undertakings as scheduled, ”we can non pull off what we can non mensurate ” ( Luu, Kim, Tuan, & A ; Ogunlana, 2009 ) .
Delay is defined as the clip in which undertaking is extended or suspended in some stage due to unforeseen fortunes. This means the work is being retarded, but non stopped wholly, and this hold will impact the undertaking agenda as entire ( Abdul-Rahman, Takim, & A ; Min, 2009 ) . The bulk of the old surveies focused on holds ‘ factors in the building stage but non in the design stage. This research discusses the hold that occurs merely in the design stage of industrial undertakings.
Industrial undertakings have different possible beginnings of differences. This is because the undertakings are different in their demands in their features and they are non quotable. The differences are come during the pre-engineering stage as a consequence of complicated actions that are taken by the concerned parties. However, it is rarely that undertakings accomplished on scheduled clip without holding any troubles ( Assaf & A ; Al-Hejji, 2006 ) . The chief cause of difference is delay during design and/or building stages. Delay disputes, like other differences, can be solved by utilizing different techniques such as common dialogue, average, or rapprochement. Delaies of class lead to important losingss to all related parties. For Engineers, holds cause losingss in three ways: ( 1 ) Extra operating expense cost due to long design period ; ( 2 ) More adult male hours, of both regular or overtime rate, which will be needed for Interior designers to finish the undertaking ; ( 3 ) Punishment cost against the Engineer.
Based on the type of hold, it is classified into six types: ( 1 ) Engineering-related ; ( 2 ) Construction-related ; ( 3 ) Financial/Economic ; ( 4 ) Management/Administrative ; ( 5 ) Code-related ; ( 6 ) Acts of God ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) . The research worker in this study is merely concerned about the first type of hold.
Types of Delaies
Engineering-related holds go on due to many factors which can be grouped into: ( 1 ) Delays in the Design Development ; ( 2 ) Delays in the Work Shop Drawings and/or related blessings ; ( 3 ) Delaies of Project Parties Changes ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) .
Design Development Delays
It is the most time-consuming activity compared to the other technology activities. In the early beginning of this phase, the Owner identifies the undertaking ‘s demands to the Engineers in a signifier of a “ range of work ” to fix constructs for a proposed undertaking. Then, the Engineer starts fixing undertaking ‘s drawings and specifications. These preliminary drawings are used in developing undertaking design. Possible alterations in the range of work might take to detain in the overall scheduled design clip. Besides, any slow responding by the Owner to Engineer ‘s questions that could originate during the design development is another cause of hold. The old mentioned causes of hold are comes from the Owner side. The Engineer besides can be a portion of hold causes, for illustration when there is a deficiency of resources, homo or installations, or deficiency of experience. Professional Designers admit that mistakes or defects could go on by the way from clip to clip. Therefore, it is impractical to anticipate a free-error design from Engineer ( Nirmal Kumar Acharya, 2006 ) .
Engineer can manage industrial undertakings under two types of bringing systems: ( 1 ) Design-Bid-Build ( D-B-B ) ; ( 2 ) Design-Build ( D-B ) . For either system, it determines the responsible party of the hold. In D-B-B undertakings, the Owner provides the design either by his ain employees or by a confer withing technology house. Then contractors submit their commands to project Owner to choose one of them. While in D-B undertakings, the Owner allocates a individual entity which is responsible for both technology and building of the undertaking. The entity could be either a house that has in-house design and building employees, or it could be a building house that hires an external Engineer to plan the undertaking under the umbrella of D-B ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) .
Work store Drawings Delays
The term ( shop drawings ) refers to the design drawings, specifications, agendas, illustrations, and other informations or which are peculiarly prepared by Engineer ( Wertman, 2008 ) . Work store drawings phase comes straight after design development phase. Work store drawings are ever the duty of Engineer to fix. They are prepared to supply more inside informations about undertaking design. The preciseness of the prepared work store drawings is related to the quality of the design itself and the professionality of the squad that carry out such drawings. In order to avoid hold, work store drawings should be ever revised and reviewed in timely manner ( Hatem & A ; Lenart, 2010 ) . Delaies could go on anytime during readying, entry, or even acquiring blessing of work store drawings phase. Engineer can non get down fixing these drawings unless the undertaking Designer submitted the design paperss. If there is a hold in subjecting the design papers, so the work store drawings readying will be delay consequently ( Ostanik, 2007 ) .
Undertaking Parties Changes Delays
Changes are one of the major causes of holds in industrial undertakings. Changes sometimes impact other activities of the undertaking and the grade of badness is changed from one instance to another. Therefore, the hold may be merely affects a specific activity or even the full scheduled clip of the undertaking. Both Owner and Engineer can do holds or even a 3rd party such as governmental governments. There are many grounds to bespeak a alteration. It is of import to analyze these grounds in order to find the responsible party and the compensability of each hold ground sing to the alterations ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) .
Causes of Delaies
In the phase of the design development, holds may happen because Engineer has deficient staff or services. This makes the Engineer incapable to manage undertaking design on clip. Another ground is when Owner is late in subjecting undertaking paperss to the Engineer. These paperss enable the Engineer to understand Owner ‘s demands ( Haseeb, Xinhai-Lu, Bibi, Maloof-ud-Dyian, & A ; Rabbani, 2011 ) . Besides, when undertaking paperss are uncomplete, this for certain will take to inquiring for excess information and hold. Slow response to Engineer questions is one of the major causes of hold in planing phase. Another ground is design alteration to run into Owner ‘s demand.
In the readying of work store drawings, errors in the design paperss ( drawings, specifications, measure of measures, etc ) that demand alterations are causes of hold. Addition, slow actions by Engineer in the procedure of fixing the bundle work store drawings. Even if work store drawings are ready, Engineer lateness in subjecting work store drawings to the Owner is another cause of hold. As for the Owner, lateness in subjecting the design paperss to the Engineer ( merely in D-B-B system ) . Poor following up the blessing procedure is negligence either by Engineer or by Owner which lead to detain.
Change-Orders is a magnitude factor of hold, it is really common in industrial undertakings specifically. The grounds behind bespeaking for alteration orders are vary. Mistakes in the design paperss provides drawings don non run into Owner demands. In some instances, constructability jobs and altering methods is the ground. However, inaccessibility of stuffs is another cause which is solved by bespeaking alternate specifications for the stuff. Furthermore, Owner ‘s building process involvement is changed, this means the design have to be modified consequently. Similarly, contractor might neglect to secure some equipments or stuffs and ask for alteration of building process. Besides, adding or extinguishing activities to the range of work is an of import factor to see. Another cause is hapless public presentation of Engineer or exhibiting an unexpected status would necessitate a alteration. Changes are besides might be requested by the governmental governments, the causes are: Incompatibility of work store design or design paperss ; or mutual exclusiveness of the work process and/or building method to the local ordinances or safety demands ; or new ordinances are issued ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) .
Finally, Engineer should subject work store drawings on clip to the Owner to enable him to acquire related blessings without any hold. Any mistakes in the work store drawings will retard the Owner from acquiring the blessing on clip. On the other manus, Owners should perpetrate to pay fiscal duties on a regular basis and without hold harmonizing to contract ( Sambasivan & A ; Soon, 2007 ) . Owner failure to pay harmonizing to fiscal footings of contract is a major cause of hold. It should be put into consideration that any hold happens by one party is an alibi for the other party holds because their activities are someway intersected. So, all contract involved parties must lodge on the timeframe duties stated in the contract ( Abdul-Rahman, Takim, & A ; Min, 2009 ) .
Beginnings of Delay
First of all, hold can be caused by any party of a contract. During undertaking stages, Owners, contractors, subcontractors, Engineers, providers, public-service corporation companies, or even nature are orign of hold ( Andi & A ; Lalitan, 2010 ) . In the technology stage, there are merely two parties ; Owner and Designer. This paper focuses on hold orign, or in other words who is responsible of the dealy in the technology stage.
In the design development, it is obvious that any hold in D-B-B system is Owner duty. While it is a shared duty between both parties in D-B system. The portion of each party in the duty depends on how this party commit to the contract duties. Figure aˆZ2. Flow chart of holds in design development shows a chart exemplifying the beginning of hold in design development phases. Engineer has the right to reasonably increase the clip continuance of the design development in instance Owner requested extra plants or changed the range. The same thing is applied when Engineer discovers errors in the priliminary docuents received from Owner. Time bounds, such as reacting to questions or petitions, are normally stated clearly in the contract between involved parties.
Figure aˆZ2. Sub-hierarchy for the Three Types of Delays and Responsible Beginnings.
In the phase of fixing work store drawings and acquiring associated blessing, it is the duty of the Owner when any hold occurs in D-B-B undertakings. While it is the duty of the Engineer in D-B undertakings since Engineer is the 1 who prepares the work store drawings. Figure aˆZ2. Flowchart of holds in work store drawings shows a chart illustrates the beginning of hold in fixing work store drawings phases. It is excusable and compinsable when the Owner holds in reacting to Engineer petitions or questions ( Marzouk, El-Dokhmasey, & A ; El-Said, 2008 ) .
Figure aˆZ2. Flow chart of holds in design development
Figure aˆZ2. Flowchart of holds in work store drawings readying
Figure aˆZ2. Flowchart of holds in work store drawings blessing
STRUCTURE OF RESEARCH
This survey is a field study research. A structured questionnaire is used as a mean to roll up required informations. The questionnaire was directed to both industrial undertaking Owners and undertaking directors in technology adviser houses in Saudi Arabia.
The research survey follows the stairss shown in Figure aˆZ3. Research Methodology Diagram. It can be summarized as the followers:
Constructing a comprehensive literature reappraisal for the subjects related to this survey besides sing correlated companies and questioning professional adviser Engineers and experts in the field of Engineering consultancy of industrial undertakings. This is done to garner needful information concerned with the factors impacting holds in the technology stage of industrial undertakings, and to explicate ordinances and footings refering to detain in industrial undertakings in the technology stage.
Planing a comprehensive questionnaire from the informations collected. The questionnaire covers the causes of hold and the needed informations.
Establishing and printing an online questionnaire study by utilizing Google paperss and directing the questionnaire web nexus to the proposed respondents. This technique makes it easy to make full out and to promote participants to react rapidly.
Using statistical computations and Analytical Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) as a quantitative technique to analyse the collected informations by using “ Adept Choice ” computing machine package.
Reporting and reflecting on the consequences.
Sum uping findings in order to expose recommendations and
Figure aˆZ3. Research Methodology Diagram.
Questionnaire Development and Design
Based on the research objectives, the questionnaire was developed utilizing the information got from the literature reappraisal. There were 20 one causes of hold subtracted from the literature reappraisal. Six expert undertaking directors from different technology subjects were interviewed to discourse the list of hold causes. The feedback from experts was valuable since some of cause were eliminated and considered non valid for this survey. Other causes nomenclature was equivocal so they had been paraphrased. Some experts added new causes that can be beginnings of hold. The research worker ended up with 30 causes of holds in industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. Theses causes of hold are categorized into five chief factors. Questionnaires from other relevant studied were reviewed to develop a new questionnaire that fits the aims of this research.
The questionnaire consists of three chief parts which are ( A ) , ( B ) , and ( C ) . An debut besides provided to give respondents a clear thought about the survey, definitions, and responses term to utilize in the questionnaire. Part ( A ) discuses general information sing both the respondent experience and his company. Part ( B ) includes the five factors of hold in the technology stage of big industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia and their corresponding list of hold causes. This portion asks about two things which are frequence and badness of each hold cause. Both inquiries are based on a five-point graduated table. A brace wise comparing is conducted two times in this portion, one to mensurate the importance index between hold factors while the other to mensurate the importance index of responsible parties for each hold factor. Part ( C ) deals with the extent of hold in the technology stage of big industrial undertaking in Saudi Arabia. An extra inquiry was added to this portion to reflect existent delayed undertakings and to compare the contract period of delayed undertaking versus the existent finished clip.
Figure aˆZ3. causes of hold in the designing of industrial undertakings in classs.
Figure aˆZ3. Sub-hierarchy of the five factors of hold and responsible beginnings of hold.
Sample Size Determination and Selection
As mentioned in the range, this research conducts a field study that trades with Saudi Oil Company ( Saudi Aramco ) as the Owner since it has the largest industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Aramco signed four GES Plus contracts with four pools consist of 11 companies as technology advisers that represent the targeted population of this survey. The questionnaire was distributed to 100 % of the population that consists of 11 companies and the Owner. Total of 20 two valid responses were targeted ( eleven by the Owner and other eleven by Engineers ) .
Part ( B-1 ) uses a graduated table of 5 points to mensurate the frequence and badness of each cause in a quantitative mode. The weights of the 5-point graduated table are illustrated in the undermentioned tabular array:
Table aˆZ3. Weight of frequence of hold causes.
Table aˆZ3. Weight of badness of hold causes.
The undermentioned expressions are used to cipher frequence and badness index:
N=X1+ X2+ X3+ X4+ X5
Ai = The assigned weight for the frequence and the badness of each the cause ( I ) as illustrated in the old tabular arraies.
Eleven = Variable figure of the respondents who ticked reply ( I )
N = Number of respondents
n = N-X5
After that the Importance Index can be calculated by utilizing the undermentioned expression:
IMP. IND. % = ( F.I. *S.I. ) *100
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Description of Respondents
This subdivision discusses the description of the respondents which included 11 Owners and 11 Engineers. The respondents are located in Eastern Province, but their undertakings cover Eastern, Western, Northern, Southern, and Central Region. The questionnaire was answered by undertaking directors, heads section, general directors, and senior Engineers. They are adept Engineers who have experience of largely more than 10 old ages.
The study classified the experience into two parts, company experience and respondent experience. It is found that the experience of 95 % of the companies exceeded 10 old ages, and the experience of 90.91 % of the respondents exceeded 10 old ages as shown in Table aˆZ4. Experience of respondents and companies in industrial engineering..
Table aˆZ4. Experience of respondents and companies in industrial technology.
The companies involve in design of undertakings in different parts, but chiefly in Eastern, Western, and Central part. Out of the sum of the 12 technology companies, 12 have undertakings in eastern part, 8 companies have undertakings in cardinal Region, 10 companies have undertakings in Western part, 2 companies have undertakings in Northern part, and 3 companies have undertakings in Southern part. Table aˆZ4.Engineering companies part of operation. shows the per centum per part operation.
Table aˆZ4.Engineering companies part of operation.
Delay in Large Industrial Undertakings
Frequency of Delay
Twenty two respondents reported to hold completed more than 696 undertakings. The respondents experienced hold in about 86 of these undertakings which represent 12.36 % of the entire undertakings figure, see Table aˆZ4. Average frequence of delayed projects..
Table aˆZ4. Average frequence of delayed undertakings.
Respondents were asked to choose 3 delayed undertakings during the last five old ages. The undertakings were classified into four classs, as shown in Table aˆZ4. Frequency of Delays in Industrial Projects between 2009-2012 – Case Studies. , harmonizing to the size of the undertakings in man-hours. It was found that the overall norm of 66 undertakings with sanctioned extension is 90.91 % . This gives an indicant that the Owner either accepted a partial duty of causes of hold or shows willingness to collaborate with Engineers to work out common jobs. First, 96.3 % of the delayed undertakings of 1-5 thousand man-hours were extension approved. Second, 88.89 % of the delayed undertakings of 6-10 1000s man-hours were extension approved. Third, 87.50 % of the delayed undertakings of 11-15 1000s man-hours were extension approved. Finally, 85.71 % of the delayed undertakings of more than 15 1000s man-hours were reported to hold an extension approved.
Table aˆZ4. Frequency of Delays in Industrial Projects between 2009-2012 – Case Studies.
Extent of Delay
The extent of hold in industrial undertakings was divided in the questionnaire into 4 classs as shown in Table aˆZ4. Average extent of delayed projects.. Out of 22 respondents, 9 % believe that the extent of hold is less than 10 % or above 50 % of the undertaking continuance. While the bulk of 50 % reported that the extent of hold is from 10 to 30 % of the undertaking continuance. Where there were about 32 % of the respondents reported the extent of hold to be between 30 to 50 % of the undertaking original continuance.
Table aˆZ4. Average extent of delayed undertakings.
The existent extent of 66 delayed undertakings was reported by 22 respondents. Undertakings had a design continuance varies between 6 to 18 months, and had values between one 1000 to fifteen 1000s and above. All of these undertakings were designed in the last five old ages ( 2007-2012 ) . Table aˆZ4. Extent of Delays in Industrial Projects – Case Studies. shows existent hold extents of the undertakings, classified based on undertaking size in man-hours into four groups: 1 thousand to five 1000s of man-hours, six to ten 1000s of man-hours, eleven to fifteen 1000s of man-hours, and above 15 1000s of man-hours.
Table aˆZ4. Extent of Delays in Industrial Projects – Case Studies.
The consequences show entire original ( contract ) continuance in comparing with entire existent continuance to cipher the mean extent of hold, and the entire requested extension compared with sanctioned extension. The overall deliberate mean extent of hold indicates an norm of 14.94 % for all reported delayed undertakings. The little undertakings that have less than 5 1000s man-hours experienced highest mean extent of hold ( 19.51 % ) . As the size of undertaking additions by a scope of five 1000s man-hours, the mean extent of hold lessenings. Undertakings with the size of 5 to 10 man-hours experienced 15.24 % mean extent of hold. Undertakings of 11 to 15 man-hours exhibited around 13.28 % mean extent of hold. Finally, Undertakings of more than 15 man-hours encountered 72 % mean extent of hold.
About all delayed undertakings had a requested clip extension. It was found that 87.8 % of the requested clip for extension was approved. For undertakings that have less than 5 1000 man-hours, around 94.12 % of the requested clip for extension was approved. While 90.48 % was approved for undertakings of the size from 6 to 10 thousand man-hours. And about 86.11 % was approved for undertakings of the size from 11 to 15 man-hours. Last, merely 81.25 % of the requested clip was approved. The high per centum of sanctioned extension clip gives a clear indicant that most, but non all, holds are excusable.
Duty for Delay
Delay causes are divided into three classs based on the duty for hold. Since there are merely two parties in the technology stage which are Owner and Engineer, the three classs of hold duty are Owner duty, Engineer duty, and Owner/Engineer common duty. The following are the lists of the hold causes of each class:
Delay causes by Owner:
Inaccessibility of range of work
Ambiguity in range of work
Delay in supplying undertaking paperss and specifications
Incompleteness of undertaking paperss and specifications
Inaccessibility of bing drawings and/or information
Slow in reacting to questions
Access to site permission process
Delay in progress payment
Adding excess range of work to already hold
Procedure of O.K.ing alteration orders
Changing building methods ( project demand )
Mistakes in undertaking paperss and specifications
Delay causes by Engineer:
Insufficient informations aggregation or hapless study
Incapability of adviser technology house
Insufficient/ unequal squad of Engineers
Poor/ inexperienced planing squad
Awareness about criterions and processs
Inaccessibility of progress technology package
Overcommitted ( overloaded ) Engineers
Poor following up
Compressed undertaking agenda
Slow actions in readying of design bundle
Design alteration to run into undertaking demands
Conflict with governmental governments ordinances or safety demand
Design conflicts with criterions
Unavailability / blessing of selected stuffs
Delay causes with common duty of both Owner and Engineer:
Misinterpretation of undertaking paperss
Poor interaction in meetings and/or coordination
Unexpected/ unanticipated extra demand. Causes and Beginnings of Delay
Frequency and Severity of the causes
The marking system that described in subdivision 3.4 is used here to mensurate the frequence and badness of the hold causes. Statistical methods are used in order to construe and analyse the informations collected that related to frequence and badness of hold causes.
The computation consequences of the hiting system as statistical variables of both frequence and badness are listed in Appendix ( B ) . The mean of the frequence is found to be in the scope of 2.86 to 1.45 on the graduated table of frequence ( out of four ) , while the mean of badness is in the scope of 2.77 to 1.5 on the badness graduated table. The standard divergence of the hold causes frequence is in the scope of 0.27 to 1.77, while the standard divergence of hold causes badness is in the scope of 0.11 to 1.74. This survey uses 95 % of the assurance degree.
Table aˆZ4. Frequency and badness of causes of hold.
Importance of the causes of hold
The importance index was calculated for the frequence and badness of hold causes as merchandise. It is interpreted to a standard signifier in a base of 100 in the Table aˆZ4. Importance index of causes of hold. of ranking.
Table aˆZ4. Importance index of causes of hold.
Ranking of the causes
Table aˆZ4. Standard ranks of causes of hold.
Most of import causes by the respondents
Based on experience, respondents were requested to choose the most five of import causes of hold. Respondents mentioned different causes, each has selected from his ain point of position. Causes of hold are ranked harmonizing to the numbering figure of each cause by respondents. Table aˆZ4. Summary of most of import causes and their ranks by the respondents. shows the sum-up of the frequence of most of import causes by respondents. The followers is a superior list of the most of import causes by respondents:
Compressed undertaking agenda.
Overcommitted ( overloaded ) Engineers.
Adding excess range of work to already hold.
Slow in reacting to questions.
Procedure of O.K.ing alteration orders.
Inaccessibility of bing drawings and/or information.
Poor following up.
Unexpected/ unanticipated extra demand.
Ambiguity in range of work.
Insufficient informations aggregation or hapless study.
Incapability of adviser technology house.
Access to site permission process.
Unavailability / blessing of selected stuffs.
Misinterpretation of undertaking paperss.
Inaccessibility of progress technology package.
Poor interaction in meetings and/or coordination.
Changing building methods ( project demand ) .
Design conflicts with criterions.
Table aˆZ4. Summary of most of import causes and their ranks by the respondents.
This survey, in add-on, used pair-wise comparing matrix to happen out the importance ranking of hold factors in the technology stage of big industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire contained two tabular arraies that used for this intent. The first tabular array compared each hold factor to the other hold factors harmonizing to respondents anterior experience in the technology field ( see consequences in Table aˆZ4. Delay factors pair wise comparing consequences of importance ranking. ) . The 2nd tabular array discussed the duty of parties, Owner versus Engineer, for each hold factor as shown in Table aˆZ4. Responsible party brace wise comparing consequences of importance ranking.. The information in the two pair-wise comparing matrix were analyzed utilizing “ Expert Choice, version 11 ” , which is a computing machine package for multi standards determination devising.
Figure aˆZ4. Analytic Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) theoretical account. shows the theoretical account of the analytical hierarchy procedure used in this research. It consists of three degrees, foremost degree called the end which is the hold factors importance ranking, the 2nd referred to as kids which are the five factors of hold, the 3rd degree indicated the options who are the Owner and Engineer as responsible parties of holds.
As shown in Figure aˆZ4. Dynamic sensitiveness with regard to detain factors importance ranking. , the most of import factor of hold is the design compatibility with 42.9 % . The 2nd of import factor is project control with a per centum of 19.7 % . The 3rd factor in the importance ranking is resource capableness which has 17.8 % . The 3rd factor is alterations and it got 11.7 % . The least of import factor of hold is project paperss holding a weighting of 7.9 % merely. The consequence of AHP shows a rebuff more duty to Engineer than the Owner. Harmonizing to the analyzed information, Owner should take 42.5 % of the duty of delayed undertakings, while Engineer should take 57.5 % of the duty. Figure aˆZ4. Responsible party for hold factors. shows in farther item the per centum of duty for the two parties under each hold factor.
Table aˆZ4. Delay factors pair wise comparing consequences of importance ranking.
Table aˆZ4. Responsible party brace wise comparing consequences of importance ranking.
Figure aˆZ4. Analytic Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) theoretical account.
Figure aˆZ4. Dynamic sensitiveness with regard to detain factors importance ranking.
Figure aˆZ4. Responsible party for hold factors.
Figure aˆZ4. Numeric assessmnt of the comparative importance of the hold factors. to Figure aˆZ4. Weighted caput to caput between Owner and Engineer. present different manners of sensitiveness analysis for the hold factors and responsible parties. Unfortunately, the consequences have a high rate of incompatibility ( 1.4 ) which means broad fluctuation between the replies of respondents. The high incompatibility could be because the respondents are from different subjects and different companies. Each subject has its ain fortunes and trades with different jobs, so the incompatibility was predictable.
Figure aˆZ4. Precedences of the hold factors with regard to the importance ranking.
Figure aˆZ4. Numeric assessmnt of the comparative importance of the hold factors.
Figure aˆZ4. Sensitivity analysis with regard to detain factors importance ranking.
Figure aˆZ4. Weighted caput to caput between Owner and Engineer.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study discussed the hold in the technology stage of big industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia. It studied the frequence and extent of the causes of hold. The research besides represented the importance of the hold causes based on the consequences of the frequence and extent of each cause of hold. This survey is a questionnaire study footing research that is directed to the Owner of the largest industrial undertakings in the Kingdom and the associated Engineers.
In the first portion of this study, a background about Saudi Arabian industrial market was introduced. This portion highlighted the major industrial undertakings in Saudi Arabia and the stages of undertakings lifecycle and phases. The hold job in the technology stage of big industrial undertakings was besides stated in this portion. After that, the aims of the research were indicated to take readers about the ends behind the study.
In the 2nd portion, a literature reappraisal was conducted utilizing multi mentions to roll up all necessary information. This helps to understand all dimensions of the stated job. Then, the causes of hold were listed in 30 points after had been revised by adept Engineers and undertaking directors in the industrial field.
In the 3rd portion, the organisation of the study was structured in sequence of phases to give a clear mission for the study. Besides, the procedure of developing the questionnaire that used in roll uping informations in this research was described. The questionnaire developed was consisted of three parts: first portion for general information about respondents, the second was related to respondents judgement based on the experience sing the frequence and badness of hold causes and factors, and the 3rd was about the overall extent of the hold in the technology stage of industrial undertakings. The hiting method of the questionnaire was discussed in item in this portion.
In the 4th portion, the collected informations by the questionnaire were presented in tabular arraies and figures. The informations were analyzed utilizing simple statistical techniques and the quantitative analysis method of Analytical Hierarchy Process ( AHP ) . The consequences were given to demo the frequence, extent, and importance ranking of each cause and factor of hold. The field study included 22 respondents, half of them represented the Owner while the other half represented the Engineer.
In the 5th portion, the major findings and the most of import factors of hold are on manus on the undermentioned subdivisions. The decision of the research are presented as managerial solutions demoing how undertaking directors can at least minimise, if non avoid, the hold in the technology stage of future industrial undertakings. Finally, some recommendation are given to assist in carry oning farther or similar surveies.
Findingss and Decisions
Based on the consequences obtained, it is observed that the hold frequence in the design stage of industrial undertakings occur particularly for little undertakings. The hold frequence had about an reverse relation with the size of the undertaking estimated in man-hours. It is besides found that all delayed undertakings were extension requested, the bulk – more than 85 % – were partly or wholly extension approved.
It footings of the extent of hold, it is found that 50 % of respondents believe that it could make 10-30 % of undertakings original continuance. Based on respondents experience, the existent delayed undertakings showed an mean hold extension of 14.94 % . The hold extension was more terrible in little undertakings – less than five 1000s man-hours – comparison to medium and large undertakings. It is besides observed that the norm of the sanctioned clip extension was 87.8 % which is high per centum.
Sing the of import causes of the hold, there are many causes that reported as of import causes by one or more respondents. The most of import causes that had more than 40 harmonizing to the standard importance index are listed to stand for the of import causes:
Compressed undertaking agenda was given the highest importance in the ranking among the other causes. Compressed agenda means the Engineer underestimated the undertaking continuance, or Engineer overestimated his capableness to complete the undertaking on clip. On both ways, Engineer must be more realistic in scheduling undertaking during command procedure.
Overcommitted Engineers considered as the 2nd highest of import cause of hold. This cause shows the willingness of the company to win more undertakings than it can manage. To work out this job the technology company has to take a necessary disciplinary action by increasing of its resources. In instance this solution is non sensible at the clip, it should cut down the rate of freshly received undertakings.
Adding excess range of work to already hold is a really of import cause of hold. This action is a type of altering order and this means it is the duty of the Owner to absorb any amendss due to his hapless planning and undertaking scoping. Owner has to analyze undertakings really good and carefully before presenting them to non add any excess plants to already be. Owner can utilize sensitiveness analysis ( what if ) technique and value technology in this instance to foretell any possible demands for undertakings.
Insufficient informations aggregation or hapless study of class affect negatively the efficient undertaking clip public presentation. Since it is the duty of Engineer to transport out study, Engineer has to delegate adequate clip for informations aggregation and study undertakings. Engineer must take his clip in study procedure and agenda it decently. This action would forestall Engineer from reiterating the same work once more and once more because of insufficient collected informations.
Inaccessibility of bing drawings and information is one of the major causes of hold. Existing drawings, or sometimes as reinforced drawings, and information are indispensable for Engineers to plan any undertaking. Deficit in these of import paperss for certain leads to break up extent of hold and take clip to fix them in instance of inaccessibility. Therefore, Owner has to do certain that all drawings and information of the bing state of affairs is ready in front of presenting undertakings.
Recommendations for Further Studies
The undermentioned points are recommended to transport out a similar research in the field of the causes of hold in Engineering stage of big industrial undertakings:
Other research is candidate to carry on for the other types of industries in Saudi Arabia.
Different survey methods can be adopted to measure the causes of hold.
The research technique is extremely recommended to cover with a individual technology subject to acquire less incompatibility rate, and as a consequence, to be able to propose more accurate solutions.
Another survey can negociate and discourse the comparative cost of delayed industrial undertakings.
You have been carefully selected, and are personally invited to take part in a research undertaking of the above rubric. It takes from 15 to 20 proceedingss to make full out this questionnaire. It is really of import and indispensable for us to larn your sentiments. ALL ANSWERS WILL Be KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. Data will be analyzed as whole, and your replies will be used merely for the intent of scientific research. Please read this signifier carefully, and experience free to reach the research worker prior to get downing the survey should you hold ANY inquiries.
Research worker: Eng. Saeed Al-Amoudi
Mob. : 0569899606
Electronic mail: 3moudi @ live.com
The questionnaire consists of three parts, Part ( A ) includes general information associating to your experience, Part ( B ) includes a list of causes of hold. You are requested to take a frequence of happening, a grade of badness for each of these causes, and an appropriate weight of nine degree graduated table in a pairwize comparing tabular array, Part ( C ) includes inquiries for the overall extent of hold. You are kindly requested to reply the inquiries as reflected by your experience.
: The clip overrun beyond the building completion day of the month as specified originally in the contract of the undertaking, whether or non the contractor was allowed a clip extension.
: Undertaking in this questionnaire refers to fixing undertaking proposal design ( FEED ) .
: The frequence of happening of a cause of hold throughout fixing undertaking proposal design.
: The badness of consequence on the completion of a undertaking when such a hold occurs.
For portion ( A ) , the responses are based on a 5-degree graduated table as follow:
Frequency of happening:
Degree of badness:
Do non cognize
: occurs all the times and state of affairss.
: occurs most of the times and state of affairss.
: occurs from clip to clip.
: does non happen at all.
: no experience with the frequence of happening of this cause.
Do non cognize
: cause has a great consequence on hold.
: cause has an appreciable consequence on hold.
: cause has some consequence on hold.
: cause has negligible or no consequence on hold.
: no experience with the badness of this cause.
Part ( A ) GENERAL Information:
You are kindly requested to compose or click ( a?“ ) the appropriate reply for the undermentioned inquiries.
Where are the industrial undertakings in the land that your house handles?
How many old ages have your house been planing industrial undertakings?
Less than 10 old ages
10 to less than 15 old ages
15 to less than 20 old ages
over 20 old ages
What is your occupation rubric in your house?
How many old ages of experience do you hold in the industrial technology consultancy?
How many industrial undertakings have you been involved in?
How many of these above mentioned undertakings were delayed?
Part ( B ) CAUSES OF DELAY:
The list below include causes of hold. For each of these causes you are kindly requested to show your option by replying the following two inquiries and take the appropriate choice:
What is the frequence of happening for each cause? Kindly tick ( a?“ ) the appropriate cell.
What is the appropriate weight of each hold factor in term of criticalness in its way from centre than other factor at rearward side? kindly tick ( a?“ ) the appropriate cell.
Rating graduated table:
Similarly, what is the appropriate weight of each responsible for the five hold causes? kindly tick ( a?“ ) the appropriate cell.
Part ( C ) Delay Extent:
This portion includes general inquiries refering to the overall extent of hold in the design of industrial undertakings. You are kindly requested to reply the undermentioned inquiries:
Based on your experience with delayed undertakings, what was the mean hold clip of the delayed undertakings relative to the original undertaking contract continuance?
less than 10 %
10 to 30 %
30 to 50 %
50 to 100 %
over 100 %
Based on you experience, what are the most of import 5 causes out of the 30 causes of hold in the design stage of industrial undertakings?
Please fill in the undermentioned tabular array with 3 completed undertakings which were designed by your house and were subjected to detain. An illustration is given in the tabular array:
Estimated Man-hours: rounded to the nearest 1000 adult male hours.
Duration: Rounded to the nearest month.
Old ages of submitting: Please choose undertakings completed during the last five old ages.
Remarks: Please compose any remark that would add value to this questionnaire
… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .. … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … ..
Name of your house ( Optional ) : … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .
Filled by ( Optional ) : … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .
Thank you for your sort engagement.
Abdul-Rahman, H. , Takim, R. , & A ; Min, W. S. ( 2009 ) . Financial-Related Causes Lending to Project Delays. Journal of Retail & A ; Leisure Property 8.3, 225-238.
Abu Zaid, W. ( 2012, April 12 ) . AMCDE Co. , Project Manager. ( S. Al-Amoudi, Interviewer ) Khobar, Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia.
Andi, A. , & A ; Lalitan, V. ( 2010 ) . Owner and Contractor Perceptions Toward Factors Causing Delays. Civil Engineering Dimension, 8-17.
Assaf, S. A. , & A ; Al-Hejji, S. ( 2006 ) . Causes of Delay in Large Construction Projects. International Journal of Project Management 24, 349-357.
Doyle, J. , Nardone, F. , & A ; Krisnan, V. ( 2005 ) . Coincident Delays in Contracts. Australia: Financial-Related Causes Lending to Project Delays.
Haseeb, M. , Xinhai-Lu, Bibi, A. , Maloof-ud-Dyian, & A ; Rabbani, W. ( 2011 ) . Problems of Projects and Effectss of Delaies in the Construction Industry of Pakistan. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research 1.5, 41-50.
Hatem, D. , & A ; Lenart, P. C. ( 2010, March ) . RFIs and Shop Drawings, How to Manage Risk and Reduce Liability. Structure Magazine, pp. 30-31.
Luu, V. T. , Kim, S.-Y. , Tuan, N. V. , & A ; Ogunlana, S. O. ( 2009 ) . Quantifying Schedule Risk in Construction Projects Using Bayesian Belief Networks. International Journal of Project Management 27, 39-50.
Marzouk, M. , El-Dokhmasey, A. , & A ; El-Said, M. ( 2008, July 1 ) . Measuring Construction Engineering-Related Delays. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education, 134 ( 3 ) , 315-326.
Nirmal Kumar Acharya, Y. D. ( 2006 ) . Critical Construction Conflicting Factors Identification Using. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 165-174.
Ostanik, M. ( 2007 ) . Construction Submittal and Shop Drawing Liability. Submittal Exchange, 1-7.
Randall Bell, M. ( 2011 ) . Undertaking Delay Economics. The Appraisal Journal, 292-300.
Sambasivan, M. , & A ; Soon, Y. W. ( 2007 ) . Causes and effects of holds in Malayan building industry. International Journal of Project Management 25, 517-526.
SIDF, S. I. ( 2012 ) . Industrial Development in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Saudi Industrial Development Fund.
Tumi, S. , Omran, A. , & A ; Pakir, A. H. ( 2009 ) . Causes of Delay in Construction Industry in Libya. The International Conference on Administration and Business ( pp. 265-272 ) . Bucharest: ICEA – FAA.
Wertman, J. S. ( 2008 ) . The Use of Shop Drawings on Construction Projects. Miami: Berger Singerman.
Yang, J.-B. , & A ; Wei, P.-R. ( 2010 ) . Causes of Delay in the Planning and Design Phases. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 80-83.