1

DelayCausesAnalysisincomplexconstructionprojects;aSemanticNetwork

Analysisapproach

BehrouzZarei1,HosseinSharifi2,YahyaChaghouee3

Facultyofentrepreneurship,UniversityofTehran,Iran1

ManagementSchool,UniversityofLiverpool,Liverpool,UK2

DepartmentofMediaManagement,ScienceandResearchBranch,IslamicAzadUniversity,Tehran,Iran3

Abstract

Delaysareamongthemostcrucialadversariestothesuccessandperformanceofconstructionprojects,

making delay analysis and management a critical task for project managers. This task will be highly

complicatedinlarge-scaleprojectssuchasconstruction,whichusuallyconsistofacomplexnetworkof

heterogeneousentitiesincontinuousinteraction.Traditionalapproachesandmethodsfortheanalysisof

delaysandtheircauseshavebeencriticisedfortheirabilitytohandlecomplexprojects,andinparticular

fortaking intoaccountthe interrelationshipsbetweendelaycauses.Addressingthisgap,thisresearch

introducesanalternativeapproachfordelaycausesanalysisbyadoptingSemanticNetworkAnalysis(SNA)

method.ThepaperreportstheresultsfromaninvestigationofdelaysinconstructionprojectsintheOil-

Gas-Petrochemical (OGP) sector using SNA. Themethod’s capacity to identify and rank delay causes,

which can assist managers in selecting appropriate measures for eliminating them, are empirically

examinedanddiscussed.ThepaperarguesthatSNAleadstoamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofthe

maincausesofdelayinlargeandcomplexprojects,allowingabetteridentificationandmappingofthe

interrelationshipsbetweenthesediscretefactors.

Keywords: Delay Analysis, Semantic Networks Analysis, Construction Project Delay, Petrochemical

Industry.

1. Introduction

Delaysareidentifiedasamajorissueforsuccessfulprojectmanagement.Delayisacommonproblemin

mostprojects,themagnitudeofwhichvariessignificantlyfromprojecttoprojectandindustrytoindustry

(Wa’eletal.,2007).Theliteraturecontainsextensivestudiesofthesubjectacrossvariousindustries(see

Wu(2016)inAviationIndustry,RuqaishiandBashir(2015)inconstructionindustry,Fallahnejad(2013)

andFouche´andRolstadas(2010)andDey(2012)inOilandGasindustry).

Delaysnotonlyaffectthedeliveryoftheproject,butcanleadtoothersourcesofinefficiencysuch

ascostoverrunaswellasmanagerialandrelationshipissues(SambasivanandSoon,2007).Thefieldof

2

ProjectManagement(PM)hasattemptedtodiscerndelaycauses,seekingtoassistmanagersintackling

thiskeyproblem(seeArditiandPattanakitchamroon(2006);AssafandAl-Hejji(2006);Sambasivanand

Soon (2007);Gill (2008);BraimahandNdekugri (2008); Sweiset al. (2008);Dey (2012); YauandYang

(2012);YangandKao (2012);Doloietal. (2012);Fallahnejad (2013);Amoateyetal. (2015); Joslinand

Müller (2016)). According to Gunasekaran and Ngai, (2012) attending these aspects of project

managementarebecoming increasingly important to theproductionplanningand control function in

operationsmanagement,

Construction projects are vital to many industries, including energy, water resources

development,communication,architecture,publichealth,andOil,GasandPetrochemical(OGP)(Gardezi

etal.,2014).Othersectorsandindustriesarealsoindirectlyaffectedbytheperformanceofconstruction

projects, which signify the prominent role of such projects in national economies. As such, delays in

constructionprojectscanposeacriticalthreattothesuccessofnationalinfrastructuralplans.

Studieshaveshownthatevenwithtoday’sadvances intechnology,managementsystemsand

techniques, project completiondates still get pushedback (Sweis et al., 2008).Sambasivan and Soon

(2007)andYangandOu(2008)seedelaysinconstructionprojectsasaglobalproblem,beingoneofthe

mostcommonlyrecurringissuesintheindustry(Tumietal.,2009;YangandKao,2012;Doloietal.,2012).

YangandOu(2008)usedastructuralequationmodelling(SEM)approachtoidentifythereasonsfordelay

inconstruction,andcategorisedthecasuesas:(1)contractrelated,(2)managementrelated,(3)human

related,(4)non-humanrelated,(5)designrelated,and(6)financerelated.YangandKao(2012)findthree

main reasons for this: construction projects (1) generally have highly complicated situations during

execution,(2)involvemanyprojectstakeholdersandinterfaces,and(3)areinfluencedbymanyexternal

factors.Gardezietal.(2014)arguethatthelevelofriskanduncertaintyinconstructionprojectsishigher

thanothersectors,whicharelargelyduetothefactthatsuchprojectshavecomplexandtimeconsuming

designs, involving processes and methods which are more likely to be affected by unprecedented

circumstances.

OneofthemostimportantfieldsinvolvingextensiveconstructionprojectsistheOGPindustry.

Projects in this sector are usually ofmega scale,with the potential to affect national economies. An

understandingofdelaycausesandtheirdynamicsisthereforeparticularlycrucialforthissector.Recent

eventsintheMiddleEastregioncoupledwithreducedoilpricesnecessitateimprovedproductivityand

efficiencyinOGPprojectsinwhichdelayanalysisplaysakeyrole.

Themethodologyappliedinmostoftheextantliteraturedealswiththeoccurrenceofdelaysand

theirtangibleliabilitiesfortheprojects.However,suchmethodshavebeencriticisedforfailingtosupport

3

analysis of complex projects in complex environments (Farrow, 2007; Yang and Kao, 2012). Complex

projectslikelargeconstructionprojects,particularlyintheOGPsector,involvevariousstakeholdersand

actors, and multiple nodes and factors that interact and communicate within interwoven networks.

Understandingcausalfactorsofdelay,andtheprioritisationofthesefactors,requiresamethodologythat

accommodatestheinterwovennatureofthesefactorsandtheirpotentialliabilities.Forthispurpose,this

studyemploystheSemanticNetworkAnalysismethod,whichisadvocatedforstudiesinvolvingstructure

andbehavioursincomplexnetworks(Pereiraetal.,2011).

Thepaperpresentsanovelapproachtothestudyofprojectdelaysandanalysisoftheirrootcauses.

SNA,whichpresentsanetworkviewoftheprojectsandtheirinterrelationships,foregroundsthemeaning

ofdelayfactorsasunderstoodbyvariousentitiesandmanagersinvolvedinindustryprojects.Applying

themethodresultsinamoreaccuratehierarchisingoftheidentifiedcauses.Whiletheempiricalresults

maybe considered specific to the chosen sector, the resultsprovidenew insights intoexaminingand

dealingwithdelaysmoreefficientlyandeffectively.Thestudyofferstwokeycontributions:(1)presenting

anewmethodforanalysingdelaysinprojects,theSemanticNetworkAnalysis,and(2)suggestinganorder

ofsignificanceforfactorsthatarecriticaltoconstructionprojectdelaysintheOGPindustry.

2. Literaturereview

2.1.Projectdelays

Cost,timeandqualityhavebeenrecognisedasmajordeterminantsofprojectsuccess.Projectmanagers

aimtoachievethebestofthe“GoldenTriangle”-budget,scheduleandquality(Riazietal.,2013).Timeis

reportedtobethemostimportantfactor(Gill,2008;ChangandLi,2014).AsnotedbyGill(2008),time

haseffectsoncostandqualityaspectsofprojects.Efficientcontrolofprojectdelayisthereforeneeded

foroptimumprojectperformanceandsuccess(ChangandLi,2014;Kariungi,2014).

Delayisagapbetweentherealprojectcompletionanditsscheduledcompletiontime(Zwikael,2006).

Inotherwords,delayisastateinwhichatimeextensionisrequiredforexecutingallorpartofaproject,

consequentlypostponing itscompletion (ManavazhiaandAdhikarib,2002;FugarandAgyakwah-Baah,

2010;Gardezietal.,2014).Delaysareknowntobethemostimportanteventsthatcauseinconvenience

forprojectmanagers(Carden,2007),creatingmajordifficultiesforprojects(AibinuandJagboro,2002).

Delayshaveconsequencessuchasreductioninprojectproductivity,increasedcosts,missedopportunities

and elimination of projects’ economic feasibility (Long et al., 2004). Aibinu and Jagboro (2002) and

Amoateyet.al(2015)foundsixpotentialnegativeconsequencesforprojectdelays,namelytimeoverrun,

4

costoverrun,dispute,arbitration, litigationandtotalabandonment.ManavazhiaandAdhikarib (2002)

reportedprojectdelays’actualimpacttobeonprojectcostandbudget.

Delayscanoccurinvariousformsandmodes.TaherandPandey(2013)suggestthatdifferenttypes

ofdelaycouldhavedifferenteffectsonnon-criticalactivities,forwhichadditionalelaboratedanalysisis

needed to work out such impacts (Taher and Pandey, 2013). Following is a summary of delay types

demonstratedbyWilliams(2003),Kikwasi(2012)andTaherandPandey(2013):

i. Excusabledelaywithcompensation:delayscausedbytheclient'sactionsorinactions.

ii. Excusabledelaywithoutcompensation:delaysinwhichneithertheconsumernorthecontractor

isdeemedaccountable.

iii. Non-excusabledelay:Thisdelayiscausedbycontractor’savoidanceofthecontractagreement.

2.2. Delaysinconstructionprojects

Delaysintheconstructionindustryhavebeenasubjectofstudyinawidearrayofworksundertakenin

severalcountries(RuqaishiandBashir,2015;AlavifarandMotamedi,2014).Studieshaveshownvaried

approachestotheexaminationofprojectdelays,andhavereporteddiverseresults.Fallahnejad(2013)

identifiedfourcategoriesofstudyforfindingthemaincausesofprojectdelays:studiesinconstruction

projects,studiesinlongtermandlarge-scaleprojectssuchashighways,studiesinpublic/governmental

project,andstudiesinOGPprojects.Researchershavesuggestedandclassifieddifferenttypesofdelays

intheseindustries.Elawi(2015)categorisedthecausesofdelayinroadandbridgeconstructionprojects

intermsofownercauses,contractorcauses,consultantcausesandotherstakeholdercauses.Arditiand

Pattanakitchamroon (2006) introduced fourmethods fordelayanalysis in constructionprojectsas “as

plannedvs.as-builtscheduleanalysismethod”,“impactas-plannedscheduleanalysismethod”“collapsed

as-built schedule analysis method”, and “time impact analysis method”. Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006)

identified56reasonsfordelayinlargeconstructionprojects.AlavifarandMotamedi(2014)summarised

causesofdelayfromtheirreviewoftheliterature,findingavarietyoffactorswhichdiffernotonlyfrom

onecountrytoanother,butbasedontheresearchers’approachandappliedmethods.Table1showsa

fewofthesummarisedstudiesbyAlavifardandMotamedi(2014).Asshowninthetable,planningand

schedulingisonefactorsharedbymoststudies.

2.3. DelaysinOGPindustryconstructionprojects

OGPconstructionhasattractedtheattentionofresearchersduetotheimportanceofthisindustry.As

Weijermars(2009)andSalazar-Aramayoetal.(2013)contended,thedependenceofmanyeconomies

5

onoilandgas,pushestheindustrytooperateathighintensitylevelsworldwide.Constructionprojects

inthisfieldarecharacterisedbyintensiveinvestments(CastilloandDorao,2013).

Country Researchers Majorcausesofdelay

SaudiArabia Assafetal.(2006) • Slowpreparationandapprovalofshopdrawings• Delaysinpaymentstocontractors• Changesindesign/designerror• Shortagesoflaborsupply• Poorworkmanship

SaudiArabia Al-KhalandAl-Ghafly(1995)

• Cashflowproblems/financialdifficulties• Difficultiesinobtainingpermits• “Lowestbidwins”system

UnitedArabEmirates(UAE)

FaridiandEl-Sayegh(2006)

• Slowpreparationandapprovalofdrawings• Inadequateearlyplanningoftheproject• Slownessofowner’sdecisionmaking• Shortageofmanpower• Poorsitemanagementandsupervision• Lowproductivityofmanpower

SaudiArabia AssafandAl-Hejji(2006)

• Changeinordersbytheownerduringconstruction• Delayinprogresspayment• Ineffectiveplanningandscheduling• Shortageoflabor• Difficultiesinfinancingonthepartofthecontractor

Iran AmiruddinBinIsmail(2012)

• Delayinprogresspaymentsbyclient• Changeordersbyclientduringconstruction• Poorsitemanagement• Slownessindecisionmakingprocessbyclient• Financialdifficultiesbycontractor• Lateinreviewingandapprovingdesigndocumentsby

client• Problemswithsubcontractors• Ineffectiveplanningandschedulingofprojectby

contractor• Mistakesanddiscrepanciesindesigndocuments• Badweather

Table1.SummaryofpreviousstudiesofthecausesofdelayinconstructionprojectsinMiddleEast

region(AlavifardandMotamedi,2014)

Salazar-Aramayoetal.(2013)assertthatOGPconstructionprojectsarenotonlyinternallycomplex

andhigh-risk,butalsosubject topressure fromdifferent stakeholders,whichexacerbatescomplexity.

Jergeas (2008)assessedthetimeandcostoverruns in threemegaoil sandsprojects inCanadaovera

three-year researchperiod. Their findings show thatdelay causesare rooted in “feasibility study, risk

6

management,primarycostandtimeestimation,andengineering”.Sepehri(2006)studiedIranianSouth

Parsconstructionprojectsandreportedthatfailureandtimeoverrunhappenmoreinplanningphases

than in construction or control phases. This author presented some failure factors including “project

planning,qualityassurance,testing,configurationmanagement,anddevelopmentprocess”.Thuyetetal.

(2007) conducteda survey to identify the risk factorsaffectingOGPconstructionprojects inVietnam,

identifyingfivefactorsasthemajorcausesofprojectdelay:(1)bureaucraticgovernmentalsystemsand

lingeringprojectapprovalprocedures,(2)poordesign,(3)incompetenceofprojectteams,(4)inadequate

tenderingpractices,and(5)delaysininternalapprovalprocessesbytheowners. IntheirstudyofOGP

industry,JergeasandRuwanpura(2010)alsoclassifiedthecausesofcostandscheduleoverrunsas:(1)

misplacedoptimism,(2)misguidedobjectives,(3)misalignedstrategies,(4)misdirectedexecution,and

(5)missing links.Additionally,Dey (2012) found thedelay factors ina refinery constructionproject in

centralIndiatobe:(1)technicalrisks;(2)financial,economic,andpoliticalrisks;(3)organizationalrisks;

(4)naturalhazards;and(5)statutoryclearancerisks.Fallahnejad(2013)conductedasurveytoidentify

andrankthecausesofdelayingas-pipelineconstructionprojectsinIran.Thisresearcheridentifiedthe

top ten important causes of project delays that are: importedmaterials, unrealistic project duration,

client-relatedmaterials,landexpropriation,changeinorders,contractorselectionmethods,paymentsto

contractors,obtainingpermits,latedeliveryoforderedmaterialsbysuppliers,andcontractors’cashflow.

InAddition,RuqaishiandBashir(2015)reviewedstudiesonthedelayanalysisofOGPconstruction

projects,andsummarisedthemaincausesoftheseprojectsintoeightgroups:(1)Client-relatedcauses,

(2) Contractor-related causes, (3) Consultant-related causes, (4) Material-related causes, (5)

Labour/equipmentrelatedcauses, (6)Contract-relatedcauses, (7)Contractrelationship-relatedcauses

and(8)Externalcauses.

While the studies reviewedabovepresent somekey factorsofdelays in the industry, they fail to

prioritisethevarietyofcausesthatarise.Resourceconstraintslimitprojectmanagers’abilitytoattendto

everyfactoratonce.Therefore,projectmanagersneedawaytoprioritisedelaycausesanddealwith

themaccordingly.Besides,incomplexprojectenvironmentsliketheOGPindustry,crossimpactsoften

emergefromtheinterplaybetweenkeyfactors.Understandingthisinterplayisthereforeimportantfor

identifyingandmanagingdelaycausesincomplexprojects.Theabsenceofsuchanapproachtothestudy

ofdelaycausesinthecurrentresearchonthesubjecthasnecessitatedandmotivatedourstudy.

7

3. Researchmethod

This research aims to extend our knowledge of project delaymanagement, where the planning and

controldimensionofprojectsandtheiroperationsmanagementplayakeyrole.Thisresearchaddresses

agapintheliteraturebyidentifyingboththecausalfactorsandtheirmutualeffectsoneachother.This

willbe important forpresentingamoreaccurateviewof the factorsand theway the factorsmaybe

prioritised. Thiswill assist in developingmethods for dealingwith delays and their causes in amore

effective way. By mapping the effects of each delay factor on the other, the main causes may be

highlighted,andthosewhichmustbeprioritizedclarified.

ThisresearchadoptedSNAtoaddressthiscriticalvoid,asthefollowingsectionexplains.Toexamine

this approach, it was imperative to provide a suitable field of study. Suitability in this study entails

economic importance,andasignificantdegreeofcomplexity.TheOGP industry,whichasdiscussed is

knownforitsglobaleconomicimportance,wasselectedasasuitablecontexttoworkfrom.Resultsfrom

thestudyofthissectorcaninformothersectorsandtypesofconstructionprojects.

3.1.SemanticNetworkAnalysisasthemethod

Variousanalysismethodshavebeendevelopedoverthetimefortheanalysisofdelayinprojects.Some

main methods include global impact, as-planned, impacted as-planned, net impact, time impact,

collapsing, isolated delay type, snapshot and window analysis, and SEM (Kao and Yang, 2009). As

reiteratedbyYangandOu(2008)findingthecausesofdelay,whichaffectproject’scriticalpathsandtheir

completion, is a key aspect in suchmethods.Whilemost knownmethodshavepaid attention to the

causesofdelay,themethodshavebeencriticisedfortheirabilitytoidentifycriticalpathchangesanddeal

with more complicated delay types (Yang and Kao, 2012). Besides, existing methods have failed to

illustratetherelationshipbetweendifferentdelaycauses,andhowtheidentifiedcausesaffecteachother

andcollectivelyinfluencescheduledelays(YangandOu,2008).Suchinsightofdelaysandtheircauses,

particularlyincomplexprojects,canhelpthemanagerstoidentifyprioritiesforattendingandresolving

thecauses.Thereisaneedtherefore,fornewapproachestoidentifyingandanalysingdelaycauseswhich

canpresentaprioritymodelofthecausesbasedontheanalysisoftherelationshipbetweendifferent

causes.TheSemanticNetworkAnalysisisabletodothis.

SNA as the alternative to existing methods is found to be a useful approach for addressing

complicatedcircumstancesas it is interested inextrapolatingtherelationsbetweenfactors(Atteveidt,

2008).SNA,whichinherentlyisbasedonqualitativeassessmentofnetworksandtheiractors’perceptions

andbehaviour,providesamorein-depthviewofthepotentialcausesofdelaybeyondstatisticalbased

8

approaches such as SEM. Yang and Ou (2008) who applied SEM in their study, refer to the limited

informationusersmayreceivefromthecorrelationcoefficientbasedanalysisofrelationshipbetweentwo

causes,whichwouldbetoosimpletopresentaholisticperceptionofthekeycausesofdelay.

Socialnetworkanalysisandcomplexnetworktheoryhavepreviouslybeenappliedtostudythe

behaviorandstructureofcomplexnetworkssuchastechnologicalnetworks,biologicalnetworks,social

networks,organisationnetworks,informationnetworks,andsemanticnetworksamongothers(Pereira

et al., 2011). The concept of semantic networkswas first introduced byQuillian (1968). Themethod

established a foundation for knowledge modelling and representation (Helbig, 2006), which was

supportedbyanadaptable formal framework inorder to systematically analyse systemsanddevelop

applications(Drieger,2013).

SNAreferstoacollectionofresearchtechniquesthatconsidereachconcept/occurrenceasanode

inanetworkandasemanticrelationshipamongthenodes(JungandPark,2015).Themethodanalyses

therelationshipbetweenconceptsbyrecordingco-occurrenceofconcepts (Ohetal.,2013).Semantic

NetworkAnalysishasbeenusedbyZareietal.(2014)asanewmethodologyfortherecognition,analysis

andprioritisationofinefficiencyfactorsintheorganisationaldiagnosisprocess.

Themethodologyisdefinedinthreesteps:(1)therecognitionofkeyfactors;(2)therecognition

ofelementsdetermininganddefiningeachofthekeyfactors; (3)analysisoffactoreffects. Inthefirst

step,theresearcherscanstheoccurrenceofthefactorsbeforeattemptingtoidentifythemainfactorsof

inefficiencyaccordingtotheevidence.Primarilyqualitativemethodologiesareemployed,suchasfocus

groups or Delphi. Information and ideas are collected through interviews with informants, who are

identified as key people in the organisation, selected for their direct knowledge and expertise of the

matterathand.Thedataisthenanalysedtoextractandprioritisethekeyfactorsthatareresponsiblefor

inefficiencies.Inthesecondstep,thesekeyfactorsarebrokendowntotheelementsthatcomprisethem.

Inthethirdstep,theeffectsofeachelementontheotherelementsaredeterminedandillustratedwith

SNA.

TheprocessofSNAinvolvesanetworkapproachthat includesthefollowingkeyelementsand

symbols:

i. Nodes:nodesencodeconceptswhicharerecognisedasthekeyfactors.AsmentionedbyDrieger

(2013),nodescanbequantitativelycharacterisedbyameasurewhichindicatesthenumberof

adjacentnodes,todenoteanode’sconnectedness.

9

ii. Edges:Edgesrepresentrelationsbetweentwonodes,whichareweightedaccordingtostatistical

quantities of adjacent nodes, such as their centralitymeasures (Drieger, 2013). In ourmodel,

relationsaredividedintothefollowingcategories:

a. Is-From:thefactorwhichisconstructedfromotherfactors(R-I).

b. Can-affect:thefactorthathasdirecteffectonotherfactors(C-A).

iii. Hubs:Hubsrepresent importantnodes inanetwork,oftencorrespondingtohighlyconnected

nodes.

Afterfinalisingthenetwork,theelements,whichareidentifiedasHubs,areaddressedandimproved.

Theoretically, improvementoftheseelementsisexpectedtohavesignificanteffectsonoverallproject

efficiencyaswellasimprovingotherfactors.Theapplicationofthismethodindelayanalysisprovidesthe

opportunitytoresolvetheaforementionedlimitationsofpreviousmethods.Thestrengthsofthispaper’s

contributioninclude:

i. Itcanhandleanalysisofcomplexenvironmentswherecomplicatedrelationshipsandprocesses

exist.

ii. Thenetworkofcausesofdelayidentifiedusingthemethodcanhighlightcriticalpathchanges.It

meansthatmoreimpactfulnodeswillbegivenpriorityforimprovementandchange.

iii. Itresolvestheproblemofmethodefficiencybyremovingdependenceonthetimeofdoingthe

analysis.

iv. Themethodidentifiesliabilityallocationclearlythroughrecognitionoffactorsandsubfactors,as

wellastherelationshipsbetweenthem.

3.2.Researchdesignanddevelopment

Theempiricalstudywascarriedoutthroughacasestudyapproach,todemonstratethesuitabilityofthe

proposedapproaches(Arenaetal,2014).Asamethod,casestudyisidealforstudiessuchasthiswhere

itenablestheinvestigationofacontemporaryphenomenonwithinitsreal-lifecontext(Stewart,2012;

Verschuren,2003;Palmberg,2010;ZachandMunkvold,2012).Themainunitsofanalysisinresearchlike

thisareorganisationalunits,whichareincontinuousandevolvingrelationships.Theirrelationshipsare

intrinsicallycomplex instructure,andare thereforedifficult toaccessconceptually(Easton,2010).The

inherentflexibilityofthecasestudymethodsuitsthestudyofsuchcomplexandevolvinginteractionsin

the industrialmarket (BeverlandandLindgreen,2010).Casestudiesprovidetheopportunity formore

contextualassessmentofsocialandbehaviouralaspectsofthetargetindustry(Kurkkioetal.,2011).A

10

multiplecasestudyapproachwaspreferredasitsuitscollectingcomparativedata,hencebeinglikelyto

yieldanaccurateandgeneralisableresult(Kurkkio,Frishammar,andLichtenthaler,2011;Stewart,2012).

ThisstudyfocusesonIranianOGP.TheOGPindustryhasbeenreportedbyKurkkioetal.(2011)

tobecomplex.Itconsistsofmultipleiterativeactivities,forwhichacasestudyisafeasibleapproach.In

theMiddleEastregion,Iranhasthelargestgasandoilreserves.TheOGPindustryisthemainindustryin

Iran,comprisingupto60%ofgrossnationalrevenuesandabout80%offoreigncurrencyrevenues.Large-

scaleinvestmentshavebeendirectedtotheIranianPetrochemicalIndustryinrecentyears,inaccordance

withnationaldevelopmentplans.Suchcapacity-developmentprojectsrequireextensivecompetencies,

andprojectefficiency.Thesuccessofsuchprojectshasbeenhamperedlargelybyexcessiveprojectdelays,

causingconcernsforindustryleadersaswellaspolicymakers(Fallahnejad,2013;Zareietal.,2015).

Prior studies have reported significant delays in Iranian petrochemical construction projects.

AccordingtoIMO(2013),theaveragedelaysintheIranianpetrochemicalconstructionprojectswere500,

470 and 357 days in 2010, 2011 and 2012 respectively. Based on a review of the Iranian Industrial

ManagementOrganisation’sreportsondelaysinpetrochemicalconstructionprojects(IMO,2013),three

petrochemicalconstructionprojectswiththelongestdelaysin2012-2013wereselectedforthecasestudy

in the research.The initial studyof the cases includedananalysisof the industry typesanddelays in

variousfirmswithinthesector.26constructioncontractorsintheseprojectswereidentifiedandselected

fordatacollection.Thesefirmscomprehensivelyrepresenttheindustryconsideringthescopeandsizeof

the projects the firmswere responsible for. Besides, our early investigations and examination of the

documentsshowedthatdelaysinthesefirms’projectsweremoreimpactfultothesuccessoftheoverall

projects.

Afocusgroupmethodologywasselectedforcollectingthedataintheresearch.Focusgroupsare

analytically challenging, as the team tends to deal with and combine three levels of data, including

individual,group,andgroupinteractions(Onwuegbuzieetal.,2009).AccordingtoZareietal.(2014)the

optimalsizeofafocusgroupisbetweensixandeightparticipants.

The aim of the focus group panels was primarily to seek agreements among the members of the

discussion.Thiswasachievedbyfocusingonandrecordingthedisagreementsbetweenthemembers.For

selectingtheexpertpanel, theresearchteamrequestedformally fromCEOsof26firms inthe Iranian

Petrochemical industry to introduceoneof theirexpertswith tenormoreyearsof jobexperience to

represent them. As the result, the expert panel was a representation of 26 firms in the Iranian

Petrochemical industry, who were recruited to the research process following their agreement to

11

participate inthestudy.Mostofthefirmsapproached inthestudywereverykeento learnwhytheir

projectsfacedelayssothatthecompanycanbetterhandlethem.

Following initial meetings to explain the objectives and approach to the study, focus group

sessionswereplannedandconducted.Eachsessionincludedatleasteightexpertstodiscusscausesof

project delay and break down contributing factors in detail. In total, 21 sessionswere heldwith the

participants in the identificationphase. The sessions took2 to3hourseach,whichwere chairedand

controlled by amoderatorwhowas assisted by an observer (co-researcher). The primary role of the

moderatorwastoinitiate,observe,facilitateandconductdiscussions,whiletheobservertookfieldnotes

andobservedtheparticipants’non-verbalcommunicationpatterns.Thesessionswerevoicerecorded.

DatafromeachsessionwasanalysedthroughthefollowingstepsasproposedbyZareietal.(2014):

i. Overview:readingthetranscriptsseveraltimestogetthegist.

ii. De-contextualisation:categorisingdataaccordingtothethemesintheresearchguide.

iii. Coding:organisingthetextaccordingtoemergingcategorieswithineachtheme.

iv. Conceptualisation:identifyingthemainconceptsintheemergingcodesandsub-codes.

v. Re-contextualisation:re-arrangingthetextaccordingtotheemerginglogic.

vi. Documentation:documentingtheoutputswhichwaspresentedtoparticipantstovalidatethe

processofanalysisinthenextsession.

ThevalidityandreliabilityofthedatawasverifiedfollowingBeverlandandLindgreen(2010)asfollows:

i. Constructvalidity:Multipledocumentswereexaminedandmultiple informantswereaskedto

provideadditionalinformationinfollow-ups.

ii. Internal validity: Through searching for indications of negative effects, used for ruling out or

accountingforalternativeexplanations.

iii. Externalvalidity:Achievedthroughselectingthetargetfirms,andusingexpertopinion,tomake

casesasuniqueaspossible.

iv. Reliability:Usingastandardisedinterview/discussionprotocol,andcarefulwrite-upofdata.

To examine and validate the results from this stage, follow up interviews were undertaken with

15informants.Theselectionofinformantswasundertakenbyfirstidentifyingthepotentialtopexecutive

managersoftheselectedpetrochemicalfirms.Fromalistof50managers,15informantswereselected

randomly.All15informantsweremalemanagerswhohadmorethanfifteenyearsofjobexperienceand

hadbeeninvolvedwithuptofivedifferentmanagerialpositionsattheIranianpetrochemicalindustry.

12

Intheseinterviews,theparticipantswerepresentedwiththeresultsfromthefocusgroupstudiesand

SNAanalyses,andaskedtocommentonhowtheoutcomerelatestotheirproblems,andwhetheritwould

informtheirfutureviewsanddecisions.Figure1presentsaflowdiagramofthestepstakenthroughthe

fieldstudy.

Fig.1.Theresearchstepsflowdiagram

4. Findings

Inthefirststep,theresearchteamexaminedandevaluatedtheproject’sdelaysandtheircausesbased

ontheprojects’documents.Reviewofthedocumentsandevidenceshowedthatthecausesofdelaycan

becategorisedinfivestandardprocessesofprojectmanagement(i.e.PMBOK’scategories)asfollows:

A-Delaysrelatedtoinitiatingprocesses

B-Delaysrelatedtoplanningprocesses

C-Delaysrelatedtoexecutingprocesses

D-Delaysrelatedtocontrollingprocesses

E-Delaysrelatedtoclosingprocesses

Thesecategorieswerediscussedinthefirstfewsessionsoffocusgrouppanels.Thediscussionsledtoa

refinedversionofcategoriesbasedonthefollowingpoints:

1-Thedelaysinexecutingprocessareprimarilyduetotheproblemsofcontractingprocess,andtherefore

contractualproblemsaretherootcausesofprocessissues.Inaddition,itwasexpressedandagreedthat

delaycausesarevariedacrossdifferentprocessesundertakenbydifferentcontractors.Consequently,it

Follow up interviews with 15 informants

Selection of three

main projects with the

most delays

Identification of delay causes in selected projects

Modification and

agreement on the

identified delay causes

Identification and

agreement on the

relationship between

delay causes

Validation of the results

26 contractors were selected

and their documents

were reviewed

The focus groups were formed and

21 sessions conducted

Follow up interviews with 15 informants

Review of the Iranian

Industrial Management

Organization’s Reports

13

isnotpossibletogeneralisesuchcauses,andthereforecategorisingthemundergenericthemesisnot

helpful. The panel members therefore concluded that classification of “delays related to executing

processes”shouldchangeto“delaysrelatedtocontractingprocesses”.

2-Theprocessesrelatedtoprojectclosing,inpracticecomeinplayaftertheproject’sexecutingprocesses

andhandingovertotheprojectowners.Sincethescopeofthisresearchcoveredprocessesuptothe

projectdeliverytoowners,thepanelconcludedthat“delaysrelatedtoclosingprocesses”isoutsidethe

scopeofthisexerciseandshouldbeomitted.

BasedonthesepointsthedelaysoftheprojectsweregroupsinfourcategoriesasshowninTable2.

Group Definition

A Delaysrelatedtotheinitialnegotiations

B Delaysrelatedtocontractingprocesses

C Delaysrelatedtoplanningprocess

D Delaysrelatedtocontrolprocess

Table2.DifferentcategoriesoftheIPIprojectcausesofdelays

Investigating the relations between elements of each category was a key factor in the

investigation,andone importantcontributionofthisresearch.Figure2depictsthe“Is-From”(I-F)and

“Can-Affect”(C-A)relationsbetweencausegroups,anddemonstrateshowtheemergenceofaproblem

inonegroupleadstodelayinothers.Thisrequiredidentificationoftheelementsofeachcategory(as

depicted in Table 3). For this purpose, the participants in focus groupswere asked to list what they

considerthemainconstitutingelementsofeachcategory.Thesefactorswerethencollated,analysedand

finalisedinageneralsessionattendedbymembersofallexpertpanels.Thefinalconsensusonthelayout

oftheelementsisdepictedinTable3.

14

Fig.2.SemanticnetworkofdelaycausesofIPI

DelayCategory Components

A-Initialnegotiations

AbsenceofindustrialfeasibilitystudyandcapacityplanningIncompleteandineffectivecontractsLackofrequiredEPdocumentsorincompletedocumentsfromEPInaccurateorwrongestimationofcostsUncontrollablefactorssuchasmonopoliesormarketfluctuationsLackofreviews,feedbacksandcorrectiveactionsTimeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansbyEPFrequentchangesintechnicaldesignbyEPLongtimelagsbetweenthechangesannouncedbyEPLackofstandardandwell-definedcommunicationsystemsbetweenEPandequipmentmanufacturesUncleardefinitionsofresponsibilitiesanddutiesofEPandequipmentmanufactures

B-Contractingprocesses

AbsenceofindustrialfeasibilitystudyandcapacityplanningIncompleteandineffectivecontractsLackofrequiredEPdocumentsorincompletedocumentsfromEPTimeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansbyEPFrequentchangesintechnicaldesignbyEPLongtimelagsbetweenthechangesannouncedbyEPDelayedpaymentsbyEPDeficiencyofprojectmanagementsystemsUnpunctualdeliveringofequipmentandmaterials

15

C-Planningprocess

IncompleteandineffectivecontractsTimeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansbyEPFrequentchangesintechnicaldesignsbyEPDelayeddeliveryofequipmentandmaterialsbyEPLackofstandardsandwell-definedcommunicationsystemsbetweenEPandequipmentmanufacturersInefficientorganizationalstructureandinternalprocessesofequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLackofuseoraccesstonewsoftwarefordesigningDeficiencyofmotivationalsystemsinequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesDeficiencyofhumanresourcesmanagementonequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLackofpowerfulmanagementinequipmentmanufacturingcompanies’resourceplanningandprocurementDeficiencyofproduction/projectplanningsystemsonequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesDeficiencyofqualityplanningsystemsDeficiencyoffinancialplanningsystemofequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesChangesinthescopeoftheprojectsimplementationbyEPwithoutinvolvingtheequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLingeringprocessofopeningLCandprovidingmaterialsandgoodsInefficientmanagementofsubcontractorsofequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesInefficientwarehousingsysteminpetrochemicalfactorysites

D-Controlprocess

InaccurateorwrongestimationofcostsbyequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesTimeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansbyEPFrequentchangesintechnicaldesignsbyEPDelayeddeliveryofequipmentandmaterialsbyEPDelayedpaymentsbyEPDeficiencyofmotivationalsystemsinequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLackofpowerfulmanagementovertheresourceplanningandprocurementofequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesChangesinthescopeoftheprojectsimplementationsbyEPwithoutinvolvingtheequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLingeringprocessofopeningLCandprovidingmaterialsandgoodsDeficiencyofprojectcontrolsystemsofequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesAbsenceofanyanalysisofthepasteventsorperiodicalreportsbyequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLaterequestsforcorrectionsorrevisionsofdelaycausesandpropositionofstrategiesforcompensatingthedelaysbyequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesLackofintegratedcontrollingsystemsforproductionLackofintegratedqualitycontrollingsystemsinequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesDeficiencyofhumanresourcescontrollingsystemsinequipmentmanufacturingcompaniesDeficiencyoffinancial/budgetcontrollingsystemsinequipmentmanufacturingcompanies

Table3.DelaycausesinIranpetrochemicalprojects

16

InFigure3,“Result-In”(R-I)isappliedtodemonstratetherelationshipbetweenfactorsleadingto

delaysineachgroup.Uncoveringsuchrelationshipsisofgreatvaluetothemanagementofprojects.Take,

forinstance,groupA,whichincludeselevenelements.“Absenceofindustrialfeasibilitystudyandcapacity

planning”(factor1)can“resultin”someproblemssuchas“lackoftherequiredEngineeringProcurement

(EP)documentsorincompletedocumentsfromEP”(factor3)and“Uncontrollablecontextualfactorssuch

asmonopoliesormarketfluctuations”(factor5).“IncompleteandineffectiveContracts”(factor2)may

cause “Lack of reviews, feedbacks and corrective actions” (factor 6). This network also shows that a

problemsuchas“UncleardefinitionofresponsibilitiesanddutiesofEPandequipmentmanufacturers”

(factor11)resultsfrom“Timeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansby

EP”(factor7),“FrequentchangesininformationanddocumentspresentedbyEP”(factor8)and“Long

lags between the changes announced by EP” (factor 9). Figure 3, drawn using Edraw 7.9 software,

illustrates an overall image of relationships using four categories of delay sources, and the detailed

componentsofeach.Theseconnectionsweresuggestedbythefocusgroupsparticipants,whowereasked

fortheirviewontherelationshipsbetweenfactorsandtheirelements.Thesummarisedresultswerethen

presented,discussedandfinalisedinthefinalgeneralsession.

Themainrelationshipsinthesemanticnetworkarebetweencategories,whichmaybereferred

toasexternal relationships.With15directeffects fromAonB,33 fromAonCand53 fromAonD,

categoryA can create101 causal relationships. Fromall 167direct delay relationships, nearly 61%of

delaysresultfromcategoryA,38%fromcategoryCandjust1%fromcategoryB.Therelationshipsand

theirvaluesareshownintable4.

A-6,A-11andA-1with35,28and23relationshipswithdelaysources,respectively,arethemost

effectivefactorsofcategoryA.Thesefactorshaveconsiderableinfluenceonothercategories.C-6andC-

4with10and7relationshipswithincategoryD,respectively,havethegreatesteffectsonthisgroup.As

aresult,therefore,improvingtheperformanceofprojectsandreducingtheirdelayscanbeachievedby

consideringandimprovingfactorsA-6,A-11,A-1,C-6andC-4ascriticaldecisionsforthemanagers.

17

Fig.3.SemanticNetworkofdelaycausesinIPIprojectsandtheirrelationships

Findings NoofRelationship Mosteffective Mostvulnerable

Effecton Effectfrom FactorNo.

value. FactorNo.

value.

DelayCategory

D* ID** D ID D ID D ID

A 101 172 0 0 6 15 35 - - -

B 2 11 15 0 - - - - - -

C 64 0 35 3 6 10 0 10 6 6

D 0 0 117 172 - - - 13,14 19 42

D*:DirecteffectID**:Indirecteffect

Table4.Externalrelationshipsofdelaycategories

18

Another importantaspectof thedata is the frequencyof factorsand their ranking,whichare

analysedandpresentedinTable5.Inthisstep,thesignificanceofelementsisascertainedthroughthe

opinionsoftheexpertsinthefocusgroups.Accordingtotheresults,themostprominentcausesofdelay

inthepetrochemicalindustryare“Inaccurateorwrongestimationofcostsininitialnegotiation(A-4)”,

“TimeconsumingprocessofreviewingandconfirmingsuggestionsandplansbyEPintheplanningprocess

(C-2)” and “Time consuming process of reviewing and confirming suggestions and plans by EP in the

controlprocess(D-2)”.

GroupA Frequency GroupB Frequency GroupC Frequency GroupD Frequency

A-1 12 B-1 12 C-1 13 D-1 12

A-2 13 B-2 13 C-2 15 D-2 15

A-3 11 B-3 11 C-3 10 D-3 10

A-4 15 B-4 14 C-4 9 D-4 9

A-5 10 B-5 10 C-5 12 D-5 7

A-6 11 B-6 9 C-6 13 D-6 14

A-7 14 B-7 8 C-7 11 D-7 10

A-8 10 B-8 14 C-8 14 D-8 11

A-9 9 B-9 13 C-9 13 D-9 12

A-10 12 C-10 12 D-10 11

A-11 12 C-11 12 D-11 11

C-12 11 D-12 10

C-13 13 D-13 12

C-14 9 D-14 10

C-15 8 D-15 14

C-16 9 D-16 13

C-17 9

Table5.Frequencyofeachfactor

5. Discussion

Themost recurring issue in the construction industry is delay (Tumi, Omran, and Pakir, 2009; Doloi,

Sawhney, Iyer,andRentala,2012;AlavifarandMotamedi,2014),which isassociatedwiththe levelof

19

uncertainty(Gardezi,Manarvi,andGardezi,2014),andcomplexityofprojectsinthissector(Tumi,Omran,

andPakir,2009;YangandKao,2012;Doloietal.,2012).TheOGPindustryplaysacrucialeconomicrole

in many economies (Fallahnejad, 2013; Farboudmanesh et al., 2013; Salazar-Aramayo et al., 2013;

Ruqaishi and Bashir, 2015), and is shaped largely of construction projectswith intensive investments

(CastilloandDorao,2013).Withdelaybeingthemainfactoraffectingtheproductionplanningandcontrol

dimensionofoperations(GunasekaranandNgai,2012),itsmanagementisthereforecriticaltothissector

and its success. This paper contributes to the field of study by presenting a new and comprehensive

approachtotheinvestigationofdelaycausesincomplexenvironmentsuchasOGP.Thecriticalnatureof

theindustrytotheeconomy,whichmotivatedthisstudy,highlightstheimportanceofidentificationof

causesofdelay.

The study uncovers some limitations of existing project delay analysismodels, especially the

modelswhicharemodifiedforOGPprojects,suchasthosedevelopedbyThuyetetal. (2007),Jergeas

(2008),JergeasandRuwanpura(2010),Dey(2012),andFallahnejad(2013).Asarguedinthepaper,these

methods are not found to satisfy the requirements formanaging complex projects in large business

environments(KaoandYang,2009;YangandKao,2012).Furthermore,akeygapidentifiedintheextant

studiesisthatresearcherswhilehaveattemptedidentifythecausesofdelay,butmostlyhaveneglected

the interplay and interactionbetween such causes. In the studyofprojectmanagement systems, the

causalmodelsareveryimportantastheconceptof“time”iscrucialformanagersinthisarea.Inproject

management,thedynamicsofelementsinvolvedintheprocessoftheprojectsareofgreatimportance

tomanagers.InterviewswiththeIranianpetrochemicalmanagersshowedhowimportantitisforthem

toresolvethedelaycausesinasystematicandstepbystepapproachduetoresourcelimitations.The

introducedmethodenablesthemanagerstoidentifyandremovekeydelaycauses,whichwillbefollowed

byfurtheriterativereviewsthroughthetimeaswellasexaminationoftheeffectsdelaysmighthaveon

othercauses.

TheresultsfromthefieldstudyconcludedthatIranianpetrochemicalconstructionprojectssuffer

from a range of key issues including technical, financial, economic, political and organisational risks,

alongsidebeingsensitiveandpronetonaturalhazards.AssuggestedbyDey(2012),suchriskswillcause

delay.Thedelaycauseswereidentifiedinthisstudyattwolevels,whicharegenerallyconsistentwiththe

findings ofAlavifar andMotamedi (2014) andRuqaishi andBashir (2015) in their studies of delays in

constructionprojectsintheMiddleEast.

Theexpertfocusgroupsinitiallyhelpedintheidentificationofthecauseswhichwereorganised

infourgroups,namelyinitialnegotiations,contracting,planning,andcontrolprocesses,alongwithseveral

20

keyconstitutingfactorsundereachgroup.ApplicationofSNA,astheadoptedmethodforanalysisofthe

datafromfocusgroupsessions,provedveryeffectiveresultinginamodelrepresentingdelaycausesand

external relationships between them. The approach also included ranking of the sub-factors by the

membersofpanel.Thiscapacityfordetectinginterrelationships,andrankingtheminorderofpriority,

aretwokeyadvantagesofSNAcomparedtothepreviousmethods(Atteveldt,2008;KaoandYang,2009;

Pereiraetal.,2011;YangandKao,2012;Ohetal.,2013).

TheanalysisoftherelationshipnetworkusingSNAassistedinamoreaccurateidentificationof

themainfactorcausingdelaysinIranianpetrochemicalconstructionprojects.Theoutcomeshowedthe

“initial negotiations deficiencies”, a stage in which different stakeholders’ conflicting views and

expectationsapplypressuretotheprocess(Salazar-Aramayoetal.,2013)toconstitutethemaincausein

thiscase.Inaddition,theanalysisofthesub-factorsshowed“Lackofreviews,feedbacksandcorrective

actions”tobethemostsignificantfactor.Theresultssuggestthatproblem-solvingintheinitialstageof

project negotiation should be prioritised in the examined industry. The analyses imply that such an

approachcouldreducethedelayofconstructionprojectsand improvetheirefficiencysignificantly.As

JoslinandMüller(2016)suggest,theprojectsuccessdependson:(1)Projectefficiency,(2)Organisational

benefits,(3)Projectimpact,(4)Stakeholdersatisfaction,and(5)Futurepotentials.Itisthereforeexpected

that resolving the“initialnegotiationdeficiencies” inconstructionprojectswouldmakeprojectsmore

successful.Theempiricalstudyandtheinformationandinsightsproducedduringitscourseprovedhighly

usefultothemanagersofthestudiedfirm.Theapproachtodelayanalysishelpedtheexecutivemanagers

tolocatedelayproblemseasierandwithmoreconfidence,allowingthemtoaddressthembyappropriate

measures in time. In thiscase,previousstudieshavesuggestedmeasures for improvingthisaspectof

projects(Javedetal.,2014):

i. Changingthenegotiationstrategiesemployed

ii. Changingthescenariosusedinthenegotiations

iii. Changingnegotiationstandardsandlaws

iv. Revisingthenegotiationprocessesandreinforcingtheiragility

v. Negotiatingthroughqualifiedindividuals,andassigningappropriateincentivesforthem.

The validation follow up interviews provided strong support for the research exercise and the

achievedoutcome.Mostofthemanagersfoundtheresultsextremelysupportiveinshapingtheirattitude

towardsandunderstandingofthecomplexanddynamicnatureofdelays.Aconsiderablenumberofthe

managersexpressedintentiontoaccepttheoutcomefromthestudyandintroduceandimplementthe

identifiedcorrectivemeasures.

21

ApplicationofvisualmethodssuchasSNAinexaminingaphenomenon,wherevariousstakeholders

withdifferentviewsareinvolved,isaneffectiveapproach(Drieger,2013).Suchmethodsassistinafaster

andmoreaccurateformationofacollectiveviewfromthevariedanduniqueinterpretationsofdifferent

stakeholders.Theresearchsupportedthiseffectfurtherbyshowingthattheuseofvisualmodeledtoa

unified interpretation of project delays and their causes in focus group sessions. In otherwords, the

introductionofvisualmethodscanassistinoriginatingtransformationintheprojects.

Conclusion

AnimportantcontributionofthispaperistheadoptionandapplicationofSemanticNetworkAnalysis

intheidentificationandanalysisofconstructionprojectdelaysinOGPindustry.Themethod’scapacityto

identify and rank delay causes can assistmanagers in selecting appropriatemeasures for eliminating

them. Furthermore, thismethod is able toaccount for interrelationshipbetweendelay causes,which

compensatesfortheweaknessofpreviousmethods.Theapplicationofanalyticaltoolsandmethodsin

addressingindustryandprojectsproblemshasbeenanestablishedresearchexerciseformanydecades.

Theincreasingcomplexityinfirmsandtheirprojectshashowevercalledforadvancinginterdisciplinary

approachesthatcanhandlesuchcomplexities.Thisresearchattemptedtakingtheexistingprojectdelay

studies,whichhavegenerallyapproachedprojectanalysisusingtechniquessuchasStructuralEquation

Modeling(e.g.studiesdonebyAtteveldt(2008);YangandOu(2008);KaoandYang(2009);YangandKao

(2012)) further by applying an analysis method which is used in social and technological fields. The

successfuloutcomeofthismethodinanalysingprojectdelaysandtheircausesshowedthatresearchin

project management can be further enriched and extended through introducing interdisciplinary

approaches.

In addition, the suggestedmethod (SNA) canbe a startingpoint for usingArtificial Intelligence in

projectdelaymanagementandcouldleadtonewtoolsforprojectmanagement.ApplicationofSNAin

this study opens theway for the application of themethod in the study of other aspects of project

management,particularlyincomplexenvironments.Theproposedmethodologyandthefindingscanbe

applied in similar project environments in order to explore delay dynamics, and develop tactics for

improvingtheeffectivenessandefficiencyofconstructionprojects.Thepapersuccessfullybridgesthe

gap between theory and practice, which will benefit practitioners and managers who seek to more

effectivelymanagetheirprojects.Thesefindingscouldbeusedasausefulroadmapforidentifyingand

removingdelaycausesatdifferentlevelsofconstructionprojectsinthepetrochemicalindustry.Managers

canapplythefindingshere indevelopingbetterstrategies forhandlingconstructionprojectdelays. In

22

addition, the researchmethodand resultswill helppetrochemical constructionprojectmanagersand

policymakersunderstandtheeffectsofthesedelaysonconstructionprojectoutcomes,andimprovethe

efficiencyofconstructionprojectmanagementinthePetrochemicalIndustry.Theresearchprovidesboth

academiaandpracticesectorswithanoveltoolfordelaycausesanalysis.Thiscanbeextremelyusefulin

developingcountrieswhichtypicallysufferfromefficiencyandeffectivenessproblemsinprojects.

AlimitationofthisstudyisthattheresultsarebasedononefieldofOGPprojects,howevertheapplied

methodprovesitsefficiencyasagenericmethodologyforcomplexprojectenvironments.

References

Aibinu, A., and G. Jagboro. 2002. “The effects of construction delays on project delivery in Nigerian

constructionindustry”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,20,593-599.

Alavifar,A.H.,andS.Motamedi.2014.“Identification,EvaluationandClassificationofTimeDelayRisksof

ConstructionProjectinIran”.PaperpresentedatInternationalConferenceonIndustrialEngineering

andOperationsManagement,(pp.919-929).Bali,Indonesia.

Amoatey, C., Ameyaw, Y., Adaku, E., and S. Famiyeh. 2015. “Analysing delay causes and effects in

Ghanaianstatehousingconstructionprojects”.InternationalJournalofManagingProjectsinBusiness,

8(1),198-214.

Arditi,D.,andT.Pattanakitchamroon.2006.“Selectingadelayanalysismethodinresolvingconstruction

claims”.internationaljournalofprojectmanagement,24,145-155.

Arena,M.,Azzone,G.,Cagno,E.,Silvestri,A.,andP.Trucco.2014.“AmodelforoperationalizingERMin

project-based operations through dynamic capabilities”. International Journal of Energy Sector

Management,8(2),178-197.

Assaf,S.,andS.Al-Hejji.2006.“Causesofdelayinlargeconstructionprojects”.InternationalJournalof

projectmanagement,24,349-357.

Atteveldt,W.V.2008.SemanticNetworkAnalysis:TechniquesforExtracting,Representing,andQuerying

MediaContent.Charleston:BookSurgePublishers.

Beverland,M.,andA.Lindgreen.2010.“Whatmakesagoodcasestudy;Apositivistreviewofqualitative

case research published in Industrial Marketing Management, 1971–2006”. Industrial Marketing

Management,39,56–63.

Braimah,N.,andI.Ndekugri.2008.“Factorsinfluencingtheselectionofdelayanalysismethodologies”.

InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,26,789–799.

23

Carden,R.,Leach,S.,andJ.Smith.2008.“AmarketreactiontoDODcontractdelay—Doesthemarket

rewardpoorperformance”.ReviewofFinancialEconomics,17(1),33-45.

Castillo, L., and C. Dorao. 2013. “Decision-making in the oil and gas projects based on game theory:

Conceptualprocessdesign”.EnergyConversionandManagement,66,48–55.

Chang,J.,andH.Li.2014.TheStudyonKeyfactorsInfluencingTimeDelayofPublicConstructionProject”.

AdvancedMaterialsResearch,912-914,1838-1841.

Dey,P.K.2012.“Projectriskmanagementusingmultiplecriteriadecision-makingtechniqueanddecision

treeanalysis:AcasestudyofIndianoilrefinery”.ProductionPlanningandControl:TheManagement

ofOperations,23(12),903-921.

Doloi, H., Sawhney, A., Iyer, K., and S. Rentala. 2012. “Analysing factors affecting delays in Indian

constructionprojects”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,30,479–489.

Drieger,P.2013.“SemanticNetworkAnalysisasaMethodforVisualTextAnalytics”.Presentedat9th

ConferenceonApplicationsof SocialNetworkAnalysis (pp. 4-17). Procedia - Social andBehavioral

Sciences.

Easton,G.2010.“Criticalrealismincasestudyresearch”.IndustrialMarketingManagement,39,118–128.

Elawi,G.S.2015.”Owners’PerspectiveofFactorsContributingtoProjectDelay:CaseStudiesofRoadand

BridgeProjectsinSaudiArabia.PhDThesis.ARIZONASTATEUNIVERSITY.

Fallahnejad, M. 2013. “Delay causes in Iran gas pipeline projects”. International Journal of Project

Management,31,136-146.

Farboudmanesh, R., Moradi, S., and M.T. Rad. 2013. “Assessing and Identifying Entrepreneurial

OpportunitiesinPetroleumIndustryinIran”.EuropeanOnlineJournalofNaturalandSocialSciences,

2(3),2802-2816.

Fouche,D.P.,andA.Rolstadas.2010.“Theuseofperformancemeasurementasabasisforprojectcontrol

ofoffshoremodificationoilandgasprojects”.ProductionPlanningandControl,21(8),760–773.

Fugar, F. D., and A.B. Agyakwah-Baah. 2010. “Delays in Building Construction Projects in Ghana”.

AustralasianJournalofConstructionEconomicsandBuilding,10(1/2),103-116.

Gardezi,S.S.,Manarvi,I.A.,andS.J.Gardezi.2014.“TimeExtensionFactorsinConstructionIndustryof

Pakistan”.ProcediaEngineering,77,196–204.

Gardezi,S.,Manarvi,I.,andGardezi,J.(2014).TimeExtensionFactorsinConstructionIndustryofPakistan.

ProcediaEngineering,77,196-204.

Gill, A. 2008. “An effect-cause-effect analysis of project objectives and trade-off assumptions”.

InternationalJournalofManagingProjectsinBusiness,1(4),535-551.

24

Gunasekaran,A.,andE.Ngai.2012. “The futureofoperationsmanagement:Anoutlookandanalysis”.

InternationaljournalofProductionEconomics,135,687–701.

Helbig, H. 2006. “Knowledge representation and the semantics of natural language :with 23 tables”.

Berlin:springer.

IMO.2013.“ReportformethodologyandproblemsrecognitionofdelaysinproductproductioninIran

andsolutionrecommendation”.Tehran:IndustrialManagementOrganization.

INP.2009.“ANNUALREPORT”.Tehran:IranianNationalPetrochemicalOrganisation.

JAVED,A.A.,LAM,P.T.,andCHAN,A.P.(2014).Changenegotiationinpublic-privatepartnershipprojects

through output specifications: an experimental approach based on game theory. Construction

ManagementandEconomics,32(4),323–348.

Jergeas, G. 2008. “Analysis of the front–end loading of Alberta mega oil sands projects”. Project

ManagementJournal,39,95–104.

Jergeas,G., and J. Ruwanpura. 2010. “Why cost and scheduleoverrunsonmegaoil sandsprojects?”.

PracticePeriodicalonStructuralDesignandConstruction,15(1),40-43.

Joslin, R., and R. Müller. 2016. “The relationship between project governance and project success”.

InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,34,613-626.

Jung,K.,andH.Park.2015.Asemantic(TRIZ)networkanalysisofSouthKorea's“OpenPublicData”policy.

GovernmentInformationQuarterly,32,353-358.

Kao,C.-K.,andJ.-B.Yang.2009.“Comparisonofwindows-baseddelayanalysismethods”.International

JournalofProjectManagement,27,408–418.

Kariungi,S.M.2014.“DeterminantsofTimelyCompletionofProjectsinKenya:ACaseofKenyaPower

andLightingCompany,Thika”.ABCJournalofAdvancedResearch,3(2),9-20.

Kikwasi,G.J.2012.“CausesandEffectsofDelaysandDisruptionsinConstructionProjectsinTanzania”.

AustralasianJournalofConstructionEconomicsandBuilding,ConferenceSeries,1(2),52-59.

Kurkkio,M.,Frishammar,J.,andU.Lichtenthaler.2011.“Whereprocessdevelopmentbegins:Amultiple

casestudyoffrontendactivitiesinprocessfirms”.Technovation,31,490–504.

Long,N.,Ogunlana,S.,Quang,T.,andK.Lam.2004.“Largeconstructionprojectsindevelopingcountries:

AcasestudyfromVietnam”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,22,553-561.

Manavazhi,M.,andD.Adhikari.2002.“Materialandequipmentprocurementdelaysinhighwayprojects

inNepal”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,20,627-632.

Oh, J., Kim, T., Park, S., Yu, H., and Y. H. Lee. 2013. “Efficient semantic network construction with

applicationtoPubMedsearch”.Knowledge-BasedSystems,39,185-193.

25

Onwuegbuzie,A.J.,Dickinson,W.B.,Leech,N.L.,andA.G.Zoran.2009.“AQualitativeFrameworkfor

CollectingandAnalyzingDatainFocusGroupResearch”.InternationalJournalofQualitativeMethods,

8(3),1-21.

Palmberg,K.2010.“Experiencesofimplementingprocessmanagement:amultiple-casestudy”.Business

ProcessManagementjournal,16(1),93-113.

Pereira,H.,Fadigas, I.,Senna,V.,andM.Moret.2011.“Semanticnetworksbasedontitlesofscientific

papers”.PhysicaA,390,1192-1197.

Ren,S.J.f.,Wamba,S.F.,Akter,S.,Dubey,R.,andS.J.Childe.2016.“Modellingqualitydynamics,business

valueandfirmperformanceinabigdataanalyticsenvironment”.InternationalJournalofProduction

Research,1-15.

Riazi,M.,Riazi,S.,andF.Lamari.2013.“PublicSectorProjectDelay:TheMalaysianPerspectiveandthe

WayForward”.Presentedatthe19thCIBWorldBuildingCongress.Brisbane:QueenslandUniversity

ofTechnology.

Ruqaishi,M.,andH.Bashir.2015.“CausesofDelayinConstructionProjectsintheOilandGasIndustryin

theGulfCooperationCouncilCountries:ACaseStudy”.Journalofmanagementinengineering,31(3),

501-517.

Salazar-Aramayo,J.L.,Rodrigues-da-Silveira,R.,Rodrigues-de-Almeida,M.,andT.N.Castro-Dantas.2013.

“Aconceptualmodelforprojectmanagementofexplorationandproductionintheoilandgasindustry:

ThecaseofaBraziliancompany”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,31,589–601.

Sambasivan,M.,andY.Soon.2007.“Causesandeffectsofdelays inMalaysianconstruction industry”.

InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,25,517-526.

Sepehri, M. 2006. “Analysis of time delays in projects—application to Iran and emerging countries”.

PresentedattheInternationalConferenceonManagementofInnovationandTechnology(pp.681–

684).IEEEXplore.

Stewart, J. 2012. “Multiple-caseStudyMethods inGovernance-related research”.PublicManagement

Review,14(1),67-82.

Sweis,G.,Sweis,R.,Hammad,A.A.,andA.Shboul.2008.“Delaysinconstructionprojects:Thecaseof

Jordan”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,26,665–674.

Taher,E.F.,andR.Pandey.2013.“StudyofDelayinProjectPlanningandDesignStageofCivilEngineering

Projects”.InternationalJournalofEngineeringandAdvancedTechnology,2(3),456-461.

Thuyet,N.V.,Ogunlana,S.O.,andP.K.Dey.2007.“Riskmanagementinoilandgasconstructionprojects

inVietnam”.InternationalJournalofEnergySectorManagement,1(2),175-194.

26

Tumi,S.,Omran,A.,andA.Pakir.2009.“CausesofdelaysinconstructionindustryinLibya”.Presentedat

the InternationalConferenceonAdministrationandBusiness (pp.264-271).Romania:Universityof

Bucharest.

Verschuren, P. 2003. “Case study as a research strategy: Some ambiguities and opportunities”.

InternationalJournalofSocialResearchMethodology,6(2),121-139.

Wa’el,A.,Mohd,R.,Kadir,A.,andD.Ernawati.2007.“Thesignificantfactorscausingdelayofbuilding

constructionprojectsinMalaysia”.Engineering,ConstructionandArchitecturalManagement,14(2),

192-206.

Weijermars, R. 2009. “Accelerating the three dimensions of EandP clockspeed—a novel strategy for

optimizingutilityintheoilandgasindustry”.AppliedEnergy,86,2222–2243.

Williams,T.,Ackermann,F.,andC.Eden.2003.“Structuringadelayanddisruptionclaim:Anapplication

ofcause-mappingandsystemdynamics”.EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch,148,192-204.

Wu,C.L.2016.“AirlineOperationsandDelay:InsightsfromAirlineEconomics,NetworksandStrategic”.

London:Routledge.

Yang,J.B.,andC.K.Kao.2012.“Criticalpatheffectbaseddelayanalysismethodforconstructionprojects”.

InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,30,385–397.

Yang, J.-B.,&Ou, S.-F. 2008. “Using structural equationmodeling to analyze relationships among keycausesofdelayinconstruction”.CanadianJournalofCivilEngineering,35(4),321-332.

Yau,N.J.,andJ.B.Yang.2012.“FactorscausingdesignscheduledelaysinturnkeyprojectsinTaiwan:An

EmpiricalStudyofPowerDistributionSubstationProjects”.ProjectManagementJournal,1-12.

Zach,O.,andB.E.Munkvold.2012.“IdentifyingreasonsforERPsystemcustomizationinSMEs:system

customizationinSMEs”.JournalofEnterpriseInformationmanagement,25(5),462-478.

Zarei, B., Chaghouee, Y., and A. Ghapanchi. 2014. “Investigating the Relationship between Business

ProcessOrientationandSocialcapital”.KnowledgeandProcessManagement,21(1),67-77.

Zarei,B.,Chaghouee,Y.,andF.Ghapanchi.2014.“OrganizationalDiagnosisinProject-BasedCompanies:

ChallengesandDirections”.SageOpen,4(2),1-7.

Zarei, B., Chaghouee, Y., and F. Ghapanchi. 2015. “Stakeholder analysis: a vital step in restructuring

projectsinproject-basedcompanies”.InternationalJournalofBusinessInnovationandResearch,9(6),

731-749.

Zarei,B.,Chaghouee,Y.,andE.Kaboli.2011.“Theimpactofprocessapproachonsocialcapital”.Journal

ofGlobalEntrepreneurshipResearch,1(2),3-15.

27

Zwikael,O.,Cohen,Y.,andA.Sadeh.2006.“Non-delayschedulingasamanagerialapproachformanaging

projects”.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,24,330-336.