Variations and Claims in International Construction Projects in the MENA Region from the Last Decade
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Identification and characterization of the significant types of “variations” and “claims” in construction projects by the terms of the conditions of construction contracts [9].
- Study the significant causes of the “variations” and “claims” in construction projects.
- Suggest recommendations and proposed solutions to benefit from this study’s results and avoid the causes of “variations” and “claims.”
- Investigate the causes of claims and variations in the MENA region, which recently has a booming construction market with the involvement of international AEC firms with tremendous budgets.
- Extending the investigation to the last decade will be an advantage, as most current research concentrated on COVID-19 after 2019 and neglected other causes that had been started before the pandemic, which may have more significant effects on the construction industry.
2. Research Methodology
Scientometric Analysis
3. Literature Review
3.1. Classification of Variations and Claims
3.2. Causes of Variations and Claims
3.3. Significance and Avoidability
4. Results
4.1. Characteristics of the Survey Targeted Participants and Statistical Investigation
4.2. Participant Profiles and Group Classifications in the Survey
- PC01—Role of the Respondent (Identity): This classification focused on the professional role of each respondent, identifying their specific position or function within their organization.
- PC02—detailed Managerial Level: Respondents were classified based on their organization’s managerial level, offering insights into the decision-making hierarchy and leadership structure.
- PC03—years of Experience: This category evaluated the individual professional experience of respondents, highlighting the depth and range of their expertise in the industry.
- PC04—organization/Firm’s Experience (Firm’s Number of Years in Business): This group focused on the longevity and historical context of the organizations represented, providing an understanding of the firm’s experience and stability in the industry.
- PC05—Organization/Firm’s Annual Number of Projects: This classification detailed the scale and scope of operations of the respondents’ firms based on the number of projects managed or undertaken annually.
- PC06—Organization/Firm’s Number of Employees: This group provided insights into the organizations’ size and human resource capacity, highlighting the scale of their operations regarding personnel.
4.3. Evaluation of Survey Validity and Reliability
4.4. Relative Importance Index Test (RII)
4.5. Assessment of Frequency for Types of Variations and Claims
4.6. Assessment of Impact for Types of Variations and Claims
4.7. Causes of Variations and Claims (Perceived Agreement Assessment)
4.8. Causes of Variations and Claims (Perceived Significance Assessment)
4.9. Causes of Variations and Claims (Perceived Avoidability Assessment)
5. Discussion
5.1. Analysis of the Findings (Statistical Hypothesis—Kruskal–Wallis Test)
5.2. Kruskal–Wallis Test (Types of Variations and Claims—Impact)
5.3. Kruskal–Wallis Test (Cause of Variations and Claims—Agreement)
5.4. Kruskal–Wallis Test (Cause of Variations and Claims—Significance)
5.5. Kruskal–Wallis Test (Cause of Variations and Claims—Avoidability)
5.6. Spearman’s Correlation Test
5.6.1. Spearman’s Correlation Test (Types–Frequency) and (Causes–Significance)
5.6.2. Spearman Correlation Test (Types–Impact) and (Causes–Significance)
5.6.3. Spearman Correlation Test (Types–Frequency) and (Causes—Avoidability)
5.6.4. Spearman Correlation Test (Types–Impact) and (Causes—Avoidability)
5.7. Overall, the Questionnaire Participant’s Assessment
5.8. K-Means Analysis
6. Conclusions
6.1. Frequent Types of Variations and Claims
6.2. Concluding Remarks
6.3. Comparative Analysis and Correlations Summary
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
# | Avoidable Causes of Variations and Claims | Recommended Mitigation/Response Strategy |
---|---|---|
1 | Changes by Client (C21) |
|
2 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection (C10) |
|
3 | Inappropriate Contract Type/ Strategy—C05 |
|
4 | Inappropriate/ Unexpected Time Control (Target)-(C15) |
|
5 | Inappropriate/ Unexpected Cost Control (Target)-C16 |
|
6 | Lack of Information for Decision-Making; Decisiveness-(C19) |
|
7 | Inappropriate /Unexpected Quality Control (Target)-(C17) |
|
8 | Slow Client Response-(C20) |
|
9 | Inadequate/ Inaccurate Design Information-(C01) |
|
10 | Inappropriate Contract Form-(C06) |
|
11 | Inappropriate Payment Method-(C13) |
|
12 | Inadequate Site Investigations-(C24) |
|
13 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications-(C04) |
|
14 | Inadequate Design Documentation-(C02) |
|
15 | Inadequate Contract Documentation- (C08) |
|
16 | Inadequate Contract Administration-(C07) |
|
17 | Incomplete Tender Information- (C09) |
|
Appendix B
Code | Type | Role of the Respondents (PC01) | Managerial Level (PC02) | Personal Experience (PC03) | Organization/Firm’s Experience (Years) (PC04) | Organization/Firm’s Annual Number of Projects (PC05) | Organization/Firm’s Number of Employees (PC06) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal- Wallis H | (p-Value) | ||
T12 | A failure to rectify defects | 3.757 | 0.153 | 0.880 | 0.644 | 10.716 | 0.030 | 0.27 | 0.866 | 1.495 | 0.828 | 1.233 | 0.873 |
T14 | Contractor’s failure to insure | 0.389 | 0.823 | 1.935 | 0.380 | 4.351 | 0.361 | 12.058 | 0.017 | 6.596 | 0.159 | 2.853 | 0.583 |
T16 | Delayed drawings or instructions | 0.741 | 0.690 | 2.696 | 0.260 | 1.402 | 0.844 | 13.614 | 0.009 | 6.451 | 0.168 | 1.103 | 0.894 |
T36 | Termination initiated by the contractor | 5.676 | 0.059 | 2.776 | 0.250 | 3.372 | 0.498 | 10.077 | 0.039 | 2.345 | 0.673 | 15.413 | 0.004 |
T39 | Loss or damage to the works caused Employer’s Risks | 1.232 | 0.540 | 0.949 | 0.622 | 6.340 | 0.175 | 7.578 | 0.108 | 14.220 | 0.007 | 6.147 | 0.188 |
Appendix C
Code | Type | Role of the Respondents (PC01) | Managerial Level (PC02) | Personal Experience (PC03) | Firm’s Experience in business) (PC04) | Firm’s Annual Number of Projects (PC05) | Firm’s Number of Employees (PC06) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | ||
T02 | Failure to pay the agreed amount due. | 9.810 | 0.007 | 0.853 | 0.653 | 5.711 | 0.222 | 12.868 | 0.012 | 1.668 | 0.797 | 0.941 | 0.919 |
T11 | Failed tests on completions | 12.143 | 0.002 | 0.980 | 0.613 | 1.286 | 0.864 | 11.567 | 0.021 | 4.106 | 0.392 | 1.291 | 0.863 |
T16 | Delayed drawings or instructions | 4.236 | 0.120 | 1.286 | 0.526 | 6.177 | 0.186 | 5.823 | 0.213 | 13.615 | 0.009 | 10.538 | 0.032 |
T21 | Fossils, archaeological or geological | 6.722 | 0.035 | 0.806 | 0.668 | 0.793 | 0.939 | 7.127 | 0.129 | 1.836 | 0.766 | 4.559 | 0.336 |
T22 | Additional tests by the engineer | 4.437 | 0.109 | 6.532 | 0.038 | 4.671 | 0.323 | 1.841 | 0.765 | 3.470 | 0.482 | 1.201 | 0.878 |
T25 | Shortage of personnel or goods | 4.334 | 0.115 | 6.174 | 0.046 | 6.841 | 0.145 | 2.121 | 0.713 | 2.726 | 0.605 | 1.870 | 0.760 |
T26 | Employer’s delay or impediment | 2.120 | 0.346 | 4.185 | 0.123 | 0.414 | 0.981 | 1.632 | 0.803 | 2.038 | 0.729 | 10.035 | 0.040 |
T27 | Delays caused by authorities | 6.376 | 0.041 | 1.003 | 0.606 | 1.882 | 0.757 | 4.640 | 0.326 | 11.746 | 0.019 | 5.343 | 0.254 |
T29 | Employer using works partially | 0.105 | 0.949 | 7.149 | 0.028 | 3.864 | 0.425 | 4.435 | 0.350 | 5.405 | 0.248 | 2.994 | 0.559 |
T32 | Adopt value engineering proposal | 2.326 | 0.312 | 7.327 | 0.026 | 0.248 | 0.993 | 2.123 | 0.713 | 3.247 | 0.517 | 0.491 | 0.974 |
T38 | Ambiguity in Documents | 6.357 | 0.042 | 0.663 | 0.718 | 2.917 | 0.572 | 1.028 | 0.906 | 0.964 | 0.915 | 4.404 | 0.354 |
T39 | Loss or damage to the works caused Employer’s Risks | 3.103 | 0.212 | 2.344 | 0.310 | 5.551 | 0.235 | 3.117 | 0.538 | 12.596 | 0.013 | 9.185 | 0.057 |
T43 | Refusal of contractor objection to nomination | 6.020 | 0.049 | 2.210 | 0.331 | 6.101 | 0.192 | 3.929 | 0.416 | 2.498 | 0.645 | 1.374 | 0.849 |
T45 | Acceleration of Works | 6.446 | 0.040 | 1.929 | 0.381 | 7.492 | 0.112 | 4.239 | 0.375 | 3.131 | 0.536 | 2.153 | 0.708 |
T47 | Client’s Breach of Contract | 4.435 | 0.109 | 0.294 | 0.863 | 1.745 | 0.783 | 5.417 | 0.247 | 8.780 | 0.067 | 10.051 | 0.040 |
T49 | Currency Fluctuation | 10.413 | 0.005 | 2.801 | 0.246 | 9.776 | 0.044 | 6.154 | 0.188 | 2.455 | 0.653 | 3.481 | 0.481 |
Appendix D
Code | Cause | Role of the Respondents (PC01) | Managerial Level (PC02) | Personal Experience (PC03) | Organization/Firm’s Experience (PC04) | Organization/Firm’s Annual Number of Projects (PC05) | Organization/Firm’s Number of Employees (PC06) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | ||
C02 | Inadequate Design. | 1.221 | 0.543 | 2.181 | 0.336 | 5.071 | 0.280 | 4.855 | 0.303 | 6.433 | 0.169 | 13.818 | 0.008 |
C03 | Inadequate Brief | 0.997 | 0.608 | 0.045 | 0.978 | 4.924 | 0.295 | 9.823 | 0.044 | 12.967 | 0.011 | 14.055 | 0.007 |
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specs. | 4.941 | 0.085 | 1.826 | 0.401 | 2.462 | 0.651 | 21.749 | 0.000 | 5.655 | 0.226 | 5.367 | 0.252 |
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type | 2.773 | 0.250 | 1.178 | 0.555 | 7.109 | 0.130 | 7.520 | 0.111 | 16.349 | 0.003 | 4.917 | 0.296 |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 2.015 | 0.365 | 2.237 | 0.327 | 6.817 | 0.146 | 20.442 | 0.000 | 17.144 | 0.002 | 14.043 | 0.007 |
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | 5.267 | 0.072 | 1.334 | 0.513 | 2.020 | 0.732 | 14.674 | 0.005 | 4.553 | 0.336 | 0.854 | 0.931 |
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documents | 2.433 | 0.296 | 2.508 | 0.285 | 8.510 | 0.075 | 18.180 | 0.001 | 8.729 | 0.068 | 9.314 | 0.054 |
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 1.577 | 0.455 | 0.046 | 0.977 | 5.389 | 0.250 | 6.898 | 0.141 | 11.187 | 0.025 | 11.288 | 0.024 |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 2.707 | 0.258 | 3.805 | 0.149 | 10.949 | 0.027 | 15.995 | 0.003 | 7.654 | 0.105 | 6.037 | 0.196 |
C11 | Unrealistic Tender Pricing | 2.557 | 0.278 | 3.768 | 0.152 | 13.541 | 0.009 | 13.012 | 0.011 | 12.290 | 0.015 | 11.334 | 0.023 |
C12 | Unrealistic Client Expectations | 3.224 | 0.199 | 2.811 | 0.245 | 14.404 | 0.006 | 14.668 | 0.005 | 15.187 | 0.004 | 7.866 | 0.097 |
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 4.218 | 0.121 | 1.526 | 0.466 | 6.919 | 0.140 | 10.975 | 0.027 | 9.080 | 0.059 | 16.076 | 0.003 |
C14 | Inappropriate Document Control | 2.581 | 0.275 | 1.700 | 0.427 | 11.051 | 0.026 | 15.091 | 0.005 | 7.038 | 0.134 | 16.094 | 0.003 |
C16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) | 2.024 | 0.364 | 1.731 | 0.421 | 7.469 | 0.113 | 5.733 | 0.220 | 5.949 | 0.203 | 13.823 | 0.008 |
C17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Quality Control (Target) | 4.758 | 0.093 | 0.106 | 0.948 | 8.535 | 0.074 | 11.844 | 0.019 | 9.188 | 0.057 | 19.021 | 0.001 |
C18 | Poor Communications | 3.506 | 0.173 | 0.358 | 0.836 | 6.813 | 0.146 | 4.159 | 0.385 | 2.665 | 0.615 | 13.069 | 0.011 |
C19 | Lack of (Decisiveness) | 1.221 | 0.543 | 0.804 | 0.669 | 11.500 | 0.021 | 7.138 | 0.129 | 7.686 | 0.104 | 10.905 | 0.028 |
C20 | Slow Client Response | 3.472 | 0.176 | 4.648 | 0.098 | 11.252 | 0.024 | 11.589 | 0.021 | 8.602 | 0.072 | 13.742 | 0.008 |
C21 | Changes by Client | 3.959 | 0.138 | 1.537 | 0.464 | 6.285 | 0.179 | 9.489 | 0.050 | 5.426 | 0.246 | 4.777 | 0.311 |
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigations | 0.464 | 0.793 | 0.011 | 0.995 | 6.324 | 0.176 | 9.965 | 0.041 | 7.853 | 0.097 | 23.056 | 0.000 |
C25 | Unrealistic Expectations (By the Contractor) | 2.574 | 0.276 | 0.726 | 0.696 | 6.848 | 0.144 | 10.994 | 0.027 | 11.313 | 0.023 | 19.155 | 0.001 |
C27 | Personality Clashes of Participants | 2.463 | 0.292 | 0.866 | 0.648 | 5.909 | 0.206 | 9.581 | 0.048 | 9.259 | 0.055 | 25.707 | 0.000 |
C28 | Poor Management by Participants | 0.738 | 0.692 | 0.047 | 0.977 | 8.442 | 0.077 | 10.064 | 0.039 | 5.525 | 0.238 | 13.343 | 0.010 |
C29 | Adversarial Cultural Affairs | 2.141 | 0.343 | 0.640 | 0.726 | 6.980 | 0.137 | 13.252 | 0.010 | 9.925 | 0.042 | 19.660 | 0.001 |
C30 | Uncontrollable External Events | 1.213 | 0.545 | 0.857 | 0.651 | 11.095 | 0.026 | 7.143 | 0.129 | 3.248 | 0.517 | 10.913 | 0.028 |
C31 | Exaggerated Claims | 7.108 | 0.029 | 1.228 | 0.541 | 7.047 | 0.133 | 7.527 | 0.111 | 7.732 | 0.102 | 4.664 | 0.324 |
Appendix E
Code | Cause | Role of the Respondents (PC01) | Managerial Level (PC02) | Personal Experience (PC03) | Organization/Firm’s Experience (Firm’s Number of Years) (PC04) | Organization/Firm’s Annual Number of Projects (PC05) | Organization/Firm’s Number of Employees (PC06) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | Kruskal-Wallis H | p-Value | ||
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design | 8.92 | 0.012 | 0.372 | 0.830 | 2.069 | 0.723 | 4.038 | 0.401 | 12.699 | 0.013 | 8.493 | 0.075 |
C03 | Inadequate Brief | 9.09 | 0.01 | 1.894 | 0.388 | 7.387 | 0.117 | 7.114 | 0.130 | 3.263 | 0.515 | 6.746 | 0.150 |
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | 5.04 | 0.080 | 2.802 | 0.246 | 11.111 | 0.025 | 12.551 | 0.014 | 6.064 | 0.194 | 7.515 | 0.111 |
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type | 6.95 | 0.031 | 0.702 | 0.704 | 7.852 | 0.097 | 7.395 | 0.116 | 12.882 | 0.012 | 18.944 | 0.001 |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 3.002 | 0.223 | 2.110 | 0.348 | 5.036 | 0.284 | 3.565 | 0.468 | 9.563 | 0.048 | 11.976 | 0.018 |
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | 8.91 | 0.012 | 0.579 | 0.749 | 3.059 | 0.548 | 4.436 | 0.350 | 7.796 | 0.099 | 17.400 | 0.002 |
C08 | Inadequate Contract Docs. | 1.83 | 0.400 | 2.267 | 0.322 | 4.009 | 0.405 | 4.619 | 0.329 | 4.800 | 0.308 | 12.948 | 0.012 |
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 6.14 | 0.046 | 2.411 | 0.300 | 6.970 | 0.138 | 7.981 | 0.092 | 3.713 | 0.446 | 4.670 | 0.323 |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 2.00 | 0.367 | 2.025 | 0.363 | 10.113 | 0.039 | 8.103 | 0.088 | 13.516 | 0.009 | 16.415 | 0.003 |
C11 | Unrealistic Tender Pricing | 6.71 | 0.035 | 0.233 | 0.890 | 8.069 | 0.089 | 11.710 | 0.020 | 2.540 | 0.637 | 8.474 | 0.076 |
C12 | Unrealistic Client Expectations | 9.49 | 0.009 | 1.183 | 0.554 | 1.880 | 0.758 | 5.153 | 0.272 | 5.957 | 0.202 | 9.015 | 0.061 |
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 4.63 | 0.099 | 0.846 | 0.655 | 3.483 | 0.480 | 2.253 | 0.689 | 7.175 | 0.127 | 12.042 | 0.017 |
C14 | Inappropriate Document Control | 1.72 | 0.421 | 0.108 | 0.947 | 4.141 | 0.387 | 1.238 | 0.872 | 5.515 | 0.238 | 4.552 | 0.336 |
C15 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control (Target) | 7.34 | 0.025 | 0.011 | 0.995 | 7.869 | 0.096 | 7.247 | 0.123 | 14.352 | 0.006 | 21.28 | 0.000 |
C16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) | 4.14 | 0.126 | 1.456 | 0.483 | 5.846 | 0.211 | 5.821 | 0.213 | 10.956 | 0.027 | 13.44 | 0.009 |
C17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Quality Control (Target) | 4.85 | 0.088 | 2.925 | 0.232 | 5.286 | 0.259 | 7.227 | 0.124 | 7.661 | 0.105 | 21.705 | 0.000 |
C18 | Poor Communications | 6.59 | 0.037 | 1.379 | 0.502 | 3.132 | 0.536 | 10.064 | 0.039 | 3.327 | 0.505 | 2.739 | 0.602 |
C19 | Lack of Decisiveness | 4.63 | 0.099 | 2.345 | 0.310 | 3.896 | 0.420 | 4.594 | 0.332 | 8.482 | 0.075 | 15.25 | 0.004 |
C20 | Slow Client Response | 10.96 | 0.004 | 0.819 | 0.664 | 9.864 | 0.043 | 4.353 | 0.360 | 16.149 | 0.003 | 6.914 | 0.140 |
C21 | Changes by Client | 4.271 | 0.118 | 1.245 | 0.536 | 6.882 | 0.142 | 7.331 | 0.119 | 13.584 | 0.009 | 15.214 | 0.004 |
C23 | Poor Workmanship | 7.948 | 0.019 | 0.668 | 0.716 | 3.692 | 0.449 | 7.843 | 0.098 | 4.764 | 0.312 | 1.142 | 0.888 |
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigation | 0.837 | 0.658 | 0.320 | 0.852 | 1.904 | 0.753 | 8.113 | 0.088 | 5.419 | 0.247 | 12.387 | 0.015 |
C28 | Poor Management | 6.953 | 0.031 | 0.240 | 0.887 | 8.590 | 0.072 | 3.515 | 0.476 | 2.022 | 0.732 | 6.483 | 0.166 |
C29 | Adversarial Cultural Affairs | 15.06 | 0.001 | 0.075 | 0.963 | 4.051 | 0.399 | 7.528 | 0.110 | 10.968 | 0.027 | 10.025 | 0.040 |
Appendix F
Code | Cause | Role of the Respondents (PC01) | Managerial Level (PC02) | Personal Experience (PC03) | Organization/Firm’s Experience (Firm’s Number of Years) (PC04) | Organization/Firm’s Annual Number of Projects (PC05) | Organization/Firm’s Number of Employees (PC06) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | Kruskal-Wallis H | (p-Value) | ||
C02 | Inadequate Design | 0.336 | 0.845 | 0.989 | 0.610 | 3.995 | 0.407 | 10.590 | 0.032 | 9.109 | 0.058 | 2.490 | 0.646 |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 9.055 | 0.011 | 5.086 | 0.079 | 5.691 | 0.223 | 11.693 | 0.020 | 6.923 | 0.140 | 6.264 | 0.180 |
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documents | 8.158 | 0.017 | 1.232 | 0.540 | 3.889 | 0.421 | 1.588 | 0.811 | 2.193 | 0.700 | 5.175 | 0.270 |
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 2.093 | 0.351 | 2.717 | 0.257 | 13.175 | 0.010 | 4.111 | 0.391 | 1.753 | 0.781 | 2.316 | 0.678 |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 2.769 | 0.250 | 2.121 | 0.346 | 9.798 | 0.044 | 1.463 | 0.833 | 3.212 | 0.523 | 2.881 | 0.578 |
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 1.031 | 0.597 | 0.153 | 0.927 | 5.576 | 0.233 | 10.797 | 0.029 | 7.427 | 0.115 | 13.673 | 0.008 |
C21 | Changes by Client | 6.743 | 0.034 | 4.693 | 0.096 | 1.210 | 0.876 | 1.191 | 0.880 | 2.101 | 0.717 | 5.204 | 0.267 |
C30 | Uncontrollable External Events | 0.378 | 0.828 | 1.468 | 0.480 | 10.300 | 0.036 | 2.847 | 0.584 | 2.727 | 0.604 | 3.585 | 0.465 |
Appendix G
TYPE (Frequency) | T16 | T23 | T38 | T45 | T31 | T34 | T25 | T07 | T09 | T10 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CAUSE (SIGNIFICANCE) | Correlation (Coefficients) | Delayed Drawings or Instructions | A Variation or Significant Change to the Quantities | Ambiguity in Documents | Acceleration of Works | An omission of Work Forming | Delayed Payments | Shortage of Personnel or Goods | Rejection of Defective Plant and/or Materials | Revised Methods of Working Due to Slow Progress | Delay Damages | |
C21 | Changes by Client | Correlation | 0.397 ** | 0.242 * | 0.280 * | 0.148 | 0.366 ** | 0.046 | 0.033 | 0.054 | −0.025 | 0.114 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.035 | 0.014 | 0.202 | 0.001 | 0.694 | 0.780 | 0.644 | 0.830 | 0.325 | ||
C10 | Significance Inappropriate Contractor Selection | Correlation | 0.346 ** | 0.279 * | 0.236 * | 0.126 | 0.411 ** | 0.018 | 0.070 | −0.002 | −0.005 | 0.179 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.002 | 0.015 | 0.041 | 0.277 | 0.000 | 0.880 | 0.546 | 0.984 | 0.969 | 0.122 | ||
C05 | Significance Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) | Correlation | 0.291 * | 0.328 ** | 0.251 * | 0.102 | 0.460 ** | 0.034 | −0.038 | 0.066 | 0.049 | 0.140 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.011 | 0.004 | 0.028 | 0.382 | 0.000 | 0.768 | 0.742 | 0.574 | 0.674 | 0.227 | ||
C15 | Significance Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control | Correlation | 0.229 * | 0.258 * | 0.146 | 0.135 | 0.320 ** | 0.037 | −0.005 | 0.140 | 0.093 | 0.187 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.046 | 0.025 | 0.209 | 0.244 | 0.005 | 0.748 | 0.968 | 0.229 | 0.423 | 0.106 | ||
C16 | Significance Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control | Correlation | 0.268 * | 0.306 ** | 0.133 | 0.220 | 0.426 ** | 0.157 | 0.084 | 0.200 | 0.204 | 0.240 * |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.019 | 0.007 | 0.253 | 0.056 | 0.000 | 0.175 | 0.472 | 0.083 | 0.078 | 0.037 | ||
C19 | Significance Lack of Decisiveness | Correlation | 0.320 ** | 0.333 ** | 0.179 | 0.266 * | 0.426 ** | 0.019 | −0.036 | 0.125 | 0.147 | 0.119 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.123 | 0.020 | 0.000 | 0.868 | 0.760 | 0.281 | 0.206 | 0.306 | ||
C17 | Significance Inappropriate/Unexpected QC (Target) | Correlation | 0.304 ** | 0.250 * | 0.142 | 0.077 | 0.297 ** | 0.021 | −0.085 | 0.051 | 0.039 | 0.096 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.008 | 0.029 | 0.223 | 0.507 | 0.009 | 0.855 | 0.463 | 0.662 | 0.736 | 0.408 | ||
C20 | Significance Slow Client Response | Correlation | 0.389 ** | 0.321 ** | 0.334 ** | 0.099 | 0.457 ** | 0.211 | 0.132 | 0.142 | −0.016 | 0.196 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.393 | 0.000 | 0.067 | 0.256 | 0.222 | 0.890 | 0.089 | ||
C01 | Significance Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | Correlation | 0.297 ** | 0.192 | 0.237 * | 0.062 | 0.317 ** | 0.177 | 0.168 | 0.236 * | 0.240 * | 0.207 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.009 | 0.096 | 0.039 | 0.595 | 0.005 | 0.127 | 0.146 | 0.040 | 0.037 | 0.073 | ||
C06 | Significance Inappropriate Contract Form | Correlation | 0.263 * | 0.291 * | 0.265 * | 0.197 | 0.440 ** | 0.259 * | 0.004 | −0.015 | −0.025 | 0.246 * |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.022 | 0.011 | 0.021 | 0.088 | 0.000 | 0.024 | 0.975 | 0.897 | 0.827 | 0.032 |
Appendix H
TYPE (Impact) | T39 | T47 | T16 | T41 | T27 | T38 | T33 | T23 | T26 | T48 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CAUSE (SIGNIFICANCE) | Correlation (Coefficients) | Loss or Damage to the Works Caused Employer’s Risks | Client’s Breach of Contract | Delayed Drawings or Instructions | Force Majeure | Delays Caused by Authorities | Ambiguity in Documents | Changes in Legislation | A variation or Change of Quantities | Employer’s Delay or Impediment | Inflation/Price Escalation | |
C21 | Changes by Client | Correlation | 0.447 ** | 0.424 ** | 0.470 ** | 0.389 ** | 0.548 ** | 0.468 ** | 0.529 ** | 0.252 * | 0.392 ** | 0.136 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 00.000 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.028 | 0.000 | 0.240 | ||
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | Correlation | 0.559 ** | 0.417 ** | 0.385 ** | 0.462 ** | 0.595 ** | 0.490 ** | 0.432 ** | 0.174 | 0.479 ** | 0.189 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.133 | 0.000 | 0.102 | ||
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type | Correlation | 0.501 ** | 0.481 ** | 0.433 ** | 0.438 ** | 0.560 ** | 0.507 ** | 0.542 ** | 0.295 ** | 0.457 ** | 0.276 * |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.010 | 0.000 | 0.016 | ||
C15 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control | Correlation | 0.461 ** | 0.492 ** | 0.487 ** | 0.398 ** | 0.581 ** | 0.391 ** | 0.410 ** | 0.256 * | 0.383 ** | 0.313 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.026 | 0.001 | 0.006 | ||
C16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control | Correlation | 0.438 ** | 0.453 ** | 0.453 ** | 0.390 ** | 0.539 ** | 0.469 ** | 0.519 ** | 0.345 ** | 0.357 ** | 0.136 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.243 | ||
C19 | Lack of Information for (Decisiveness) | Correlation | 0.556 ** | 0.561 ** | 0.377 ** | 0.309 ** | 0.538 ** | 0.448 ** | 0.486 ** | 0.207 | 0.462 ** | 0.336 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.073 | 0.000 | 0.003 | ||
C17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected QC | Correlation | 0.447 ** | 0.413 ** | 0.489 ** | 0.412 ** | 0.455 ** | 0.457 ** | 0.474 ** | 0.287 * | 0.404 ** | 0.098 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.012 | 0.000 | 0.402 | ||
C20 | Slow Client Response | Correlation | 0.360 ** | 0.398 ** | 0.438 ** | 0.331 ** | 0.539 ** | 0.503 ** | 0.445 ** | 0.280 * | 0.451 ** | 0.162 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.014 | 0.000 | 0.162 | ||
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | Correlation | 0.402 ** | 0.473 ** | 0.312 ** | 0.420 ** | 0.486 ** | 0.355 ** | 0.418 ** | 0.273 * | 0.417 ** | 0.224 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.017 | 0.000 | 0.052 | ||
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | Correlation | 0.566 ** | 0.414 ** | 0.443 ** | 0.304 ** | 0.557 ** | 0.585 ** | 0.499 ** | 0.182 | 0.455 ** | 0.115 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.008 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.116 | 0.000 | 0.324 |
Appendix I
TYPE (Frequency) | T16 | T23 | T38 | T45 | T31 | T34 | T25 | T07 | T09 | T10 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CAUSE AVOIDABILITY | CORRELATION (Coefficients) | Delayed Drawings or Instructions | A Variation or Significant Change to the Quantities | Ambiguity in Documents | Acceleration of Works | An Omission of Work Forming | Delayed Payment | Shortage of Personnel or Goods | Rejection of Defective Plant and/or Materials | Revised Methods of Working Due to Poor Progress | Delay Damages | |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | Correlation | 0.066 | 0.231 * | 0.283 * | 0.064 | 0.100 | −0.075 | −0.034 | 0.141 | 0.127 | 0.114 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.570 | 0.045 | 0.013 | 0.584 | 0.390 | 0.521 | 0.772 | 0.225 | 0.273 | 0.325 | ||
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | Correlation | 0.096 | 0.084 | 0.268 * | 0.334 ** | 0.405 ** | −0.022 | 0.208 | 0.101 | 0.133 | 0.136 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.411 | 0.473 | 0.019 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.852 | 0.072 | 0.385 | 0.251 | 0.243 | ||
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | Correlation | 0.229 * | 0.318 ** | 0.294 ** | 0.142 | 0.458 ** | 0.083 | −0.010 | 0.082 | 0.173 | 0.286 * |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.046 | 0.005 | 0.010 | 0.221 | 0.000 | 0.478 | 0.933 | 0.479 | 0.135 | 0.012 | ||
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type | Correlation | 0.333 ** | 0.170 | 0.168 | 0.157 | 0.264 * | 0.096 | −0.081 | 0.046 | 0.348 ** | 0.192 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.003 | 0.142 | 0.147 | 0.175 | 0.021 | 0.412 | 0.489 | 0.695 | 0.002 | 0.097 | ||
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design | Correlation | −0.067 | 0.020 | 0.149 | 0.162 | 0.109 | 0.077 | 0.024 | 0.198 | 0.262 * | 0.173 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.566 | 0.863 | 0.198 | 0.163 | 0.348 | 0.509 | 0.834 | 0.086 | 0.022 | 0.136 | ||
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigation | Correlation | 0.055 | 0.197 | 0.250 * | 0.012 | 0.162 | −0.080 | −0.076 | 0.214 | 0.259 * | 0.212 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.635 | 0.088 | 0.029 | 0.920 | 0.161 | 0.494 | 0.513 | 0.064 | 0.024 | 0.066 | ||
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | Correlation | −0.041 | 0.027 | 0.068 | 0.035 | −0.025 | 0.012 | −0.067 | 0.117 | 0.235 * | 0.070 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.724 | 0.814 | 0.560 | 0.765 | 0.831 | 0.915 | 0.567 | 0.313 | 0.041 | 0.546 | ||
C02 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | Correlation | 0.148 | 0.175 | 0.290 * | 0.091 | 0.181 | 0.109 | 0.032 | 0.393 ** | 0.361 ** | 0.373 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.202 | 0.131 | 0.011 | 0.432 | 0.117 | 0.350 | 0.782 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documentation | Correlation | 0.139 | 0.162 | 0.227 * | 0.276 * | 0.176 | 0.170 | 0.008 | 0.211 | 0.397 ** | 0.335 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.230 | 0.163 | 0.048 | 0.016 | 0.129 | 0.141 | 0.945 | 0.068 | 0.000 | 0.003 | ||
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | Correlation | 0.055 | −0.163 | 0.148 | −0.062 | 0.201 | 0.010 | 0.022 | 0.169 | 0.094 | −0.032 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.639 | 0.158 | 0.203 | 0.597 | 0.082 | 0.930 | 0.852 | 0.145 | 0.421 | 0.782 | ||
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | Correlation | 0.101 | 0.216 | 0.051 | 0.192 | 0.180 | 0.022 | 0.056 | 0.164 | 0.329 ** | 0.167 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.387 | 0.060 | 0.664 | 0.096 | 0.120 | 0.851 | 0.629 | 0.156 | 0.004 | 0.150 |
Appendix J
CAUSE AVOIDABILITY | TYPE (IMPACT) | T39 | T47 | T16 | T41 | T27 | T38 | T33 | T23 | T26 | T48 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CORRELATION | Loss of Works Caused Employer’s Risks | Client’s Breach of Contract | Delayed Drawings or Instructions | Force Majeure | Delays Caused by Authorities | Ambiguity in Documents | Changes in Legislation | A Variation or Significant Change to the Quantities | Employer’s Delay or Impediment | Inflation/Price Escalation | ||
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | Correlation Coefficient | 0.222 | 0.307 ** | 0.305 ** | 0.244 * | 0.308 ** | 0.185 | 0.359 ** | 0.227 * | 0.179 | 0.294 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.054 | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.034 | 0.007 | 0.109 | 0.001 | 0.048 | 0.121 | 0.010 | ||
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | Correlation Coefficient | 0.143 | 0.370 ** | 0.206 | 0.240 * | 0.271 * | 0.360 ** | 0.226 * | 0.205 | 0.190 | 0.042 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.216 | 0.001 | 0.074 | 0.037 | 0.018 | 0.001 | 0.050 | 0.076 | 0.099 | 0.717 | ||
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | Correlation Coefficient | 0.301 ** | 0.354 ** | 0.330 ** | 0.237 * | 0.510 ** | 0.520 ** | 0.434 ** | 0.186 | 0.459 ** | 0.150 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.008 | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.039 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.109 | 0.000 | 0.195 | ||
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) | Correlation | 0.251 * | 0.275 * | 0.295 ** | 0.183 | 0.388 ** | 0.298 ** | 0.352 ** | 0.145 | 0.258 * | 0.198 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.029 | 0.016 | 0.010 | 0.113 | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.002 | 0.212 | 0.025 | 0.087 | ||
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | Correlation | 0.070 | 0.295 ** | 0.055 | 0.066 | 0.073 | 0.176 | 0.299 ** | 0.132 | 0.165 | 0.088 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.548 | 0.010 | 0.635 | 0.572 | 0.533 | 0.128 | 0.009 | 0.256 | 0.153 | 0.449 | ||
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigation | Correlation | 0.164 | 0.266 * | 0.222 | 0.184 | 0.302 ** | 0.254 * | 0.306 ** | 0.303 ** | 0.248 * | 0.241 * |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.156 | 0.020 | 0.054 | 0.111 | 0.008 | 0.027 | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.030 | 0.036 | ||
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | Correlation | 0.043 | 0.166 | 0.006 | −0.008 | 0.073 | 0.064 | 0.160 | 0.210 | 0.063 | 0.104 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.712 | 0.151 | 0.957 | 0.949 | 0.531 | 0.580 | 0.169 | 0.069 | 0.590 | 0.369 | ||
C02 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | Correlation | 0.178 | 0.183 | 0.142 | 0.325 ** | 0.381 ** | 0.229 * | 0.415 ** | 0.145 | 0.344 ** | 0.116 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.125 | 0.115 | 0.221 | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.046 | 0.000 | 0.212 | 0.002 | 0.318 | ||
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documentation | Correlation | 0.219 | 0.310 ** | 0.227 * | 0.191 | 0.434 ** | 0.278 * | 0.483 ** | 0.193 | 0.305 ** | 0.342 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.058 | 0.006 | 0.048 | 0.099 | 0.000 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.094 | 0.007 | 0.003 | ||
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | Correlation | 0.016 | 0.190 | 0.086 | 0.048 | 0.152 | 0.127 | 0.277 * | 0.071 | 0.171 | 0.183 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.893 | 0.099 | 0.458 | 0.679 | 0.190 | 0.276 | 0.015 | 0.540 | 0.140 | 0.113 | ||
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | Correlation | 0.097 | 0.095 | 0.062 | 0.176 | 0.116 | −0.033 | 0.164 | 0.214 | 0.135 | 0.115 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.403 | 0.414 | 0.592 | 0.128 | 0.317 | 0.779 | 0.157 | 0.063 | 0.247 | 0.322 |
References
- Sherif, A.; Abdelalim, A.M. Delay Analysis Techniques and Claim Assessment in Construction Projects. Int. J. Eng. Manag. Humanit. (IJEMH) 2023, 10, 316–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumaraswamy, M.M. Conflicts, Claims and Disputes in Construction Engineering. Constr. Archit. Manag. 1997, 4, 95–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M. Risks Affecting the Delivery of Construction Projects in Egypt: Identifying, Assessing and Response. In Project Management and BIM for Sustainable Modern Cities; Springer International Publishing: Basel, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 125–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- FIDIC. Conditions of Contract for Construction for Building and Engineering Works Designed by the Employer. 1999. Available online: https://www.researchpublish.com/papers/project-risk-management-during-construction-stage-according-to-international-contract-fidic (accessed on 14 July 2024).
- Abdelalim, A.M.; El Nawawy, O.A.; Bassiony, M.S. Decision Supporting System for Risk Assessment in Construction Projects: AHP-Simulation Based. IPASJ Int. J. Comput. Sci. 2016, 4, 22–36. [Google Scholar]
- Khedr, R.; Abdelalim, A.M. Predictors for the Success and Survival of Construction Firms in Egypt. Int. J. Manag. Commer. Innov. 2021, 9, 192–201. [Google Scholar]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Abo Elsaud, Y. Integrating BIM-Based Simulation Technique for Sustainable Building Design. In Project Management and BIM for Sustainable Modern Cities; Springer International Publishing: Basel, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 209–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassanen, M.A.H.; Abdelalim, A.M. A Proposed Approach for a Balanced Construction Contract for Mega Industrial Projects in Egypt. Int. J. Manag. Commer. Innov. 2022, 10, 217–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Said, S.O.M. Dynamic Labour Tracking System in Construction Project Using BIM Technology. Int. J. Civ. Struct. Eng. Res. 2021, 9, 10–20. [Google Scholar]
- Van Eck, N.; Waltman, L. Software Survey: VOS-viewer, a Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Eldesouky, M.A. Evaluating Contracting Companies According to Quality Management System Requirements in Construction Projects. Int. J. Eng. Manag. Hum. 2021, 2, 158–169. [Google Scholar]
- Ostrovsky, R.; Rabani, Y.; Schulman, L.J.; Swamy, C. The Effectiveness of Lloyd-Type Methods for the K-Means Problem. J. ACM 2013, 59, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pai, S.G.; Sanayei, M.; Smith, I.F. Model-Class Selection Using Clustering and Classification for Structural Identification and Prediction. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2021, 35, 04020051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, C.; Yang, H. Research on K-Value Selection Method of K-Means Clustering Algorithm. J 2019, 2, 226–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yousri, E.; Sayed, A.E.B.; Farag, M.A.M.; Abdelalim, A.M. Risk Identification of Building Construction Projects in Egypt. Buildings 2023, 13, 1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Sherif, A.; Abdelalkhaleq, H. Criteria of selecting appropriate Delay Analysis Methods (DAM) for mega construction projects. J. Eng. Manag. Compet. (JEMC) 2023, 13, 79–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Younis, R.E.A.; Abdelkhalek, H.; Abdelalim, A.M. Project Risk Management During Construction Stage According to International Contract (FIDIC). Int. J. Civ. Struct. Eng. Res. 2023, 10, 76–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Elbeltagi, E.; Mekky, A.A. Factors Affecting Productivity and Improvement in Building Construction Sites. Int. J. Prod. Qual. Manag. 2019, 27, 464–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdelalim, A.M.; Khalil, E.B.; Saif, A.A. The Effect of Using the Value Engineering Approach in Enhancing the Role of Consulting Firms in the Construction Industry in Egypt. Int. J. Adv. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2021, 8, 16531–16539. [Google Scholar]
- Khedr, R.; Abdelalim, A.M. The Impact of Strategic Management on Project Performance of Construction Firms in Egypt. Int. J. Manag. Commer. Innov. 2021, 9, 202–211. [Google Scholar]
- Hassanen, M.A.H.; Abdelalim, A.M. Risk Identification and Assessment of Mega Industrial Projects in Egypt. Int. J. Manag. Commer. Innov. (IJMCI) 2022, 10, 187–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medhat, W.; Abdelkhalek, H.; Abdelalim, A.M. A Comparative Study of the International Construction Contract (FIDIC Red Book 1999) and the Domestic Contract in Egypt (the Administrative Law 182 for 2018). Int. J. Manag. Commer. Innov. 2023, 11, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
No. | FIDIC Sub-Clause | Claim Description | Claim Party | Sort of Claim (Additional) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Employer (E) | Contractor (C) | Cost (C) | Profit (P) | Time (T) | |||
1 | 4.2.a | Failure to extend the validity of the performance security | E | C | |||
2 | 4.2.b | Failure to pay the agreed amount due. | E | C | |||
3 | 4.14 | Avoidance of Interference | E | C | |||
4 | 4.16 | Damages, losses, and expenses resulting from Transport | E | C | |||
5 | 4.19 | Payment of electricity, water, or gas | E | C | |||
6 | 4.2 | Employer’s equipment or free-issue materials | E | C | |||
7 | 7.5 | Rejection of defective plant and/or materials | E | C | |||
8 | 7.6 | Contractor’s failure to remedy defects | E | C | |||
9 | 8.6 | Revised methods of working due to poor rate of progress | E | C | |||
10 | 8.7 | Delay damages | E | C | |||
11 | 9.4 | Failed tests on completion | E | C | |||
12 | 11.4 | A failure to rectify defects | E | C | |||
13 | 15.4 | Termination by employer | E | C | |||
14 | 18.1 | Contractor’s failure to insure | E | C | |||
15 | 18.2 | Contractor’s inability to insure | E | C | |||
16 | 1.9 | Delayed drawings or instructions | C | C | P | T | |
17 | 2.1 | Right of access to or possession of the site | C | C | P | T | |
18 | 4.2 | Delay of performance security payment after performance certificate issuing | C | C | P | T | |
19 | 4.7 | Errors in setting out information | C | C | P | T | |
20 | 4.12 | Unforeseen physical conditions | C | C | T | ||
21 | 4.24 | Fossils, ancient artifacts, archaeological or geological items | C | C | T | ||
22 | 7.4 | Additional tests instructed by the engineer | C | C | P | T | |
23 | 8.4.a | A variation or significant change to the quantities | C | T | |||
24 | 8.4.c | Unusual bad weather | C | T | |||
25 | 8.4.d | Shortage of personnel or goods | C | T | |||
26 | 8.4.e | Employer’s delay or impediment | C | T | |||
27 | 8.5 | Delays caused by authorities | C | T | |||
28 | 8.9 | Suspension and/or resuming work after suspension | C | C | T | ||
29 | 10.2 | The employer using part of the works | C | C | P | ||
30 | 10.3 | Prevention from undertaking tests on completion | C | C | P | T | |
31 | 12.4 | An omission of works | C | C | T | ||
32 | 13.2 | An adopted value engineering proposal | C | C | P | ||
33 | 13.7 | Changes in legislation | C | C | T | ||
34 | 14.8 | Delayed payment | C | C | |||
35 | 16.1 | Suspension initiated by the contractor | C | C | P | T | |
36 | 16.4 | Termination initiated by the contractor | C | C | P | ||
37 | 17.1 | Damage or injury caused by Employer’s personnel agents | C | C | |||
38 | 17.4 | Ambiguity in Documents | C | C | P | T | |
39 | 17.4 | Loss or damage to the works caused by Employer’s Risks (poor design, etc.) | C | C | P | T | |
40 | 18.1 | Insurances supplied by the Employer’s | C | C | |||
41 | 19.4 | Force Majeure | C | C | P | T | |
42 | 19.6 | Optional payment and release due to termination | C | C | P | ||
43 | 5.2 | Refusal of contractor objection to nomination | C | C | P | T | |
44 | 11.8 | An instruction to search for defect | C | C | P | T | |
45 | 8.3 | Acceleration of Works | C | C | P | T | |
46 | 8.10 | Payment for plant and material in the event of suspension | C | C | |||
47 | 16.2 | Client’s Breach of Contract | C | C | P | ||
48 | 16.2 | Inflation/Price Escalation | C | C | P | ||
49 | 16.2 | Currency Fluctuation | C | C | P | ||
50 | 5.2 | Default of Nominated Subcontractor or Suppliers | C | C | P | T | |
51 | 19.6 | Rectification of Damage Due to Unexpected Risk | C | C | P | T |
No. | List of Causes | No. | List of Causes |
---|---|---|---|
01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | 16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) |
02 | Inadequate Design Documentation | 17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Quality Control (Target) |
03 | Inadequate Brief | 18 | Poor Communications Among Project Participants |
04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | 19 | Lack of Information for Decision Making (Decisiveness) |
05 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) | 20 | Slow Client Response |
06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 21 | Changes by Client |
07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | 22 | Lack of Competence of Project Participants |
08 | Inadequate Contract Documentation | 23 | Poor Workmanship |
09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 24 | Inadequate Site Investigation |
10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 25 | Unrealistic Information Expectations (By Contractor) |
11 | Unrealistic Tender Pricing | 26 | Lack of Team Spirit Among Participants |
12 | Unrealistic Client Expectations | 27 | Personality Clashes Among Project Participants |
13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 28 | Poor Management by One or More Project Participants |
14 | Inappropriate Document Control | 29 | Adversarial Culture Among project Participants |
15 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control | 30 | Uncontrollable External Events |
31 | Exaggerated Claims |
Code# | Type | Type Frequency | Type Frequency Index | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very Low | Low | Average | High | Very High | Mean | RII | Rank | ||
T16 | Delayed drawings or instructions | 1 | 5 | 48 | 16 | 6 | 3.28 | 65.53 | 1 |
T23 | A variation or significant change to the quantities | 3 | 4 | 44 | 19 | 6 | 3.28 | 65.53 | 2 |
T38 | Ambiguity in Documents | 5 | 13 | 43 | 11 | 4 | 2.95 | 58.95 | 3 |
T45 | Acceleration of Works | 3 | 10 | 54 | 9 | 0 | 2.91 | 58.16 | 4 |
T31 | An omission of work forming | 3 | 18 | 48 | 7 | 0 | 2.78 | 55.53 | 5 |
T34 | Delayed payment | 2 | 25 | 43 | 4 | 2 | 2.72 | 54.47 | 6 |
T25 | Shortage of personnel or goods | 2 | 38 | 29 | 4 | 3 | 2.58 | 51.58 | 7 |
T07 | Rejection of defective plant and/or materials | 3 | 36 | 30 | 7 | 0 | 2.54 | 50.79 | 8 |
T09 | Revised methods of working due to slow progress | 3 | 38 | 28 | 6 | 1 | 2.53 | 50.53 | 9 |
T10 | Delay damages | 3 | 36 | 33 | 2 | 2 | 2.53 | 50.53 | 10 |
Code # | Type | Type Impact | Type Impact Index | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very Low | Low | Average | High | Very High | Mean | RII | Rank | ||
T39 | Loss or damage to the works caused Employer Risks (War, riots, munitions, poor design. | 6 | 2 | 4 | 18 | 46 | 4.26 | 85.26 | 1 |
T47 | Client’s Breach of Contract | 4 | 5 | 2 | 21 | 44 | 4.26 | 85.26 | 2 |
T16 | Delayed drawings or instructions | 1 | 3 | 7 | 34 | 31 | 4.20 | 83.95 | 3 |
T41 | Force Majeure | 3 | 7 | 7 | 24 | 35 | 4.07 | 81.32 | 4 |
T27 | Delays caused by authorities | 2 | 4 | 3 | 46 | 21 | 4.05 | 81.05 | 5 |
T38 | Ambiguity in Documents | 1 | 4 | 7 | 42 | 22 | 4.05 | 81.05 | 6 |
T33 | Changes in legislation | 7 | 3 | 2 | 40 | 24 | 3.93 | 78.68 | 7 |
T23 | A variation or change in the quantities | 2 | 1 | 16 | 42 | 15 | 3.88 | 77.63 | 8 |
T26 | Employer’s delay or impediment | 4 | 1 | 23 | 41 | 7 | 3.61 | 72.11 | 9 |
T48 | Inflation/Price Escalation | 3 | 2 | 27 | 34 | 10 | 3.61 | 72.11 | 10 |
Code | Cause Description | Clients | Consultants | Contractors | Overall |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | 100.00% | 100.00% | 93.80% | 98.68% |
C21 | Changes by Client | 100.00% | 97.70% | 87.50% | 96.05% |
C19 | Lack of Information for Decision Making (Decisiveness) | 100.00% | 93.00% | 93.80% | 94.74% |
C23 | Poor Workmanship | 100.00% | 90.70% | 100.00% | 94.74% |
C30 | Uncontrollable External Events | 100.00% | 93.00% | 93.80% | 94.74% |
C02 | Inadequate Design Documentation | 94.10% | 95.30% | 87.50% | 93.42% |
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | 94.10% | 97.70% | 81.30% | 93.42% |
C16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) | 100.00% | 93.00% | 87.50% | 93.42% |
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 88.20% | 95.30% | 87.50% | 92.11% |
C15 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control (Target) | 100.00% | 93.00% | 81.30% | 92.11% |
C22 | Lack of Competence of Project Participants | 94.10% | 93.00% | 81.30% | 92.11% |
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) | 88.20% | 95.30% | 81.30% | 90.79% |
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documentation | 94.10% | 93.00% | 81.30% | 90.79% |
C18 | Poor Communications Among Project Participants | 100.00% | 90.70% | 81.30% | 90.79% |
C20 | Slow Client Response | 100.00% | 90.70% | 81.30% | 90.79% |
C31 | Exaggerated Claims | 100.00% | 93.00% | 75.00% | 90.79% |
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | 88.20% | 95.30% | 75.00% | 89.47% |
C11 | Unrealistic Tender Pricing | 100.00% | 86.00% | 87.50% | 89.47% |
C14 | Inappropriate Document Control | 100.00% | 86.00% | 87.50% | 89.47% |
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigation | 94.10% | 88.40% | 87.50% | 89.47% |
C03 | Inadequate Brief | 94.10% | 88.40% | 81.30% | 88.16% |
C12 | Unrealistic Client Expectations | 100.00% | 86.00% | 81.30% | 88.16% |
C17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Quality Control (Target) | 100.00% | 81.40% | 93.80% | 88.16% |
C26 | Lack of Team Spirit Among Participants | 94.1% | 90.70% | 75.00% | 88.16% |
C28 | Poor Management by One or More Project Participants | 94.1% | 86.00% | 87.50% | 88.16% |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 94.1% | 88.40% | 75.00% | 86.84% |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 88.20% | 88.40% | 75.00% | 85.53% |
C25 | Unrealistic Information Expectations (By the Contractor) | 94.10% | 86.00% | 75.00% | 85.53% |
C27 | Personality Clashes Among Project Participants | 94.10% | 86.00% | 75.00% | 85.53% |
C29 | Adversarial (industry) Culture Among project Participants | 94.10% | 86.00% | 75.00% | 85.53% |
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 94.10% | 86.00% | 68.80% | 84.21% |
Code # | Cause Description | Cause Significance | Cause Significance Index | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very Low | Low | Average | High | Very High | Mean | RII | Rank | ||
C15 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control (Target) | 3 | 3 | 7 | 16 | 47 | 4.33 | 86.58 | 1 |
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 1 | 3 | 8 | 23 | 41 | 4.32 | 86.32 | 2 |
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type | 4 | 3 | 8 | 12 | 49 | 4.30 | 86.05 | 3 |
C16 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) | 3 | 4 | 7 | 15 | 47 | 4.30 | 86.05 | 3 |
C21 | Changes by Client | 3 | 3 | 6 | 20 | 44 | 4.30 | 86.05 | 3 |
C19 | Lack of (Decisiveness) | 2 | 6 | 5 | 18 | 45 | 4.29 | 85.79 | 4 |
C20 | Slow Client Response | 2 | 5 | 5 | 28 | 36 | 4.20 | 83.95 | 5 |
C17 | Inappropriate/Unexpected QC | 5 | 2 | 10 | 22 | 37 | 4.11 | 82.11 | 6 |
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design | 2 | 3 | 7 | 38 | 26 | 4.09 | 81.84 | 7 |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 5 | 4 | 6 | 25 | 36 | 4.09 | 81.84 | 7 |
Code # | Cause Description | Cause Avoidability | Cause Avoidability Index | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very Low | Low | Average | High | Very High | Mean | RII | Rank | ||
C10 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection | 2 | 5 | 23 | 41 | 5 | 3.55 | 71.05 | 1 |
C13 | Inappropriate Payment Method | 4 | 3 | 20 | 47 | 2 | 3.53 | 70.53 | 2 |
C06 | Inappropriate Contract Form | 3 | 7 | 25 | 31 | 10 | 3.50 | 70.00 | 3 |
C05 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) | 3 | 6 | 31 | 24 | 12 | 3.47 | 69.47 | 4 |
C01 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information | 2 | 5 | 34 | 31 | 4 | 3.39 | 67.89 | 5 |
C24 | Inadequate Site Investigation | 1 | 5 | 39 | 26 | 5 | 3.38 | 67.63 | 6 |
C04 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications | 1 | 7 | 40 | 25 | 3 | 3.29 | 65.79 | 7 |
C02 | Inadequate Design Documentation | 1 | 8 | 44 | 19 | 4 | 3.22 | 64.47 | 8 |
C08 | Inadequate Contract Documentation | 1 | 10 | 42 | 21 | 2 | 3.17 | 63.42 | 9 |
C07 | Inadequate Contract Administration | 4 | 4 | 51 | 15 | 2 | 3.09 | 61.84 | 10 |
C09 | Incomplete Tender Information | 1 | 8 | 53 | 11 | 3 | 3.09 | 61.84 | 10 |
Identity (Role of the Respondents) | Frequency | Percent | Valid % | Cumulative % | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Client | Not Sure | 1 | 5.9 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
Yes | 16 | 94.1 | 94.1 | 100.0 | |
Total | 17 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Client Representative/Consultant | No | 3 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 |
Not Sure | 2 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 11.6 | |
Yes | 38 | 88.4 | 88.4 | 100.0 | |
Total | 43 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Contractor | No | 1 | 6.3 | 6.3 | 6.3 |
Yes | 15 | 93.8 | 93.8 | 100.0 | |
Total | 16 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Identity (Role of the Respondents) | Frequency | Percent | Valid % | Cumulative % | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Client | No | 1 | 5.9 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
Not Sure | 1 | 5.9 | 5.9 | 11.8 | |
Yes | 15 | 88.2 | 88.2 | 100.0 | |
Total | 17 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Client Representative/Consultant | No | 1 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 2.3 |
Not Sure | 1 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 4.7 | |
Yes | 41 | 95.3 | 95.3 | 100.0 | |
Total | 43 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Contractor | No | 1 | 6.3 | 6.3 | 6.3 |
Yes | 15 | 93.8 | 93.8 | 100.0 | |
Total | 16 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Identity (Role of the Respondents) | Frequency | Valid % | Cumulative % | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Client | No | 1 | 5.9 | 5.9 |
Yes | 16 | 94.1 | 100.0 | |
Total | 17 | 100.0 | ||
Client Representative/Consultant | No | 1 | 2.3 | 2.3 |
Not Sure | 6 | 14.0 | 16.3 | |
Yes | 36 | 83.7 | 100.0 | |
Total | 43 | 100.0 | ||
Contractor | Not Sure | 1 | 6.3 | 6.3 |
Yes | 15 | 93.8 | 100.0 | |
Total | 16 | 100.0 |
Identity (Role of the Respondents) | Frequency | Valid % | Cumulative % | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Client | No | 2 | 11.8 | 11.8 |
Not Sure | 2 | 11.8 | 23.5 | |
Yes | 13 | 76.5 | 100.0 | |
Total | 17 | 100.0 | ||
Client Representative/Consultant | No | 1 | 2.3 | 2.3 |
Not Sure | 8 | 18.6 | 20.9 | |
Yes | 34 | 79.1 | 100.0 | |
Total | 43 | 100.0 | ||
Contractor | Not Sure | 2 | 12.5 | 12.5 |
Yes | 14 | 87.5 | 100.0 | |
Total | 16 | 100.0 |
Cluster | Cause | Count |
---|---|---|
0 | T45, T40, T35, T25, T24 | 5 |
1 | T1, T49, T44, T42, T41, T27, T50, T20, T18, T26, T51, T6, T5, T4, T3, T15, T14 | 17 |
2 | T47, T48, T34, T2, T7, T39, T38, T37, T8, T46, T43, T33, T31, T17, T19, T13, T21, T22, T32, T12, T10, T9, T28, T29, T30, T11 | 26 |
3 | T23, T36, T16 | 3 |
No. | Significant Causes of Variations and Claims | No. | Avoidable Causes of Variations and Claims |
---|---|---|---|
01 | Changes by Client (C21) | 01 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection (C10) |
02 | Inappropriate Contractor Selection (C10) | 02 | Inappropriate Payment Method (C13) |
03 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) (C05) | 03 | Inappropriate Contract Form (C06) |
04 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Time Control (Target) (C15) | 04 | Inappropriate Contract Type (Strategy) (C05) |
05 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Cost Control (Target) (C16) | 05 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information (C01) |
06 | Lack of Information for Decision Making; (Decisiveness) (C19) | 06 | Inadequate Site Investigation (C24) |
07 | Inappropriate/Unexpected Quality Control (Target) (C17) | 07 | Unclear and Inadequate Specifications (C04) |
08 | Slow Client Response (C20) | 08 | Inadequate Design Documentation (C02) |
09 | Inadequate/Inaccurate Design Information (C01) | 09 | Inadequate Contract Documentation (C08) |
10 | Inappropriate Contract Form (C06) | 10 | Inadequate Contract Administration (C07) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Abdelalim, A.M.; Al-Sabah, R.; Salem, M.; Said, S.O.; Tantawy, M.; Ezz Al-Regal, M.R. Variations and Claims in International Construction Projects in the MENA Region from the Last Decade. Buildings 2024, 14, 2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14082496
Abdelalim AM, Al-Sabah R, Salem M, Said SO, Tantawy M, Ezz Al-Regal MR. Variations and Claims in International Construction Projects in the MENA Region from the Last Decade. Buildings. 2024; 14(8):2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14082496
Chicago/Turabian StyleAbdelalim, Ahmed Mohammed, Ruqaya Al-Sabah, Mohamed Salem, Salah Omar Said, Mohamed Tantawy, and Mohamed Ramadan Ezz Al-Regal. 2024. "Variations and Claims in International Construction Projects in the MENA Region from the Last Decade" Buildings 14, no. 8: 2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14082496