Susmit - Final Thesis - Chap5 - Conclusion
Susmit - Final Thesis - Chap5 - Conclusion
Susmit - Final Thesis - Chap5 - Conclusion
199
Results, Discussion and Conclusion
5.1 Introduction
This chapter deals with the results obtained from different studies carried out during
the course of this research. The results and analysis of these studies are discussed and
summarized in this chapter with respect to their individual contribution and their
overall contribution to the main research. No research work can conclude without
discussing the limitations. This chapter aims at fulfilling this task too. Further, an
attempt is made to assess the contribution of the study from an academic as well as
from an industry perspective. The chapter ends with a recommendation for further
research.
The main objective with which this research study was undertaken was to have an
identify the critical risks and their management in brownfield construction projects in
steel plants. The study also endeavoured to find out if a correlation exists between the
project complexity and the criticality of the risk. Further, an effort was also made to
explore the effect of risk response factors and risk response options. The study was
initiated through a literature survey in two specific areas of construction project risks
and project complexity. Thereafter, the identified risks and project complexity
The objective of the pilot survey was to identify the major risks that are present in
brownfield construction projects in steel plants. The pilot survey was preceded by a
focus group discussion which finalized the group of construction project risks which
200
are relevant to construction projects in existing steel plants. The major risks identified
from the pilot survey along with other suggested risks from the second focus group
discussion were subjected to main survey to finally identify the select group of critical
risks from the perception of the respondents. In the final stage, expert interview was
conducted to validate the findings of the main survey and to have some insight about
the relationship. The following Table 5.1 sketches the journey of the author from
initiation to culmination.
(Compiled by Author)
From the above table it is clear that apart from expert interview all the other stages are
mainly devoted in the identification of risks and complexity indicators. Thus all the
stages basically aimed towards findings. The following figure 5.1 illustrates the
201
Figure 5.1: Flow of the Study
Each stage of research generated a new finding which k ept up the tempo of this
academic task. The findings of the study in each of the stages and the fulfilment of
Table 5.2: Summary of findings of the study with fulfilment of Research Objective
Expert
survey to
identify
Research 1st Focus 2nd Focus Fulfilment of
Pilot survey weights of Main Survey
Objectives Group Group Objectives
complexity
attributes/
indicators
• 36 major risks
assessed and 16
critical risks
identified based
on RPS and cut-
• Three risks off normalization
Based on the of economic
To ascertain the factor of 0.5.
Risk nature The critical risk
overall risk included in • Overall Risk
Potential events identified
potential of 48 risks main survey. Potential of the
Score and and the overall
brownfield were
cut-off • Addl 4 risks brownfield
risk potential of
construction identified were construction
normalizatio brownfield
projects in steel for pilot included as project is
n factor of suggested by construction
plants survey. assessed based
0.5 only 29 the projects in steel
on Fuzzy
risks respondents plant assessed.
of pilot. Synthetic
identified.
Analysis.
Overall Risk
Potential found
out to be
between medium
and high.
• Responses Responses on
Some on these complexity
To investigate the parameter parameters indicators were
relationship of s/ taken. taken and overall Significant
Complexity Weights of
criticality of risk attributes • No complexity of positive
attributes indicators
with the the of correlation project assessed. correlation exist
and finalized
complexity of complexit studied between project
indicators based on
project. y between Positive complexity and
finalized. responses.
wereprim complexity correlation exists risk criticality.
arily and risk between Project
decided. potential complexity and
scores. criticality of risk
Contd.
202
• Risk Response
Option and risk
• Risk Response
Response Factors against
Options each risk
To explore the
nomenclat evaluated.
effect of Risk
ure • Both the Influence of Risk
Response Factors
finalized Response factors Response factors
on the Risk
• Risk have statistically on the risk
Response Options
Response same level of response option
selected for each
Factors influence on 3 studied and
risk.
were risk response analysed.
discussed options
and their • Human response
scales factors have
finalized. more influence
in case of other 2
response options.
• Positive
Correlation
exists between
risk response While there is
To determine the
factors and significant
relationship of
criticality of correlation
these factors with
risks. between risk
the complexity of
• Positive response factors
the project and
Correlation with criticality of
criticality of risk.
exists in most risks, it is weak
cases between in case of project
risk response complexity.
factors and
complexity of
project.
The findings of the study corresponding to each research area are discussed below:
In the second focus group discussion it was decided that questions relating to the
organization in the main survey it was found that part of the respondents agree that
they have identified some risk in their projects. However, lesser proportion of them
indicate that they have assessments made for those risks and further lesser
203
proportion mentioned that they have a plan for responding to those risks. When
asked about formal documentation, a far less number indicated that they have
documentation of response plan for their risks. Among the 8 organisations from
where the respondents have taken part only one organization has been found to have
One of the main objectives of this study was to identify risks which are critical to
brownfield construction projects in steel plants. With this objective the study arrived
at the major risks after the pilot survey and finally arrived at 16 critical risks after
the main survey. Based on the Risk Potential Score (RPS) at an overall level
“Unrealistic time estimates of activities….” has topped the critical risk list followed
with projects and consultant executives, have slightly differing view point about the
top critical risk. While project and consultant executives felt that “Delayed Supply
of equipment…..” is the top critical risk, the plant executive felt that “Unrealistic
time estimates of activities….” is more important risk. Two more risks which are
typical of brownfield construction projects have found place in this select list of
critical risks. These are “Work Fronts/ shutdown not being made available in
time….” and “Unforeseen ground condition …”. These two risks have plagued the
brownfield construction projects on many occasions in recent times. Apart from the
individual effect of these critical risks, Fuzzy synthetic Analysis was carried out to
204
identify the critical risk groups (CRG) and finally the overall risk potential of the
brownfield construction projects in steel plants. The critical risk groups identified
The overall risk potential was calculated for the brownfield construction projects
on the basis of Probability of Occurrence and Severity of Impact and was found to
Overall complexity of each project/ package was calculated and the correlation
between project complexity and individual risks is found to be positive. The highest
with a correlation coefficient of 0.402 and p-value of 0.000. The lowest correlation
0.209 and p-value of 0.007. All other risks had a correlation in between this range.
Correlation was also found out between project complexity and the overall risk
potential for each project and it was found to be 0.434 with a p-value of 0.000. The
experts were of the opinion that the increase in complexity affects the visibility of
the project particularly for long term projects thus increasing its risk potential. This
205
finding enables us to conclude that there is a significant correlation that exists
between complexity of projects and the risk potential score which basically indicates
Systemic, it was found that the response factors have statistically same level of
Checking of interface) all other risks have shown that there is statistically no
difference between the two response factors on the risk response option. Even for
these risks only in case of some of the response options there were statistical
differences. For the two risks more prevalent in the brownfield projects i.e “Work
Fronts/ shutdown not being made available in time….” and “Unforeseen ground
condition …” it was found that for both the risk there is no statistical difference
between human response factor and systemic response factors for all the response
options. As far as the experts opinion is concerned the Risk Response Factors were
complementary to each other and their measure depended on the type of risk to be
responded. One of the experts was of the opinion that for critical risks both the
response factors were interdependent and hence have same level of influence. This
206
enabled the author to conclude that both the response factors were important when
In addition to exploring the influence of these risk response factors on the risk
response individually, the influence of these risk response factors as a whole on each
of the response option was also studied. The results show that in overall basis the
human response factors are more influential than the systemic response factors in
The two project cases also suggest that the response factors -both human and
systemic have influence but human response factors have more influence in
Generally the risk response factors have shown a high level of correlation with the
case of systemic response factors. This may be due to the perception that systemic
factors have a very limited influence with respect to these risks. It has also been
observed that at an overall level the response factors have high correlation overall
project risk (Avg. Systemic Factors it is 0.435 with p-value 0.000 and for Avg.
Human Factors it is 0.499 with p-value 0.000). The interesting finding that comes
out is that the correlation of Human Response Factors is more than Systemic
207
vi) Relationship of Risk Response Factors and Project Complexity
While studying the correlation between risk response factors and the complexity of
project it has been found that there is very insignificant correlation both in case of
Response Factors and Average Human Response Factors had low level of
Systemic Response factors is 0.197 with a p-value of 0.011 and for Average Human
Factors is 0.183 with a p-value of 0.018. This finding suggests that there is a very
insignificant level of correlation. This has also been supported by the experts one of
whom observed that complexity arises out of various factors which are independent
or have very limited dependence on risk response factors. Thus the correlation
The conclusion of the present study is based upon the information obtained from the
literature and analysis of data collected in course of this research and finally supported
by the opinion of experts. The study was carried out with the objective of developing
following areas so that one can manage the steel plant construction projects better.The
208
• Risks in Brownfield Construction Projects in Steel plants
projects in steel plants. This included two risks which are mainly associated
well as overall risk of a project. Thus for more complex project possibility
Factors on Risk Response Options for some of the risks i.e irrespective of the
chosen option the influence remains statistically same. However, for some risks
there are differences in the influence of the two risk response factors for some
of the risk response options but not in all the five options. Thus both the
response factors are important for the selection of a choice and action under the
Risk Response Factors have exhibited a high level of correlation with Risk
209
Response Factors and Systemic Response Factors influence goes up with the
Human response Factors and Risk Criticality suggest that the respondents felt
that the Human Response Factors are more influential than Systemic Response
Factors.
With respect to Project Complexity, the low correlation suggests that Response
Factors are more independent of the Project Complexity. Extending the idea , it
can be further concluded that the response factors are more sensitive to the
The present study has been carried out to provide some understanding about the risk
scenario of the construction projects in steel plants in India. As with any other research,
the study too had its own limitations which needs to be outlined here for the benefit of
First limitation that was experienced was the general reluctance of executives of private
sector projects in responding to the questionnaire survey. Had the responses been more
from the private sector it could possibly have contributed more positively towards the
research findings. Even multiple methods of data collection could not garner much
response.
210
The study has also restricted itself to the brownfield construction projects in steel plants
and accordingly the responses were taken both in pilot survey and main survey from
the steel plant executives where brownfield construction projects have taken place.
This has limited the scope and greenfield projects which are also coming up remained
The scope of the present study was limited to project owners of steel plants that consists
of project and plant executives who are associated with projects and executives of
consultant. The perspective of other stakeholders, like contractors, suppliers and others
could have added further dimensions to risk management in brown-field steel plant
construction projects .
This research study has endeavoured to make some significant contribution in the area
of construction project risk management related to steel plants. The research was
carried out with the objective of finding out and addressing the perceived gap in the
area of construction project risk management and to a limited extent on the practices
A. Theoritical Contribution
The concept of project risk - its identification and assessment has been done according
to the available theories and literature. The critical risks identified and assessed in the
main survey includes risk which were also identified in the other studies conducted
earlier. However, the study also identified some risks which are typical of brownfield
211
project setting. The table 5.3 below shows the critical risks identified in the present
Table 5.3: Critical risks identified in the present study and their mention in other
studies
Sl. Risks SPSS Risks identified in literatures
No. Risk
Id.
No.
1 Delayed Supply of R1 Chan & Kumarswamy, (1997), Zou, Zhang &
equipment/equipment parts Wang, (2006, 2007)
causing delay
2 Unrealistic time estimates of R7 Chan & Kumarswamy, 1997, Zou, Zhang &
activities and duration of the Wang, (2006), (2007), Banaitiene & Banaitis,
project causing time overrun (2012), Jayasudha&Vidivelli, 2016, Xiong
et. al (2017) and Chan et. al (2011)
3 Delay in approval of design and R5 Zou, Zhang & Wang, (2006), 2007, Xu et al,
drawings causing delay in (2010), Banaitiene&Banaitis, (2012),
project Jayasudha&Vidivelli, (2016), Xiong et. al
(2017) and Chan et. al (2011),
4 Contractor having inadequate R3 Zou, Zhang & Wang, 2006, 2007,
workmen to carry out work Doraiswamy et al, (2015) &Sambasivam&
resulting in delay. Soon (2007), Jayasudha&Vidivelli, 2016,
Xiong et. al (2017) and Chan et. al (2011),
Datta & Mukherjee, 2001
5 Poor Subcontractor performance R8 Zou, Zhang & Wang, (2006), 2007, Xu et al,
leading to time and cost overrun. (2010), Doraiswamy et al, 2015
&Sambasivam& Soon (2007)
6 Work Fronts/ shutdown not R16 Considered in discussion with experts
being made available in time
creating delay in the start of
activity, finally resulting in time
overrun.
7 Inadequate checking and R33 Suggested by respondents of pilot survey
interfacing among different
packages leading to rework and
time overrun
8 Contractor developed financial R6 Zou, Zhang & Wang, (2006), Banaitiene &
problems during the project Banaitis, (2012), Jayasudha&Vidivelli,
causing delay. (2016), Datta & Mukherjee, (2001)
9 Inadequate Safety provisions R2 Wang et al.2004, Zou, Zhang & Wang,
leading to accidents and (2006), Jayasudha &Vidivelli, (2016)
resulting in delay
10 Improper cost estimates (due to R4 Wang et al.(2004), Zou, Zhang & Wang,
lack of knowledge/ information (2006, 2007), Xu et al, (2010), Banaitiene &
gap) , resulting in cost overrun Banaitis, (2012), Xiong et. al (2017) and
Chan et. al (2011)
11 Inadequate Project Planning R11 Chan &K’swamy, (1997), Wang et al.(2004),
with poorly/ inadequately Zou, Zhang & Wang, (2006, 2007),
defined tasks and their Doraiswamy et al, (2015) &Sambasivam&
Soon (2007), Jayasudha&Vidivelli, (2016)
Contd.
212
requirement affecting the
project.
12 Increase in scope due to addl. R21 Chan &K’swamy, (1997), Zou, Zhang &
requirement causing cost and Wang, (2006, 2007), Doraiswamy et al,
time overrun (2015) &Sambasivam & Soon (2007)
Chan &K’swamy,
13 Unforeseen ground condition R20
Contd.(1997),
leading to delay in project Jayasudha&Vidivelli, 2016, Considered in
schedule. discussion with experts
14 Delay in arranging for necessary R27 Doraiswamy et al, 2015 &Sambasivam&
construction equipment/ cranes Soon (2007), Considered in discussion with
by the contractor. experts.
15 Inexperienced Contractor R12 Chan &K’swamy, (1997),
causing delay Banaitiene&Banaitis, (2012), Doraiswamy et
al, (2015) &Sambasivam & Soon (2007)
16 Not adequate skilled manpower R17 Chan &K’swamy, (1997), Zou, Zhang &
available for the project manager Wang, (2006, 2007), Doraiswamy et al,
in the project leading to (2015) &Sambasivam & Soon (2007)
inadequate supervision resulting
in lack of quality
(Compiled by Author)
Most of the critical risks identified in this study have also found mention in other
studies as is evident from the above table. However, risks like “Workfronts/ Shutdown
not being made available in time…” and “Unforeseen ground condition …” are typical
construction projects in steel plants are usually divided into a number of small
projects/packages which are very much interlinked and in brownfield case such
interlinking on many occasions are with the existing facilities. This interfacing or lack
of it often generates risk. While identifying and assessing risks, the respondents felt
that the risk of “Inadequate checking of interface….”is equally applicable and relevant
to the brownfield projects in steel plants. Thus the study tried to address some of the
characteristic risks of brownfield construction projects over and above the other
The literatures in the area of construction project risks and project complexity have
progressed well over the years. However, their respective progress have taken paths
213
which are largely independent. Though some of the complexity attributes/ indicators
have found their place in the consideration of risks but as concepts their linkages have
not been observed in the available literature. Thus this study has made an effort to link
these two theoretical concepts. The positive correlation suggests that projects with
The concept of risk response through the response strategies of Avoid, Transfer,
Mitigate and Accept (both active and passive) is available in almost all the literatures
relating to project risk management. In fact some of the literatures have even
highlighted some actions covering the above mentioned strategies. The previous
have not dealt with the factors responsible for the choice of and action under a specific
risk response. In categorizing the factors responsible for selection of a specific response
strategy and working under that strategy into two broad areas of Human and Systemic,
this study has made an attempt to visualize the relative importance of these factors in
B. Practical Contribution
The present study has important contribution through its findings for the construction
the organisations. The responses also highlighted the lack of documentation with
respect to the response plan. It has also been observed from the responses that the
periodicity of review of response plan has large variance- starting from no review to
214
half yearly review clearly indicating non-uniform level of risk management. Only one
organization out of the 8 organisations from where respondents are taken, have
structured process of risk management. This highlights the need for proper risk
The fact that the results have shown similar importance for both systemic response
factors and human response factors in responding to risk leads to put thrust in two major
areas:
a) Skill Development
b) System Development
a) Skill development
i) Technical skill of the project manager and his project team – part of it is the
up. This may be possible either with the background of the project manager
ii) Managerial skill of the project manager – this may be developed through
iii) Leadership skill of the project manager – this may be developed through
215
b) System development
This area is quite an overlooked area where in most of the organization either
they lack a system or lack in proper implementation of the system. The present
study has considered three areas under systemic factors which requires system
development.
general and project risks in particular. Changes and Change Orders are
Proper system for change and change order generation can help avoid or
reduce major risks of delay. In similar way systems for timebound approval
risks.
existing ground condition and presence of any underground facility will help
Sites.
216
iii) Availability of proper information system – Developing a proper project
transferring or even reducing the risk. Most of the time it is the lack of
documentation that leads to risk event taking place in projects. For the
existing facilities (in the form of Linkage Diagram) will help in managing
in a project serves as a major tool for risk management. The presence of risk
all risks encountered and actions taken to respond to the risks with the
resources deployed need to be carried out for all the projects. These Lessons
217
C. Social Contribution
Though to a very limited extent but the findings of the study has got some
implication at a larger social level. In the National Steel Policy, 2017 it has been
envisaged that India has to achieve a production level of 300 Million tonnes by
2030-31. In order to achieve this the organisations will need to augment their
projects. This is due to the fact that getting land for greenfield projects will
gradually become impossible. Even the projects will be more complex in future
Therefore it will require more competent project managers and engineers and
more robust system to handle risks in such projects. The findings of the
national level.
The research study has tried to capture some aspects project risks in brownfield
construction projects in steel plants but could not capture all the aspects of this type of
construction projects due to lack of time and due to limited scope. The areas where this
218
i) The consideration of this research is based on brownfield construction
project in steel plants which has made the study limited to one area of
also help in finding out any possible variations in the results and the reasons
thereof.
ii) This study has established a positive correlation between project complexity
and criticality of risk. Further study can be conducted to analyse the causal
iii) This study has made a comprehensive analysis based on the Human
iv) The study has adopted project complexity as a lens through which it has
studied the risk criticality and level of risk response factor influence for
The academic endeavor which began with the objective of identifying and managing
risks in brownfield construction projects in steel plants is a long and arduous one. The
219
Yet the research has brought forth interesting findings that can contribute positively to
both the industry and academia at large. The thesis has tried to sustain the scope of
220
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: