Construction delays causing risks on time and cost - A critical review

Abstract

There is an increase in the number of construction projects experiencing extensive delays leading to exceeding the initial time and cost budget. This paper reviews 41 studies around the world which has surveyed the delay factors and classified them into Groups. The main purpose of this paper is to review research which has categorized the causes responsible for time delays and cost overruns in projects. The intention was to see whether these causes are valid for projects being executed in Sabah East Malaysia allowing a mitigation plan to be prepared. The collected list has 113 causes for delays which were categorized into 18 different groups. Most of the research has analysed the responses from Questionnaire surveys. The collected data are used to rank the problem factors. The data are further used to investigate and analyse the reported "Importance Index, Frequency Index, Severity Index, Relative Importance Index, Relative Importance Weight, Weighted Average, Mean, Standard Deviation and Variance". The collective comparison has revealed that the ranking given by all the researchers is not the same. Further each and every study has different rank ratings from different group. This review paper attempts to provide an updated compilation of the earlier studies on ranking of the delay causers, which are never similar and constant for universal projects. From the critical review, it is concluded that this type of research requires a different method or approach to generate meaningful answers and that there is a strong case against opinion surveys.

Full text

Construction Delays Causing Risks on Time and
Cost - a Critical Review
Chidambaram Ramanathan, SP Narayanan and Arazi B Idrus, (Universiti Teknologi
Petronas, Malaysia)
Abstract
There is an increase in the number of construction projects experiencing extensive delays
leading to exceeding the initial time and cost budget. This paper reviews 41 studies around the
world which has surveyed the delay factors and classified them into Groups. The main purpose
of this paper is to review research which has categorized the causes responsible for time delays
and cost overruns in projects. The intention was to see whether these causes are valid for
projects being executed in Sabah East Malaysia allowing a mitigation plan to be prepared. The
collected list has 113 causes for delays which were categorized into 18 different groups. Most of
the research has analysed the responses from Questionnaire surveys. The collected data are
used to rank the problem factors. The data are further used to investigate and analyse the
reported “Importance Index, Frequency Index, Severity Index, Relative Importance Index,
Relative Importance Weight, Weighted Average, Mean, Standard Deviation and Variance”. The
collective comparison has revealed that the ranking given by all the researchers is not the
same. Further each and every study has different rank ratings from different group. This review
paper attempts to provide an updated compilation of the earlier studies on ranking of the delay
causers, which are never similar and constant for universal projects. From
the critical review, it
is concluded that this type of research requires a different method or approach to generate
meaningful answers and that there is a strong case against opinion surveys.
Keywords: Construction delays, Cost risk, Time risk, Project Management
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to critically review and identify the applicability of past studies on
determining the factors causing time delays and cost overrun in current projects. This goal has
been accomplished by reviewing articles published during the last 15 years (since 1995) in
various project management journals like: International Journal of Project Management (IJPM),
Journal of Construction Management Economics (JCME), Journal of Management in
Engineering (JME), Engineering Construction and Architectural Management Journal (ECAMJ)
and others.
The biggest customer of the construction industry in most countries is the government (Okpala
and Aiekwu, 1988). To the dislike of owners, contractors and consultants, many government
projects experience extensive delays and thereby exceed the initial time and cost estimates
(Odeh and Bataineh, 2002). This problem is more evident in the traditional type of contracts in
which the contract is awarded to the lowest bidder. This procurement strategy is adopted by
majority of government projects in developing countries. The Latham Report (Latham, 1994)
suggested that ensuring timely delivery of projects is one of the important needs of clients of the
construction industry. Severe criticisms of the industry arise if it takes much longer than the
stipulated project time (Bennett et al., 1979; Flanagan et al., 1986). Completing projects on time
is an indicator of an efficient construction industry (NEDO, 1988). Contractors are primarily

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
38
concerned with quality, time and cost and yet the majority of construction projects are procured
on the basis of only two of these parameters, namely time and cost (Bennet and Grice, 1990).
The literature emphasises time as an indicator for project success.
The construction process can be divided into three important phases, i.e. project conception,
project design and project construction. Usually, the vast majority of project delays occur during
the ‘construction’ phase, where many unforeseen factors are always involved (Chan and
Kumaraswamy, 1997). In construction, delay could be defined as the time overrun either beyond
completion date specified in a contract, or beyond the date that the parties agreed upon for the
delivery of a project. It is a project slipping over its planned schedule and this is a common
problem in construction projects. To the owner, delay means loss of revenue through non
availability of production facilities and rentable space or a dependence on present facilities. In
some cases, delay causes higher overhead costs to the contractor because of longer work
period, higher material costs through inflation, and due to labour cost increases. Completing
projects on time is an indicator of efficiency, but the construction process is subject to many
variables and unpredictable factors, which result from many sources. The sources are the
performance of parties, resources availability, environmental conditions, involvement of other
parties, and contractual relations, and the completion of a project within the specified time is
rare (Assaf, 2006).
Cost and schedule overruns occur due to wide range of factors. If project costs or schedules
exceed their planned targets, client satisfaction would be compromised. The funding profile no
longer matches the budget requirement and further slippage in the schedule could result (Kaliba
et al., 2009). According to Ahmed et al. (2002), delays on construction projects are a universal
phenomenon and road construction projects are no exception. Delays are usually accompanied
by cost overruns. These have a debilitating effect on contractors and consultants in terms of
growth in adversarial relationships, mistrust, litigation, arbitration, cash-flow problems, and a
general feeling of trepidation towards other stakeholders (
Ahmed et al., 2002). This problem is
not unique to developed countries and is being experienced in most of the developing
economies.
When projects are delayed, they are either extended or accelerated and therefore, incur
additional cost. The normal practices usually allow a percentage of the project cost as a
contingency allowance in the contract price and this allowance is usually based on judgment
(Akinsola, 1996). Although the contract parties agree upon the extra time and cost associated
with delay, in many cases there are problems between the owner and contractor as to whether
the contractor is entitled to claim the extra cost. Such situations result in questioning facts,
causal factors and contract interpretations (Alkass et al., 1996). Therefore, delays in
construction projects cause dissatisfaction to all parties involved and the main role of the project
manager is to make sure that projects are completed within the budgeted time and cost.
Several studies have been undertaken on factors causing delays and cost overruns, and
affecting quality, safety and productivity, etc. and specific problems in special types of projects.
These studies usually focus on specific aspects of project performance. Practitioners need to
develop the capacity to foresee potential problems likely to confront their current and future
projects. Identification of the common problems experienced on past projects in their
construction business environment is a good option (Long et al., 2004).
Frimpong et al. (2003) revealed that project management tools and techniques play an
important role in the effective management of a project. PMBOK defines Project Management
as the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities to meet the
project requirements (PMI, 2008). Project management involves managing the resources—

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
39
workers, machines, money, materials and methods used (Giridhar and Ramesh, 1998). Some
projects are effectively and efficiently managed while others are mismanaged, incurring much
delay and cost overruns. Any construction project comprises two distinct phases: the
preconstruction phase (the period between the initial conceptions of the project to awarding of
the contract) and the construction phase (period from awarding the contract to when the actual
construction is completed). Delays and cost overruns occur in both phases. However the major
instances of project overruns usually take place in the construction phase (Frimpong et al.,
2003).
Unfortunately, due to various reasons, project successes are not common in the construction
industry, especially in developing countries. From several studies and empirical evidence it is
clear that project overruns comprising delays and cost overruns occur during the ‘construction’
phase. Therefore, professionals and scholars have been motivated to take steps to meet this
challenge.
Review of Construction Delays across the World
Realistic ‘construction time’ has become increasingly important because it often serves as a
crucial benchmark for assessing the performance of a project and the efficiency of the
contractor (Kumaraswamy and Chan, 2002). This study aims to identify the uncertainties and to
foresee potential problems likely to confront the current and future projects, helping project
teams to be proactive in managing their projects in which potential problems are fully anticipated
(Long et al., 2004).
Research literature from all around the world has been collated and consolidated for the better
understanding and to conceive the overall picture of the issues. This critical review is presented
in five sections; Firstly Identification of Factors and Category, Secondly the Research
Methodology adopted in earlier studies (reorganizing and tabulating the data from literature),
Thirdly Analysis of Data, Fourthly Results and discussions and Fifthly Conclusions.
Identification of Factors and Category
The factors identified in the research articles are collated and grouped into 18 categories. The
set of factors studied by different authors are collected and presented in Table 1. Different
authors focus on selected categories for study and analysis. Table 1 tabulates the type of effect
studied by different authors and the respective category as classified in their studies. From the
review it is observed that certain factors have been categorized under different Groups by
different authors. This has been tabulated in detail and discussed in following section of this
paper.
Category
No.
Category
No. of
causes /
factors /
problems
Type of Effect
Studied
References
1
Financier
4
Time delay
Long et.al 2004
3
Time delay
Assaf et.al. 1995
2
Project
6
Time delay
Assaf and Hejji 2006
5
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
3
Project Attributes
8
Time and cost
overrun
Long et.al 2004

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
40
Table 1 cont’
Category
No.
Category
No. of
causes /
factors /
problems
Type of Effect
Studied
References
4
Owner / Client
10
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
10
Time and cost
overrun
Long et.al 2004
5
Time delay
Alaghbari et.al. 2007
4
Time delay
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
4
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
5
Contractor
13
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
17
Time and cost
overrun
Long et.al 2004
12
Time delay
Alaghbari et.al. 2007
6
Time and cost
overrun
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
4
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
6
Consultant
7
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
7
Time and cost
overrun
Long et.al 2004
6
Time delay
Alaghbari et.al. 2007
4
Time and cost
overrun
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
7
Design
8
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
3
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
8
Coordination
7
Time and cost
overrun
Long et.al 2004
9
Materials
7
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
2
Time and cost
overrun
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
4
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
5
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf et.al. 1995
10
Plant / Equipment
5
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
1
Time delay
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
4
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
5
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf et.al. 1995

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
41
Table 1 cont’
Category
No.
Category
No. of
causes /
factors /
problems
Type of Effect
Studied
References
11
Labour /
Manpower
5
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
2
Time and cost
overrun
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
4
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
3
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf et.al. 1995
12
Environment
9
Time and cost
overrun
Long, et.al 2004
4
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf et.al. 1995
13
Contract
2
Time & cost
disputes
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
14
Contractual
relationships
3
Time & cost
effects
Odeh & Battaineh, 2002
14
Time delay
Assaf et.al. 1995
15
External
12
Time and cost
overrun
Assaf and Hejji 2006
4
Time delay
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
2
Time overrun
Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997
8
Time delay
Alaghbari et.al. 2007
16
Changes
7
Time delay
Assaf et.al. 1995
17
Scheduling &
Controlling
11
Time delay
Assaf et.al. 1995
18
Government
relations
4
Time delay
Assaf et.al. 1995
Table 1 Factors and Categories
Research Methodology
Chan and Kumaraswamy (1997) adopted a Questionnaire survey with 83 hypothesized delay
factors which was designed in late 1994 on the basis of a pilot survey. The 83 factors have been
grouped into eight major factor categories. Odeh and Battaineh (2002), Frimpong et al (2003),
Long et al (2004), Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006), Abdul-Rahman et al. (2006), Sambasivan and
Soon (2007), Alaghbari et al. (2007), Adnan (2008), and Kaliba et al. (2009) also designed their
research methodologies with questionnaire surveys comprising individual set of well recognized
causes of delay.
The questionnaires were designed to evaluate the frequency of occurrence, severity and the
importance of the identified causes (Assaf, 2006). The questionnaire was distributed to
Contractors, Consultants and Clients. In the field survey the respondents were asked to indicate
the level of importance of each cause using five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not important)

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
42
to 5 (extremely important). The number of firms that completed and returned the questionnaire
sets are listed in Table 2 and graphically represented in Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1 shows the
total number of questionnaires distributed and the total responses of the individual study.
Figure 2 shows the response rate of individual sectors of respondents in Percentage.
Questionnaire Design and Methods:
The Questionnaire study adopted by each author has a different approach. They have been
designed based on previous literature, current construction practice, personal experience and
location of the project.
Assaf et al. (1995) conducted the investigation in two phases. The first phase included a
literature search and interviews. The first phase identified 56 causes of delay. In the second
phase a questionnaire was developed using these delay causes. His scope was limited to large
public building projects in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. The total population consisted
of contractors, architects/engineers (A/Es), and public owners (Government agencies).
Chan and Kumaraswamy conducted two studies in 1997 and 2002. In the earlier study, a pilot
study was carried out in early 1994 to investigate the principal causes of construction delay of
both building and civil engineering projects which were completed in Hong Kong between 1990
and 1993. The latter survey was supplemented by site visits by industry experts with the aim of
identifying the principal factors facilitating faster construction in Hong Kong projects.
Odeh and Battaineh (2002) distributed the questionnaire to a random sample of 100 contractors
and 50 consultants representing different specializations in large projects. The sample size of
each specialization is proportional to the distribution of the population of the different
specializations. Given the sample size, the samples were selected randomly from the population
in each specialization. Sambasivan and Soon (2007) adopted the same method in their study on
the causes and effects of construction delays.
Long et al. (2004) developed their questionnaire survey to investigate several issues relating to
large construction projects focusing only on the problems experienced. To suit the Vietnam
construction conditions, the preliminary questionnaire was pilot tested. Six experienced
professionals in the Vietnam construction industry were involved in the pilot test. Their
comments were used to revise and prepare the final questionnaire. Responses to the
questionnaire were then collected and analysed. The analysis included ranking the problems in
terms of degree of occurrence and level of influence.
Frimpong et al. (2003) developed a questionnaire of 26 factors designed from previous
preliminary investigations conducted in groundwater drilling projects between 1970 and 1999 in
Ghana. The questionnaire was directed towards three groups in both public and private
organisations: owners of the groundwater projects, consulting offices, and contractors working
in the groundwater works.
Alaghbari et al. (2007) distributed the questionnaire among government bodies, main
contractors, consultants and developers who were connected with the building systems
construction projects. In order to accomplish this, the researchers contacted professional
institutions, agents and government bodies. The sample was restricted to building system
companies. The respondents were contractors, consultant, developers, subcontractors,
engineers and architects who were involved in building system construction projects.

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
43
All the other studies were conducted by the random sampling of the three principal construction
parties (Owners, Consultant and Contractor).
Figure 1 Total number of questionnaires distributed and response
Figure 2 Response rate for different categories for the Questionnaire
144
287
125
60
200
200
60
502
450
320
150
400
164
285
110
180
57
109
72
30
150
166
37
78
187
82
147
22
87
91
143
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
No. of Questionnaire
Total Respondents
Total Distributed
40%
38%
58%
50%
75%
83%
7%
17%
58%
55%
37%
13%
31%
83%
79%
26%
33%
39%
45%
30%
14%
23%
29%
7%
33%
32%
26%
32%
70%
19%
40%
77%
32%
59%
40%
42%
35%
23%
43%
67%
37%
23%
40%
34%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Authors surveyed
Overall Owner Consultant Contractor

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1)
37-57
44
Sl.
No
.
Description of
study
Questionnaires distributed
Questionnaire Respondents
Proportional Response Rate*
References
Total
Owners
Consultant
s
Contractor
s
Total
Owner
s
Consultant
s
Contractor
s
Overall
Owner
Consulta
nt
Contractor
1
Causes of delay
144
27
51
66
57
15
19
23
40%
26%
33%
40%
Assaf and Hejji
2006
2
Large projects in
Vietnam
287
82
85
120
109
36
27
46
38%
33%
32%
42%
Long et.al 2004
3
Causes of delay
Ghana Case study
125
55
30
40
72
28
19
25
58%
39%
26%
35%
Frimpong et.al
2003
4
Risk in D&B
Projects in
Malaysia
60
-
-
-
30
-
-
-
50%
-
-
-
Adnan et.al 2008
5
Causes and
effects of delay in
Malaysian projects
200
100
50
50
150
67
48
35
75%
45%
32%
23%
Sambasivan &
Soon, 2007
6
Quantify schedule
risk in projects
200
-
-
-
166
-
-
-
83%
-
-
-
Luu et.al. 2009
7
Schedule delays
and cost
escalation in
Zambia projects
60
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
30%
70%
43%
Kaliba et.al. 2009
8
Delay Mitigation in
Malaysian projects
502
8
81
413
37
5
7
25
7%
14%
19%
67%
Abdul-Rahman
et.al. 2006
9
Factors causing
delays in Malaysia
450
-
-
-
78
-
-
-
17%
23%
40%
37%
Alaghbari et.al.
2007
10
Schedule delay
causes in BOT
320
-
-
-
187
-
-
-
58%
-
-
-
Yang et.al. 2010
11
Delays in
Traditional
contracts
150
100
50
82
63
19
55%
-
77%
23%
Odeh & Battaineh,
2002
12
Time overrun in
HongKong
400
-
-
-
147
50
49
48
37%
-
-
-
Chan &
Kumaraswamy
1997
13
Compressing
duration Hong
Kong
164
-
-
-
22
-
-
-
13%
-
-
-
Chan &
Kumaraswamy
2002
14
Delay and cost
overrun in
Vietnam
285
-
-
-
87
-
-
-
31%
-
-
-
Le-Hoai. et. al.
2008
15
Delay in Jordan
Projects
110
30
30
50
91
26
29
36
83%
29%
32%
40%
Sweis et.al. 2007
16
Time, cost and
quality managt.
180
30
90
60
143
10
84
49
79%
7%
59%
34%
Bowen et.al. 2002
Table 2 Details of the Questionnaire distribution in various studies and their response
* The decimals more than 0.5 are rounded to next whole number

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1)
37-57
45
Data Analysis
Abbreviation
Proposed Expression
Parameters
Reference
Place of
study
Importance Index
I
Where I = importance index; ai =
constant expressing the weight
of the ith response, where ai =
0,1,2,3 for I = 1,2,3,4,
respectively; xi = frequency of
the ith response given as a
percentage of the total response
for each cause; i = response
ategory index.
Assaf et.al. 1995
Saudi Arabia
Rank correlation coefficient
Where, D= difference between
ranks given by one party and the
rank given by another party for
an individual cause and N=
umber of cause or groups.
Assaf et.al. 1995
Saudi Arabia
Relative Importance Index
RII
where w = weighting given to
each factor by the
respondentsand ranges from 1 to
5 where '1' is 'not significant' and
'5' is 'extremely significant', A =
highest weight (i.e. 5 in this
case), and N = total number of
respondents.
Chan &
Kumaraswamy, 1997
Hong Kong
Relative Importance Index
RII
where r = rating given to each
factor by the respondents and
ranges from 1 to 5 where '1' is
'not significant' and '5' is
'extremely significant', A =
highest rating (i.e. 5 in this case),
and N = total number of
respondents.
Chan &
Kumaraswamy, 2002
Hong Kong
Relative Importance Index
RII
Where i = response category
index, Wi = the weight assigned
to the ith resonse. Xi = frequency
of the ith response given as
percentage of the total
responses for each case.
Odeh & Battaineh,
2002
Jordan
Relative Importance Weight
RIW
where: xj=the sum of the jth
factor; j=the factors 1, 2, 3, 4, . .
.. . .N; N=total number of factors
(26); ai=constant expressing the
weight given to the ith response:
i=1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Frimpong et al. 2003
Ghana
Frequency Index (%)
F.I. (%)
a is the constant expressing
weighting given to each
response (ranges from 1 for
Assaf and Hejji 2006
Saudi Arabia

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1)
37-57
46
rarely up to 4 for always), n is the
frequency of the responses, and
N is total number of
responses.
Severity Index (%)
S.I. (%)
a is the constant expressing
weighting given to each
response (ranges from 1 for
rarely up to 4 for always), n is the
frequency of the responses, and
N is total number of
responses.
Assaf and Hejji 2006
Saudi Arabia
Importance Index (%)
IMP.I. (%)
Assaf and Hejji 2006
Saudi Arabia
Relative Importance Index
RII
where w = weighting given to
each factor by the
respondentsand ranges from 1 to
5 where '1' is 'not significant' and
'5' is 'extremely significant', A =
highest weight (i.e. 5 in this
case), and N = total number of
respondents.
Sambasivan & Soon
2007
Malaysia
Mean Score
MS
Where MS is the mean score, f is
the frequency of responses to
each rating (1-4), s is the score
given to each factor by the
respondents (ranges from 1 to
4), and N is the total number of
responses concerning that factor
Alaghbari et al. 2007
Malaysia
Frequency Index (%)
F.I. (%)
a = constant expressing the
weight assigned to each
responses (ranges from 0 for No
happen to 4 for Always), n =
frequency of each response, N =
total number of responses.
Le-Hoai et al. 2008
Vietnam
Severity Index (%)
S.I. (%)
a = constant expressing the
weight assigned to each
responses (ranges from 0 for No
happen to 4 for Always), n =
frequency of each response, N =
total number of responses.
Le-Hoai et al. 2008
Vietnam
Relative Importance Index
RII
Le-Hoai et al. 2008
Vietnam
Table 3 Data Analysis Expressions used for various studies reported in literature.

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
47
Analysis of Data
Each and every study has a different scope and different conclusions. Hence, different
approaches have been used and the data analysed with different expressions. Table 3 includes
the expressions used by individual researchers to produce the results to meet the set
objectives. It shows the data analysis approaches with abbreviations and the equations used to
calculate the results. The table explains the parameters used in the expressions. The place
where the study was performed is denoted in column 6 of the Table 6.
Results and Discussions
The data from the responses were analyzed by the authors of each and every study and the
groups were ranked as shown in Table 4. It has collective listing of 18 different
Groups/Category. The respective rankings results of the studies have been summarized to
obtain an over view on the Groups that are highly responsible for the project delays.
The review findings shows that the group and factor ranking differs based on the location like
Hong Kong, Jordan, Vietnam, etc. Sambasivan and Soon (2007) stated that “the effects of
delays in construction projects can be country-specific” whereas other studies has proven that
project characteristics may even be region-specific. None of the studies is comparable to any
other and each study has different rankings for the groups/categories/sources of the delays and
cost overruns. The groups most influential in earlier studies (in 1995) are now (2010) not
considered high risk factors. The possible variations in the ranking results are most unlikely to
be because of the different respondents. Table 4 clearly outlines that the studies have yielded
different results. Even Sambasivan & Soon (2007) adopting the same 28 factors derived by
Odeh & Battaineh (2002) has obtained different results of group influence and their responsible
levels. Figure 3 shows the scatter diagram of the ranks obtained from the various related
studies.
As there is no correlation in the ranking of the different studies, the first five rankings influencing
project delays and cost overruns from the entire set of results of each author has been
collected. In the different studies the groups with Rank 1 to Rank 5 has been listed. The groups
which appear more than once have been identified. This is tabulated in Table 5.
Even though the groups like Owner (Rank 1), Contractor (Rank 2), Design related and Plant and
Equipments (Rank 3), Labour (Rank 4) and Consultant and Contractual relationships (Rank 5)
fall more frequently within the first 5 rank category, other groups like Finance related, Materials,
Schedule and Controlling, Coordination, Changes are also found in some studies but occurs
only once in the collated studies. So out of all 18 categories 7 categories appears among the
first five ranks and other 11 categories are rated consistently below Rank 5. This provides an
overall view of the study, and is shown in Table 5.
The critical review has resulted in a consolidated list of factors/causes and their ranking (Table
6). This review study has identified 113 factors from the studies discussed in this article.
Further analysis ranked all these factors according to the results in the respective studies.
Table 6 compares the results of ten studies in 12 different sectors of the projects. The
corresponding Factors and their Group wise categories are mentioned in the last column of the
table 6. This comparative study brings together the results of various studies and combines the
Factors / Causes, Ranking and Group classification.
The serial numbers in row 1 of table 6 represents authors, whose details are as follows:
Column [1] Assaf et.al. 1995, col.[2] Chan & Kumaraswamy 1997, col. [3] Odeh & Battaineh

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
48
2002, col.[4] Frimpong et.al. 2003, col.[5] Long, et.al 2004, col. [6] Sambasivan& Soon 2007,
col.[7] Alaghbari et al. 2007, col.[8] Le-Hoai. et al. 2008, col.[9] Luu et al. 2009 and col.[10]
Tumi et al. 2009. Also (a) indicates “Contractor”, (b) “Consultants”, (c) “Occurrence” and (d)
“Influence”.
From the list of factors obtained in Table 6 from the previous studies, the first five important
causes of delay and cost overruns in different developing countries are determined and
summarized in Table 7.
The problem of delays in the construction industry is a global phenomenon. In Saudi Arabia,
Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006) found that only 30% of construction projects were completed within
the scheduled completion dates and that the average time overrun was between 10% and 30%.
In Nigeria, Ajanlekoko (1987) observed that the performance of the construction industry in
terms of time was poor. Odeyinka and Yusif (1997) have shown that seven out of ten projects
surveyed in Nigeria suffered delays in their execution. Ogunlana and Promkuntong (1996)
conducted a study on construction delays in Thailand. Al-Momani (2000) carried out a
quantitative analysis on construction delays in Jordan. Frimpong et al. (2003) conducted a
survey to identify and evaluate the relative importance of the significant factors contributing to
delay and cost overruns in Ghana groundwater construction projects. Chan and Kumaraswamy
(1997) studied delays in Hong Kong construction industry.
Conclusions
The critical review undertaken in this paper covers research studies in the area of construction
delay with time and cost risks. Totally 18 categories of causes were identified from the various
related studies reported in the literature. These 18 categories or Groups are (1) Finance-
related, (2) Project-related, (3) Project Attributes, (4) Owner/Client, (5) Contractor, (6)
Consultant, (7) Design-related, (8) Coordination, (9) Materials, (10) Plant/Equipment, (11)
Labour/Manpower, (12) Environment, (13) Contract-related, (14) Contractual relationships, (15)
External, (16) Changes, (17) Scheduling & Controlling and (18) Governmental relationship.
Generally, all the research studies were conducted by questionnaire surveys using randomly
sampled responses and analysis of data obtained from the responses.
The review study has
ranked the responsible groups by combining the analysis results which are: Owner (Rank 1),
Contractor (Rank 2), Design related and Plant and Equipments (Rank 3), Labour (Rank 4) and
Consultant and Contractual relationships (Rank 5). These fall into the first 5 rank categories.
Each study has a unique approach and unique results are derived from the questionnaire
response data. Various indices like Importance Index (I), Rank Correlation Coefficient, Relative
Importance Index (RII), Frequency Index (FI), Severity Index (SI) and Mean Score (MS) have
been determined to assess the impact of the Factors at various angles based on the
requirement for the project.
Each study has rated the groups or factors with Ranks of influence. These ranks are compared
for better understanding. But two studies have similar rating of ranks. Each and every Group in
the various studies arrived at different weights of Ranks. It would appear that the Groups and
Factors causing delays are country, location and project specific and that there are no root
causes that can be generalised.

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
49
Sl.
No.
Group
Overall / Average Ranking Studied
Assaf
et.al.
1995
Chan&
Kumaraswamy,
1997
Odeh & Battaineh 2002
Long et.al 2004
Assaf and Hejji 2006
Sambasivan&
Soon 2007
Combined
Ranking
Contractors
Consultants
Occurrence
Influence
Frequency
Severity
Importance
1
Finance – related
1
-
-
-
7
7
-
-
-
-
2
Project – related
-
5
-
-
-
-
7
9
8
-
3
Project Attributes
-
-
-
-
6
5
-
-
-
-
4
Owner / Client – related
-
7
1
1
5
3
1
1
1
4
5
Contractor – related
-
1
3
2
2
4
2
2
2
1
6
Consultant – related
-
-
6
4
1
1
3
5
5
7
7
Design – related
-
2
-
-
-
-
5
3
3
-
8
Coordination
-
-
-
-
3
6
-
-
-
-
9
Materials
2
8
7
5
-
-
6
6
6
2
10
Plant/Equipments
7
6
2
3
-
-
9
7
9
3
11
Labour
6
3
2
3
-
-
4
4
4
3
12
Environment
9
-
-
-
4
2
-
-
-
-
13
Contract
-
-
4
7
-
-
-
-
-
6
14
Contractual
Relationship
3
5
6
-
-
-
-
-
5
15
External
-
4
8
8
-
-
8
8
7
8
16
Changes
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
17
Scheduling and Control
5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
18
Government
relationship
8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Table 4 Group rankings
Figure 4 Scatter diagram of rank distribution
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Ranks
Groups
Assaf,S.A, et.al. 1995
Chan,D.W.M & Kumaraswamy, M.M 1997
Odeh,A.M & Battaineh,H.T.2002 "Contractor"
Odeh,A.M & Battaineh,H.T.2002
"Consultants"
Long, N.D, et.al 2004 "Occurrence"
Long, N.D, et.al 2004 "Influence"

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
50
Research Study
Groups
Results
Place of
study
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Assaf et.al. 1995
Finance-related
Materials
Contractual
relationship
Changes
Schedule and
controlling
Overall
Saudi Arabia
Chan &
Kumaraswamy, 1997
Contractor
Design
Labour
External
Project – related
Overall
Hong Kong
Odeh & Battaineh,
2002
Owner
Plant and
Equipment
Contractor
Contract
Contractual
relationship
Contractor’s
response
Jordan
Owner
Contractor
Plant and
Equipments
Consultant
Materials
Consultant’s
response
Long et.al 2004
Consultant
Contractor
Coordination
Environment
Owner
Occurrence
Vietnam
Consultant
Environment
Owner
Contractor
Project
attributes
Influence
Assaf and Hejji, 2006
Owner
Contractor
Consultant
Labour
Design
Frequency
Saudi Arabia
Owner
Contractor
Design
Labour
Consultant
Severity
Owner
Contractor
Design
Labour
Consultant
Importance
Sambasivan & Soon,
2007
Contractor
Materials
Plant and
equipment
Owner
Contractual
relationship
Overall
Malaysia
Many occurrence (No.)
and %
Owner (5) 50%
Contractor (5)
50%
Design (2) + Plant
& Equipment (2)
40%
Labour (3)
30%
Consultant (2) &
Contr.
Relationship (2)
40%
Table 5 Factors securing the first five rank in different studies

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
51
Sl.
No.
Factors / Causes
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Groups
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
1
Slow payment for completed works
5
4
2
1
4
7
6
9
Financing
2
Contractor financial difficulties
2
5
14
5
2
4
4
4
Financing
3
Cash problems during construction
1
7
5
Financing
4
Inflation
4
Financing
5
Financial difficulties to owner
1
3
1
4
6
Necessary variations of works
8
7
Project
7
Obsolete technology
9
9
Project attributes
8
Unsatisfactory site compensation
10
7
Project attributes
9
Lack of involvement through project life
16
19
Project attributes
10
Incompetence project team
20
12
Project attributes
11
Slow site handover
5
8
12
Owner interference
2
4
20
13
Long waiting time for approval of drawings
3
Owner / Client
14
Client initiated variations
5
18
19
Owner / Client
15
Unrealistic contract durations imposed by client
13
13
6
18
24
Owner / Client
16
Unrealistic client initial requirement
20
Owner / Client
17
Low speed of decision making
4
8
5
26
13
8
4
Owner / Client
18
Slow site clearance difficulties
2
1
13
Owner / Client
19
Delays in subcontractors’ work
9
9
3
5
13
6
Contractor
20
Poor site management and supervision
11
5
13
17
2
5
1
11
6
Contractor
21
Unstable management structure and style of contractor
12
15
20
Contractor
22
Shortage of Technical, managerial and supervisory
personnel
15
20
7
4
14
Contractor
23
Construction method
5
17
15
13
8
Contractor
24
Improper planning
10
8
1
Contractor
25
Mistakes during construction
17
11
22
10
6
16
9
17
Contractor
26
Inadequate contractor experience
3
1
8
3
2
10
Contractor
27
Severe overtime
5
Contractor
28
Excessive contracts and subcontracts
18
11
Contractor
29
Lack of responsibilities
10
Contractor
30
Contract Management
12
7
19
11
Consultant
31
Delay in work approval
18
11
Consultant
32
Preparations and approval of drawings
21
19
16
Consultant
33
Quality assurance/Control
25
21
25
22
11
Consultant
34
Waiting for information
24
11
35
Long waiting time for approval of test samples of
material
16
18
15
25
23
11
Consultant
36
Poor contract management
2
Consultant
37
Supervision too late & slowness in making decision
3
15
11
38
Slow to give instructions
4
39
Lack of consultant’s experience
9
10
40
Poor project management assistance
2

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
52
Sl.
No.
Factors / Causes
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Groups
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
41
Delay in design information
2
Design - related
42
Inadequate design team experience
6
15
Design - related
43
Mistakes and discrepancies in design
7
10
3
Design - related
44
Impractical design
19
11
Design - related
45
Slow information flow between project team
10
17
Coordination
46
Lack of communication between consultant and
contractor
14
20
14
9
2
Coordination
47
Lack of communication between client and consultant
17
20
14
9
2
Coordination
48
Shortage
11
11
10
15
6
4
9
3
3
Materials
49
Change in type & Spec.
6
Materials
50
Procurement
3
Materials
51
Slow / late delivery
16
11
7
13
Materials
52
Damage in storage while needed at site
45
Materials
53
Delay in special manufacturer from foreign country
(Imported)
16
17
Materials
54
Quality
26
23
12
Materials
55
Escalation in prices
6
Materials
56
Difficulty in obtaining at official current prices
13
Materials
57
Failure
42
7
16
16
8
Plant/Equipments
58
Shortage/Availability
36
7
16
15
6
17
8
16
Plant/Equipments
59
Unskilled operators
50
Plant/Equipments
60
Slow / late delivery
41
11
Plant/Equipments
61
Poor productivity
41
Plant/Equipments
62
Shortage / Supply
27
16
12
21
7
19
Manpower
63
Labour skills/Productivity
27
1
9
11
19
Manpower
64
Nationality of labour
49
Manpower
65
Hot weather effect on construction activity
42
Environment
66
Rain / inclement weather effect on construction activity
55
18
23
24
8
27
20
12
21
Environment
67
Insufficient available utilities on site
51
Environment
68
Social and cultural factor
54
Environment
69
Project delivery systems used. (#)
33
17
Contract
70
Mistakes and discrepancies in contract documents
14
22
10
18
Contract
71
Deficiencies/inaccurate in cost estimates
10
12
15
8
Contract
72
Low warded bid price
14
7
Contract
73
Conflicts between contractor & consultant
20
21
Contractual Relationship
74
Uncooperative owner
9
Contractual Relationship
75
Slowness of owner’s decision–making process
2
19
26
Contractual Relationship
76
Joint owner ship of project
51
Contractual Relationship
77
Poor organization of contractor or consultant
11
22
18
25
Contractual Relationship
78
Difficulty of coordination with various parties in the
project
11
Contractual Relationship

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
53
Sl.
No.
Factors / Causes
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
Groups
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
79
Insufficient communication between the owner & design in
the design phase.
21
Contractual Relationship
80
Unavailability of professional construction management
31
Contractual Relationship
81
Controlling subcontractors by general contractors in
execution of works
6
Contractual Relationship
82
Unavailability of financial incentive for contractor to finish
ahead of schedule
32
Contractual Relationship
83
Negotiations and obtaining of contracts
46
Contractual Relationship
84
Legal disputes between various parties in the const. project
46
15
20
14
Contractual Relationship
85
Problems with neighbors
28
27
28
External
86
Unforeseen ground conditions
24
25
23
18
6
External
87
Fraudulent practices and kickbacks
11
External
88
Price fluctuation
12
10
89
Design changes by owner
9
19
26
3
13
21
5
14
Changes
90
Design changes made by designers (*)
14
3
13
21
5
14
Changes
91
Foundation conditions encountered in the field
33
1
Changes
92
Mistakes in soil investigation
27
16
Changes
93
Water table conditions on site
24
Changes
94
Geological problems on site
46
12
Changes
95
Errors committed during field construction on site
27
Changes
96
Inaccurate time estimates
1
3
1
Scheduling & Control
97
Planning and scheduling deficiencies
8
13
6
Scheduling & Control
98
Preparation and approval of shop drawing
11
Scheduling & Control
99
Waiting for sample materials approval
27
Scheduling & Control
100
Preparation of schedule networks and revisions by
consultant during construction
33
Scheduling & Control
101
Lack of training personnel and management support to
model construction operation
24
Scheduling & Control
102
Lack of database in estimating activity duration and
resources
16
Scheduling & Control
103
Poor judgment and experience of involved people in
estimating time and resources
6
Scheduling & Control
104
Inadequate early planning of project
16
Scheduling & Control
105
Inspection and testing procedures used in project
36
Scheduling & Control
106
Application of quality control based on foreign specification
42
Scheduling & Control
107
Traffic control regulation practiced at site
53
Scheduling & Control
108
Accident during construction
56
Scheduling & Control
109
Inadequate control procedures
19
Scheduling & Control
110
Obtaining permits from Government
21
4
2
21
Govt. relations
111
Obtaining permits from labourers
24
21
Govt. relations
112
Excessive bureaucracy in project-owner operation
11
8
14
7
Govt. relations
113
Building codes used in design of projects
8
27
28
26
Govt. relations
Table 6 Consolidated list of Factors / Causes and their Ranking
* (Due to unfamiliarity with local conditions and environment)
# (Design & Build, General Contracting, turnkey, etc.)

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
54
Major Causes
Author
1
2
3
4
5
Vietnam (a)
Poor site
management and
supervision
Poor site
management and
assistance
Financial difficulties of
owner
Financial difficulties of
contractor
Design Change
Le-Hoai et. al. 2007
Malaysia (b)
Improper planning
Site management
Inadequate contractor
experience
Finance and
payments of
completed works
Subcontractors
Sambasivan, 2007
Jordan (b)
Financial difficulties
faced by the
contractor
Too many change
order from the owner
Poor planning and
scheduling by the
contractor
Presence of unskilled
labours
Shortage of Technical
professionals with the
contractor
Sweis, 2007
South Korea (b)
Public interruptions
Changed site
conditions
Failure to provide site
Unrealistic time
estimation
Design Error
Acharya et al. 2006
Hong Kong (b)
Inadequate resources
due to contractor/lack
of capital
Unforeseen ground
conditions
Exceptionally low bids
Inexperienced
contractor
Works in conflict with
existing Utility
Lo, 2006
UAE (b)
Preparation and
approval of drawings
Inadequate early
planning of the
project
Slowness of the
owner’s decisions
making process
Shortage of
manpower
Poor supervision and
poor site
management
Faridi, 2006
Nigeria (b)
Contractor’s financial
difficulties
Client’s cash flow
problem
Architects incomplete
drawing
Subcontractor’s slow
mobilization
Equipment
breakdown and
maintenance problem
Aibinu, 2006
Saudi Arabia (b)
Changes in orders by
owner during
construction
Delay in progress
payments
Insufficient planning
and scheduling
Shortage of labour
Difficulties in
financing contract
Assaf 2006
Kuwait (b)
Change orders
Financial constraints
Owner’s lack of
experience
Materials
Weather
Koushki, 2005
(c)
Contractor
Materials
Financial constraints
Change orders
Weather
Ghana (a)
Monthly payment
difficulties
Poor contract
management
Material procurement
Inflation
Contractor’s financial
difficulties
Frimpong, 2003
Jordan (b)
Poor design
Changes in
orders/design
Weather
Unforeseen site
conditions
Late deliveries
Al-Moumani 2000
Saudi Arabia (b)
Cash flow problem
financial difficulties
Difficulties in
obtaining permits
“Lowest bid wins”
system
Al-Khal 1999
Lebanon (b)
Owner’s more
concern in financial
issues
Contractors regarded
the contractor
relationship the most
important
Consultant
considered project
management most
important
Mezher et al. 1998
Saudi Arabia (b)
Slow preparation and
approval of shop
drawings
Delays in payment to
contractors
Changes in
Design/Design errors
Shortage of Labour
supply
Poor workmanship
Assaf et al. 1995
Table 7 Comparison of previous studies on delay and cost overrun in construction projects in different Countries
(a): Delay and cost overruns; (b): Delays only; (c): Cost overruns only

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
55
This study has identified 113 distinct factors classified into 18 groups responsible for delays
through critical review of 41 previous research studies performed in the relevant field. This
gives all the combination of factors and categories responsible for construction delays. But this
critical review of forty one studies also demonstrates that none of the studies can be
generalised and directly applicable ‘as is’. This presents a strong case against opinion surveys
when as in this case, statistical analyse of actual projects could be done which potentially could
generate meaningful answers.
REFERENCES
Abdul-Rahman, H., Berawi, A.R., Berawi, A.R., Mohamed, O., Othman, M. and Yahya, I.A.
(2006) ‘Delay Mitigation in the Malaysian Construction Industry’, Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 132 (2), 125-133
Acharya, N.K., Lee, Y.D. and Im, H.M. (2006) ‘Investigating delay factors in construction
industry: A Korean perspective’, Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management,
10, 177-190
Adnan, H., Jusoff, K. and Salim, M.K. (2008) ‘The Malaysian Construction Industry’s Risk
Management in Design and Build’, Journal of Modern Applied Science, 2 (5), 27-33
Ahmed, S., Azher, S., Castillo, M. and Kappagantula, P. (2002) Construction delays in Florida;
an empirical study, Florida, 2002.
http://www.cm.fiu.edu/publication/Delays .pdf
Aibinu, A.A. and Odeyinka, A. (2006) ‘Construction delays and their causative factors in
Nigeria’, Journal of Construction Engineering Management, 132 (7), 667-677
Ajanlekoko, J.O. (1987) ‘Controlling cost in the construction industry’, Lagos QS Digest, Lagos,
1 (1), 8–12
Akinsola, A.O. (1996) ‘Neural network model for predicting building projects’ contingency’, In
Conference proceedings of association of researchers in construction management, ARCOM
96, Sheffield Hallam University, England, 507–16
Alaghbari, W., Kadir, M.R.A., Salim, A. and Ernawati (2007) ’The significant factors causing
delay of building construction projects in Malaysia. Engineering’, Construction and Architectural
Management Journal, 14 (2), 192-206
Alkass, S., Mazerolle, M. and Harris, F. (1994) ’Construction delay analysis techniques’, Journal
of Construction Management Economics, 14 (5), 375–94
Al-Khalil, M. and Al-Ghafly, M. (1999) ‘Important causes of delay in public utility projects in
Saudi Arabia’, Journal of Construction Management Economics, 17 (5), 647–55
Al-Moumani, A. (2000) ‘Construction delay: a quantitative analysis’, International Journal of
Project Management, 20, 51–59
Assaf, S.A. and Al-Hejji, S.A. (2006) ’Causes of delay in large construction projects’,
International Journal of Project Management, 24, 349-357
Assaf, S.A., Al-Khalil, M. and Al-Hazmi, M. (1995) ’Causes of Delay in Large Building
Construction Projects’, Journal of Management in Engineering, 45-50
Bennett, J. and Grice, T. (1990) ‘Procurement systems for building’, In:Brandon, P. (ed)
Quantity Surveying Techniques: New Directions, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford
Bennett, J., Flanagan, R., Goodacre, P., Gray, C., McLaughlin, N. and Norman, G. (1979) UK
and US Construction Industries: A comparison of Design and Contract Procedures Surveyors
Publications, UK London

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
56
Bowen, P.A., Hall, K.A., Edwards, P.J., Pearl, R.G. and Cattell, K.S. (2002) ‘Perceptions of
Time, Cost and Quality Management on Building Projects’, The Australian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 2, 48-56
Chan, D.W.M and Kumaraswamy, M.M. (1997) ‘A comparative study of causes of time overruns
in Hong Kong construction projects’, International Journal of Project Management, 15 (1), 55-63
Chan, W.M.C. and Kumaraswamy, M.M. (2002) ‘Compressing construction durations: lessons
learned from Hong Kong building projects’, International Journal of Project Management, 20, 23-
35
Faridi, A.S. and El-Sayegh, S.M. (2006) ‘Significant factors causing delay in the UAE
construction industry’, Journal of Construction Management and Economics, 24 (11), 1167-1176
Flanagan, R., Norman, G., Ireland, V. and Ormerod, R. (1986) A Fresh Look at the UK and US
construction Industry Building Employers Confederation, UK, London
Frimpong, Y., Oluwoye, J. and Crawford, L. (2003) ‘Causes of delay and cost overruns in
construction of groundwater projects in a developing countries; Ghana as a case study’,
International Journal of Project Management, 21, 321-326
Giridhar, P. and Ramesh, K. (1998) Effective management of Turnkey projects, Aace
Transactions, PM7- PM11. Istanbul
Kaliba, C., Muya, M. and Mumba, K. (2009) ‘Cost escalation and schedule delays in road
construction projects in Zambia’, International Journal of Project Management, 27, 522-531
Koushki, P.A., Al-Rashid, K. and Kartam, N. (2005) ‘Delays and cost increases in the
construction of private residential projects in Kuwait’, Journal of Construction Management and
Economics, 23 (3), 285-294
Latham, M. (1994) Constructing the Team, HMSO, London, 87-92
Le-Hoai, L., Lee, Y.D. and Lee, J.Y. (2008) ‘Delay and Cost Overruns in Vietnam Large
Construction Projects: A comparison with other selected countries’, KSCE Journal of Civil
Engineering, 367-377
Lo, T.Y., Fung, I.W.H. and Tung, K.C.F. (2006) ‘Construction delays in Hong Kong civil
engineering projects’, Journal of Construction Engineering Management, 132 (6), 636-649
Long, N.D., Ogunlana, S., Quang, T. and Lam, K.C. (2004) ‘Large construction projects in
developing countries: a case study from Vietnam’, International Journal of Project Management,
22, 553-561
Luu, T.V., Kim, S., Tuan, N.V. and Ogunlana, S.O. (2009) ‘Quantify schedule risk in construction
projects using Bayesian belief networks’, International Journal of Project Management, 27, 39-
50
Mezher, T. and Tawil, W. (1998) ‘Causes of delays in the construction industry in Lebanon’,
Engineering Construction Architecture Management Journal, 5 (3), 252–60
NEDO (1988) Faster Building for Commerce HMSO, UK. London
Odeh, A.M. and Battaineh, H.T. (2002) ‘Causes of construction delay: traditional contracts’,
International Journal of Project Management, 20, 67-73
Odeyinka, H.A. and Yusif, A. (1997) ‘The causes and effects of construction delays on
completion cost of housing project in Nigeria’, Journal Financial Manage Property Construction,
2 (3), 31–44

Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building
Ramanathan, C et al. (2012) Construction delays causing risks on time and cost – a critical review, Australasian Journal of
Construction Economics and Building, 12 (1) 37-57
57
Ogunlana, S.O. and Promkuntong, K. (1996) ‘Construction delays in a fast growing economy:
comparing Thailand with other economies’, International Journal of Project Management, 14 (1),
37–45
Okpala, D.C. and Aiekwu, A.N. (1988) ‘Causes of high costs of construction in Nigeria’, Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management, 114 (2), 233-244
Project Management Institute (PMI) (2008) A guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge, Fourth Edition, PMBOK, Atlanta
Sambasivan, M. and Soon, Y.W. (2007) ‘Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction
industry’, International Journal of Project Management, 25, 517-526
Swies, G., Swies. R., Hammad. A. A. and Shboul, A. (2008) ‘Delays in construction projects:
The case of Jordan’, International Journal of Project Management, 26, 665-674
The Hindu (2007) Hit by delays and cost escalation
http://www.hindunnet.com/2007/07/06/stories/2007070657310100
Tumi.S.A.H., Omran.A. and Pakir.A.H.K. (2009) ‘Causes of delay in construction Industry in
Libya’, The International Conference on Administration and Business, 265-272
Yang.J., Yang.C. and Kao.C. (2010) ‘Evaluating schedule delay causes for private participating
public construction works under the Build-Operate-Transfer model’, International Journal of
Project Management, 28, 569-579