The consideration of payments to contractors is not only a legal obligation but a necessity for assuring the continuity and completion of a construction project. However, consistent payments to facilitate project cash flows are uncommon in the construction industry. Within the context of a small island developing state, this paper aims to uncover leading risks factors the contributing to implications of delayed payments, on contractors’ cash flows and uncover any causalities and effects on relationships among these factors. A two-tiered quantitative approach was adopted. Firstly, a compiled list of delay factors was collated from the literature review. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with experienced construction professionals to determine the factors’ relevance and applicability in Trinidad and Tobago. A closed-ended survey questionnaire was subsequently developed and administered to primary construction stakeholders. Secondly, the responses obtained were collated, validated, and ranked using the relative importance index. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was carried out using SPSS, and thereafter, SPSS Amos was used to determine the best-fit Structural Equation Model (SEM). The results strongly indicate that the issue of delayed payments is very prevalent within public sector projects. Unstable political climates and the delay in employers’ issuance of variation orders were found to be the main causes of delayed payments within the industry. Delays in sub-contractor and supplier payments as well as an increase in the contractor’s debt are the leading effects of delayed payments on the contractor’s cash flows. Based on these findings, a risk response framework was outlined to assist small to medium-contracting enterprises cope with payment delays, both locally and internationally. This research contributes to the advancement of construction management knowledge by informing construction professionals and policy makers of the implications of delaying approved payments, the consequential causes and effects, and a risk response technique to mitigate the negative effects on contractors’ cash flows. Doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2023-09-01-05 Full Text: PDF

As projects evolve into complex and specialized temporary initiatives, accountability shortfalls in material flow are a major reason for schedule and cost overruns in construction. To date, researchers and practitioners are unresolved regarding the causes of material handling challenges and eminent solutions to improve material flow accountability. Consequently, inefficient supply chain management practices persist, leading to ineffective handling methods. This research, therefore, focused on identifying critical material challenges encountered by contractors and presented solutions to alleviate schedule and cost overrun failures. The fuzzy Delphi approach was used to refine opinions and achieve group consensus from 15 specialists on the ranking of material handling problems and potential solutions associated with design-build projects. The research revealed that complexity, material flow, and lack of information sharing are the top three main causes of onsite material problems. Potential solutions identified were a faster response mechanism (as an alternative to a slower build schedule), increasing material handlers’ worker power, subcontractors’ involvement in the procurement process, and prefabrication. The research highlighted subcontracting as a material handling paradox as apart from being a solution, it creates non-value-added costs in the supply chain and often inappropriately transfers risk. The findings showcased the potential to improve onsite material handling praxis by considering decision-making uncertainties in material flow and recognizing the importance of procurement methods in construction supply chain solutions in resolving scheduling and cost inefficiencies.

The unresolved scholarly debate to curtail cost and time performances in projects has led to alternate solutions, departing from the dominant technical school of thought to include concepts from behavioural sciences. In this paper, we consider the psychological effect, namely optimism bias, as one of the root causes for delays in cost overruns on projects. The research objectives were to determine the level of bias among project participants, rank time and cost overrun causes according to the participants’ bias score and establish a mitigation strategy to curb potential delays and cost overrun impacts based on the bias scores obtained. A literature survey was conducted to determine causal factors contributing to delays and cost overruns linked to optimism bias. Through a pilot survey of three semi-structured interviews, eighty factors obtained from the literature survey were reduced to 24 critical delay and cost overrun factors relevant to Trinidad and Tobago. A questionnaire was subsequently developed seeking construction professionals to rate their bias scores based on an 11-point Likert scale. The research confirms that project planners and decision-makers exhibit moderate levels of optimism bias; however, participants lacked awareness of the impact of optimism bias on projects outcomes. Project location, environmental impacts and historic preservation, and labour disputes are the top three critical factors where project professionals displayed increased optimistic tendencies. It is proposed that contingency “time window” and reference class forecasting be implemented as control mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of time and cost overruns on projects. This research introduces a novel method to account for and measure optimism bias on construction projects. This study adds knowledge into delays and cost overruns causation and provides a foundation for future studies on quantifying psychological effects on projects and enhancing overall project management practices. Doi: 10.28991/esj-2021-01287 Full Text: PDF

The cost overrun phenomenon on projects worldwide creates a major source of risk that warrants investigation. The prevailing factor school of thought provides strong empirical evidence that critical factors contributing to cost overruns are both context-specific and project-specific. Although many studies have been conducted identifying factors and causes of cost overruns, very few studies have investigated root causes. Additionally, a limited body of knowledge is available within the context of Small Island Development States (SIDS). To fill this gap, the objectives of this study were to identify and determine the main critical factors contributing to the cost overrun phenomenon in public sector social housing programmes (PSSHPs). These selected factors were thereafter categorized under leading root causes, and their severity was determined based on primary stakeholders’ perspectives. One hundred and twenty-three factors were identified from the literature, of which forty-one critical factors were extracted and grouped under four root causes based on a pilot survey of relevant public sector housing experts in the Trinidadian and Jamaican construction sectors. These refined factors and root causes were formulated into a questionnaire survey. One hundred and five responses were obtained from professionals who had a minimum of five years’ experience in various phases of public housing delivery. The severity of these critical factors was evaluated, ranked, and categorized using the relative importance index (RII) approach. The findings uncovered the leading root cause, which is political in nature. The top five critical factors are the selection of politically aligned contractors, the intentional design of inadequate contracts, the project actors' deliberately underestimating costs, the partisan project management team, and strategic misrepresentation. These findings are unique to SIDS and contribute to knowledge to reframe contemporary project management practices, which focus mainly on technical causes. Finally, as existing technical solutions are ineffective in curbing cost overruns in PSSHPs, these findings also inform public sector policymakers to focus on prioritization, control, and mitigation of political risks in formulating effective governance mechanisms. Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2022-06-03-016 Full Text: PDF