Purpose: Projects often face delays and unnecessary use of time due to various factors and reasons, and hence suffer from unfavourable consequences. The purpose of this paper is to identify the universal delay factors from an intensive literature review, complemented by delay factors in major Norwegian construction projects based on empirical data.Design/methodology/approach: The study in which this paper is based includes an intensive literature review, and semi-quantitative open survey questionnaires. This paper addresses frequency and type of delay factors in construction projects, in Norway based on the survey, and worldwide based on the previous studies.Findings: From the study, the causes of delays facing the Norwegian construction industry are: poor planning and scheduling; slow/poor decision-making process; internal administrative procedures and bureaucracy within project organisations; resources shortage (human resources, machinery, equipment); poor communication and coordination between parties; slow quality inspection process of the completed work; design changes during construction/change orders; sponsor/owner/client lack of commitment and/or clear demands (goals and objectives); late/slow/incomplete/improper design; office issues; and users’ issues. And the top 10 universal delay factors are: design changes during construction/change orders; delays in payment of contractor(s); poor planning and scheduling; poor site management and supervision; incomplete or improper design; inadequate contractor experience/building methods and approaches; contractor’s financial difficulties; sponsor/owner/client’s financial difficulties; resources shortage (human resources, machinery, equipment); and poor labour productivity and shortage of skills.Research limitations/implications: When it comes to the identification of delay factors in major Norwegian projects, the research is based on a sample of 202 respondents from an open survey questionnaire. It should be noted that analysing a large population of respondents that have been asked open questions can be challenging due to the vague findings it might lead to. Also, when it comes to the identification of the universal delay factors, there were different methods used by different authors, within different context. Similar future studies in Norway based on qualitative and quantitative methods will give better verification for the findings.Practical implications: This paper has documented the critical delay factors/causes in Norway. The results of this study will help project managers, in Norway and elsewhere, to be aware and know about the potential causes of delay in their construction projects, which will help to identify the possible risks in the early phases of the project. Another practical implication is to make project managers and policy makers conscious that delays are quite universal, making it necessary to identify them as a first step.Social implications: The identification of delays factors and causes can permit projects to implement mitigation actions to avoid delays, thus allowing delivering schools, hospitals and other necessary infrastructure on schedule or ahead of schedule to society.Originality/value: This paper highlights most (almost all) of the studies in the literature, including to the study done in Norway, concerning the delay factors in construction projects and large construction projects in general. This wide review of relevant literature will save time other academicians from having to conduct similar studies. This study will assist both academic and professional experts providing more insight about the delay causes in large-scale construction projects.

Purpose: This paper studies how the concepts of efficiency, effectiveness and efficacy are used in project management literature. The concepts relate to the degree of success or failure of projects and the degree to which the results are achieved. The purpose of this paper is to review the use of the concepts of efficiency, efficacy and effectiveness in project management literature and among practitioners. Design/methodology/approach: The study is based on an extensive literature review, initially from the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. The first phase involved searching the words “efficiency”, “effectiveness” and “efficacy” in all articles of the journal, and then quantifying the results. This was followed by a qualitative search of the same articles with the aim of understanding how the terms “project efficiency”, “project efficacy” and “project effectiveness” are used. A further intensive literature review was then conducted in other literatures in the field of project management, including, but not limited to, International Journal of Project Management and Project Management Journal. Finally, the authors complemented the review by including theories from deep searches of Google Scholar and Google Books using the parameters “project efficiency”, “project effectiveness” and “project efficacy” and checked how the three concepts are used in other fields. Findings: This research reveals there is wide diversity in interpretations of the three concepts among research scholars and practitioners, which makes it challenging to apply these three concepts appropriately and clearly. As a consequence, the authors propose a model for describing these concepts. Research limitations/implications: This research is based on an academic and non-academic literature review. It identifies a number of inconsistencies in existing literature regarding the three concepts. Practical implications: This review enriches understanding of project management. Clarifying the understanding of project efficiency, project effectiveness and project efficacy will help and support organisational improvement. A clear and aligned view of these concepts can also be a basis for measurements based on possible developed indicators. Originality/value: This paper highlights the gap in the literature concerning the practical use and interpretation of the concepts “project efficiency”, “project effectiveness” and “project efficacy”.

Projects have become popular work form in modern organizations. Megaprojects can be seen as the wild beasts in the project world, they are hard to tame, known for their complexity, vast size, expensive cost, and long time frame. These projects bring big changes in the geography of countries and life of people. Some of these megaprojects become landmarks for a country and bring significant prosperity, but some become unforgettable catastrophes. One of the definitions of megaprojects is that they are the projects in which the cost exceeds one billion US dollars. Examples of megaprojects include, “Channel tunnel”, “London Olympics 2012” and “Ormen Lange offshore project”. Though several pitfalls and challenges have been pointed out with respect to managing megaprojects, the relevance and the need of carrying out this kind of projects attract both the industries (practitioners) and academics. There are many significant issues that must be addressed in connection with managing megaprojects. This paper focuses on the different initiatives taken to date, presents them and tries to find the area of the missing expertise to understand the characteristics and the management of megaprojects

A “Black Swan” is produced when the gap between what we know and what we think we know becomes dangerously wide (Taleb, 2007). This concept is closely related to uncertainty and learning. A Black Swan event is usually a surprise, at least to the observer. However the Black Swan event very much depends on the observer. What may be a Black Swan surprise for a turkey is not a Black Swan surprise to its butcher; so the main objective is to “avoid being the turkey” by exploring and identifying areas of vulnerability in order to avoid surprises. In projects, while some may disagree, almost all failures, even catastrophic ones, are not really Black Swan events but a series of failures that alone may have a negative impact on project outcomes but combined lead to catastrophic failure. However it is surprising how often experienced project teams ignore the early warning signs and move forward into the project lifecycle despite serious problems in many areas that are keys to project success. This will ultimately lead to the Black Swan event materializing. That is when it is too late to take any preventive actions. This paper will characterize the Black Swan concept in projects and describe its nature and identify organizational mechanisms that can be useful in dealing with Black Swan surprises in projects. This study is mainly based on literature study, however carries out an assessment on examples of Black Swan events in order to better clarify the concept under study

This study focuses on three important shared values—trust, openness, and commitment—and examines the impact of these values on project performance and outcomes, specifically for science and innovation research projects. To this end, 12 in-depth interviews were conducted with researchers, research managers, and research leaders at the largest research institution in Scandinavia. The findings indicate that the three values (trust, openness, and commitment) are practiced at this research institution and are essential to effective teamwork. The findings also show that trust and openness promote shared understanding, and encourage commitment.

This paper is about developing a holistic framework for project evaluation; it is applied in a case study of an Algerian highway megaproject. This project has attracted the attention of all the local media and even many of the international media. Several media discussions on the project are limited to the completion of the project itself seen in a short-term perspective. In this regard, the discussions were notably associated with delays and expenditures coming in over budget, which is project efficiency signified by aspects such as time, cost and the scope. One reason that made the media focus only on these aspects is that they can easily be measured and are usually the first criteria against which the project can be assessed. The relevance of the project and its effects, whether it attains its goals and objectives measured in terms of effectiveness, including impact and sustainability – all these four measures can only be verified at a later stage, after the project has delivered its results. These are much broader aspects and are therefore difficult to measure. This paper is about developing an ex-post evaluation framework model. This is achieved by going through the different definitions of the measures of project success or failure and then reflecting on them with respect to the whole project life cycle by considering all the process groups in the project (i.e., conception phase, front-end analysis phase, planning and design phase, engineering phase, procurement phase, construction phase, closing phase and operating phase). This would provide us with a holistic way of evaluating projects.