##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

In development projects especially those of construction in nature, working within the time schedules is paramount and normally an issue of conflict. Emergence of Public Private Partnership to remedy delays in project has not been that perfect but provides a platform for risk sharing between stakeholders. This study borrowed on contingency theory to investigate the extent to which time overrun related risks impact on project delivery through PPP models. In the null, the hypothesis that time overrun related risks do not have an influence on project delivery was tested using entire management team of the completed construction project sampled randomly to give 71 participants. Questionnaires and interview schedules were applied to obtain research data. Quantitative and qualitative techniques were used in analysis where regression analysis was used to determine variable effects. The null hypothesis was tested at 95% confidence level and found that there was a strong negative correlation between the variables, r (38) = -0.975 (p<.05) which implies that construction time overrun related risks significantly influence project delivery. Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected. The study recommends that stakeholders in PPPs should come together at initial stages to ensure that project drawings are made and approved in time to facilitate speedy execution of the overall project and avoid unnecessary design changes by involving all stakeholders to reduce time overrun.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Kumaraswamy, M., & Zhang, D. (1995), Determinants of construction duration. Construction Management and Economics. 13: 209–217.
     Google Scholar
  2. Enshassi, A., J., Al-Najjar & Kumaraswamy, M. (2008), Delays and cost overruns in the construction projects in the Gaza Strip. J. Financial management. Property Construction. 14: 126-151.
     Google Scholar
  3. World Bank Report (1993), Housing: Enabling Markets to Work with Technical Supplements. The World Bank, Washington DC.
     Google Scholar
  4. Alexanderson, G., & Hulten, S. (2008), Prospects and pitfalls of public-private partnerships in the transportation sector: theoretical issues and empirical experience. In International Conference on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport, 10th, 2007, Hamilton Island, Queensland, Australia (pp. 1-16). Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney.
     Google Scholar
  5. Farlam, P. (2005), ‘Working Together: Assessing Public-Private Partnerships in Africa’, Nepad Policy Focus Series. Netherlands: The South African Institute of International Affairs.
     Google Scholar
  6. UNECE (2008), Guide Book on Promoting Good Governance in Public-Private Partnerships. Geneva. UNECE.
     Google Scholar
  7. Kaming, P. F., Olomolaiye, P.O., Holt, G.D. & Harris, F.C. (1997), Factors influencing construction time and cost overruns on highrise projects in Indonesia, Journal of Construction management and Economics, 15(1); 83-94.
     Google Scholar
  8. Shebob, A., Dawood, N., & Xu, Q. (2011), Analyzing construction delay factors: A study of building construction project in Libya in: Egbu,C, and Lou,E,C,W, (Eds) Procs 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September2011, Bristol,UK, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 1005-1012.
     Google Scholar
  9. Chileshe, N., & Yirenkyi-Fianko, (2011), Perceptions of Threat Risk Frequency and Impact on Construction Projects in Ghana: Opinion survey findings. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries 16(2):115-149.
     Google Scholar
  10. Gwaya, A.O., Masu, S. M., & Wanyona, G. (2014), A Critical Analysis of the Causes of Project Management Failures in Kenya. International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE) 4(1), 64-69.
     Google Scholar
  11. Špačková, O. (2012), Risk management of tunnel construction projects (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Czech Technical University in Prague.
     Google Scholar
  12. Ye, S., & Tiong, R. L. (2003), The effect of concession period design on completion risk management of BOT projects. Construction Management and Economics, 21(5), 471-482.
     Google Scholar
  13. Longenecker, J., & Pringle, C. (1978), The illusion of contingency theory as a general theory‟, Academy of Management Review, pp.679-682.
     Google Scholar
  14. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998), Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
     Google Scholar
  15. Yamane, T. (1967), Statistics, an Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed., New York: Harper and Row.
     Google Scholar
  16. Tipili, G.L., & IIyasu, M.S. (2014), Evaluating the impact of risk factors on construction projects cost in Nigeria. The International journal of Engineering and Science (IJES). 3(6), 10-15.
     Google Scholar
  17. Lyons, T., & Skitmore, M., (2004), Project risk management in the Queensland engineering construction industry: a survey. International Journal of Project Management. 22;51- 61
     Google Scholar
  18. Kartam, N.A., & Kartam, S.A. (2001), Risk and its management in the Kuwaiti
     Google Scholar
  19. Abdul Rahman, I., Memon, A.H., Nagapan, S., Latif, Q.B.A.I., & Abdul Azis, A.A (2008). Time and Cost Performance of Construction Projects in Southern and Central Regions of Peninsular Malaysia. Paper presented at 2012 IEEE Colloqium onHumanities, Science & Engineering Research (CHUSER 2012), December 3 -4, 2012.
     Google Scholar