Risk allocation in public construction projects: the case of Jordan

Hiyassat, Mohammed; Alkasagi, Fatima; El-Mashaleh, Mohammad; Sweis, Ghaleb

doi:10.1080/15623599.2020.1728605

Cited by 30 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, "to ensure quality project provision" was ranked third as one of the consultant-related risk handling responsibilities. The findings further offer contradictory and supportive evidence with previous studies [11,15,31]. For instance, previous studies have acknowledged and appreciated this risk handling responsibilities among the consultants [11].…”

Section: To Ensure Quality Project Provisioncontrasting

confidence: 66%

“…Further, the rationale and justification for targeting contractors in higher classes has been used before. For example, the Jordanian study by Hiyassat et al [31] aimed at assessing and allocating risks in public construction projects classified contractors into six grades based on company size, equipment, personnel, and experience, where Grade 1 is the highest.…”

Section: Sampling Technique and Sample Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The emergent implication from this finding is that steps should be taken by a consultant to work closely in terms of controlling safety issues on-site while also involving the contractor to have correct guidelines and safety tools to avoid problems during the execution of a project. Interestingly, recent Jordanian studies such as Hiyassat et al [31], found the consultants ranking the risk priority of "inadequate safety measures and weakness of safety awareness" higher than the contractors who ranked this 17th out of 62 risks. The findings of Hiyassat et al [31] are rather contradictory to our current study.…”

Section: Safety Project Provisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, recent Jordanian studies such as Hiyassat et al [31], found the consultants ranking the risk priority of "inadequate safety measures and weakness of safety awareness" higher than the contractors who ranked this 17th out of 62 risks. The findings of Hiyassat et al [31] are rather contradictory to our current study. More so, the risk of public security and safety lies with the contractor under (third-party Insurance) it is a risk to both the employer and contractor.…”

Section: Safety Project Provisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, previous studies have acknowledged and appreciated this risk handling responsibilities among the consultants [11]. However, recent Jordanian studies such as Hiyassat et al [31], though they did not specifically refer to "quality", found the consultants ranking the risk priority of "unclear specifications" higher than the contractors who ranked this 14th out of 62 risks, in comparison to the contractors ranking of seventh. Likewise, within the Zambian context, which also shares geographical and economic conditions with Tanzania, "clarity of drawings and technical specifications" and "poor quality materials" were ranked higher (2nd and 9th respectively out of 55) as risks influencing performance [46].…”

Section: To Ensure Quality Project Provisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Risk Handling Responsibilities in Tanzanian Project-Based Organisations

Sospeter

Chileshe

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk handling is one of the elements and essential parts of risk management when properly incorporated into a project. However, there is inadequate knowledge amongst the contractual parties on risk handling responsibilities in road projects, particularly in Sub-Saharan African developing countries. This study is aimed at bridging that knowledge gap by investigating the perceptions of contractors and consultants on the risk handling responsibilities in road projects in Tanzania. The primary data were collected from 80 registered foreign and local civil contractors and engineering consultants based in Dar es Salaam. Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were used for the data analysis. The results show that both contractors and consultants ranked safety project provision and ensuring quality provision in terms of construction as shared risk responsibilities among contractual parties. The findings further show that consultant-related risk responsibilities are: safety provision, the use of historical cost deviation, ensuring quality provision, and review of knowledge on budgeting. On the other hand, contractor-related risk responsibilities include: safety provision and ensuring quality provision. The findings of this study can be used by the practitioners and stakeholders as important lessons useful for controlling risks and making decisions when they intend to participate in such projects during the construction stage.

show abstract