Mitigating the effects of delay risk in building construction projects in Ghana

Abstract

The completion of a project within stipulated time duration is a key variable of project performance. However, delays in completion of projects remains a common occurrence in the construction industry in Ghana. Delays in completion result in resources employed on such projects to exceed what has been planned. The aim of the study is to explore the effects of delays and develop strategies/framework for mitigating the effects of delay risk in building construction projects in Ghana. A cross-sectional survey research design was adopted with structured questionnaires administered to construction professionals in the building construction sector. A total of Six Hundred and Forty-four (644) questionnaires were distributed to the respondents with Three Hundred Thirty (330) questionnaires were recovered which represents a response rate of 51.2%. The findings of the study suggest that; economic losses to the contractor ($\overline{X}=4.28,$ $\sigma =.672$), loss of integrity or image of project participants ($\overline{X}=4.37,$ $\sigma =.703$), cost overrun X̅ = 4.32, σ = .913), compromised commercial relationships between project stakeholders X̅ = 4.23, σ = .761), disputes, and reduced profitability of clients’ organization were the severest forms of the effects of delays (X̅ = 4.09, σ = .822). The study concluded that delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants and are the most severe effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. The study recommended that, respecting payment schedule and honoring payment certificates promptly and clarity in contract provisions were the effective measures to mitigate the effects of delays.

Keywords:

• Delay risk
• effects of causal factors
• mitigating effects
• construction projects

Reviewing Editor:

• Marco Montemurro, Senior Editor, Arts et Metiers ParisTech - Centre de Bordeaux-Talence, France

Subjects:

• Engineering economics
• industrial engineering & manufacturing
• engineering management

1. Introduction

The construction industry in Ghana is considered one of the key drivers of the economy (Ofori, 2018). Ofori (2012) observed that the industry is multifaceted, spread geographically and cuts across all sectors of the economy including buildings, roads, dams and bridges. According to the Ghana Stastical Service (2020), the construction industry in Ghana contributes up to 10% of the overall Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 7% of employment. Arguably, improving construction project performance through the effective management of dalays in construction can positively affect the sectors contribution to economic growth. Delay to projects is one of the foremost concerns of the construction industry. The delays to the projects according to Saeed (2009), are affecting the economies throughout the world. Delay in the construction sector is defined as a “time overrun after the completion of a contract or beyond the date agreed upon by the parties for delivery of the project” (Assaf and Al-Hejji 2006; Kumar 2016). The success of a project depends on the most efficient programming, scheduling and control of available resources and project activities by keeping its time, cost and utility values at the top. However, along with cost and quality, project schedule is considered to be the most important aspect of the construction management life cycle and as one of the main drivers of the project success (Durdyev & Hosseini, 2020). Even with today’s technology and project management techniques, there are delays in construction projects and project completion dates are still being postponed. This reveal that time overrun in construction projects is very important and a chronic problem (Kazaz and Ulubeyli 2009). Delays in the construction sector have become a global phenomenon, especially not only in developing countries, but also in all countries (Pourrostam et al. 2011; Sunjka and Jacob 2013; Cülfik et al. 2014). However, delay is a more common problem in construction projects in countries where economic development is directly linked to the construction sector (Sweis et al. 2008). Many projects are of such a nature that the client will suffer hardship, expense, or loss of revenue if the work is delayed beyond the time specified in the contract. Then, again, delay has cost consequences for the contractor: standby costs of non-productive workers, supervisors, and equipment, expenses caused by disrupted construction and material delivery schedules and additional overhead costs (Clough, 1986). Construction delays occur when the actual progress is slower than the planned/contract schedule (Pandey et al., 2016). Delay/the time lag in the completion of construction projects is a critical issue affecting the construction industry and is an alarming issue over the globe. Delays can adversely affect the stakeholders, end up with zero incentives or negative productivity or termination of contract agreements or litigations. It is becoming unusual that a project work gets over within the stipulated period. According to Ogweno et al. (2016), successful completion of a construction project in time, considered to be a sign of project efficiency. The successful accomplishment of a project is measured basically by the time spent, the total cost involved and the quality of work done. The construction delay affects the timely completion, cost, and quality. Proper decision making well ahead of starting a project, approving designs and working drawings, material selections, and logistics planning may reduce the future problems arising during the construction stages of the project.

Most research as can be seen from Table 1 that seeks to investigate the causes and effects of delays are descriptive and hardly explores the nature of the effects of delays which is critical to finding ways of mitigating the effects. Bashir et al. (2019) support this view in contending that such studies have failed to account for interrelationships between factors that could lay the foundation for addressing the effects of delays in construction projects.

Table 1. Descriptive studies on construction delays.

Author(s) and Year	Summary of aim and methods of research	Study setting	Key findings of the research
Aydin and Mihlayanlar (2018)	To investigate the factors causing delay in construction activities. Descriptive survey design was adopted. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques.	Edirne, Turkey	The findings of the study revealed that the top three delay factors were; delays in municipality permits, changes in legal regulations, and difficulties in financing the project and paying the debt. On the other hand, bad reputation and loss of reliability, time overrun and cost overrun were found to be the main effects of delays.
Mydin et al. (2014)	To evaluate and identify the causes and consequences of project delays. Non-probability sampling and descriptive statistics analytical techniques.	Malaysia	The study identified causes of delays to include; weather conditions, poor site conditions, poor site management, incomplete documents, lack of experience, financial problems, contract modifications, variations, coordination problems, and mistakes/defective works. These point to contractor-related factors. The consequences of the delays included; time overrun, cost overrun, disputes, negotiations, legal actions, and total abandonment.
Kikwasi (2012)	To assess causes and effects and disruptions in construction projects. The study is descriptive and adopted both purposive and random sampling techniques.	Tanzania	The study identified the causes of delays and disruptions to include; design changes, delays in payment, information delays, funding problems, poor project management, compensation issues, and problems in valuation. Time overrun, cost overrun, negative social impact, idle resources, and disputes were found to be the main effects of delays.
Fugar and Agyakwah- Baah (2010)	The aim was to identify the causes of delays in building construction projects in Ghana using an opinion survey. The study suggested possible ways of eradicating or minimising delays.	Ghana	The overall results of the study indicate that the respondents generally agree that financial group factors ranked highest among the major factors causing a delay in construction projects in Ghana. The financial group factors were delay in honouring payment certificates, difficulty in accessing credit, and fluctuation in prices. Materials group factors are second followed by scheduling and controlling factors.
Buertey et al. (2014)	The aim was to identify, rate and rank the most significant risk factors that cause delays on projects and examine the social impact of these delays to recommend modalities to help mitigate these risk factors.	Ghana	Findings revealed that client, contractor, material, and finance factors significantly resulted in schedule delay of large projects. Also, micro-factors that result in delays to large construction projects are time constraints, cost overruns, payment problems, disputes, and litigation. The measures to minimize delays include; availability of resources, improved communication, proper scope definition and feasibilities, utilization of modern technology, appropriate application of technologically based systems, and competent project management structures.
Pinamang et al. (2018)	The aim of the study was assess the importance, and effects of schedule delay in construction projects. The study adopted a survey design and purposive sampling technique.	Ghana	The study showed that the major objectives of scheduling in construction projects are to expose and adjust conflicts between trades or subcontractors, serve as effective project control tools, and resolve delay claims. The study established that the lack of scheduling of construction projects contributes to delays and causes disruptions in construction projects.

It can be seen from Table 1 that finding solutions to the effects of delays is under-discussed in the literature, not comprehensive, and lacks a holistic approach. A critical analysis of the literature reveals these shortcomings have hardly been addressed (Fugar & Agyakwah-Baah, 2010; Buertey et al., 2014; Pinamang et al., 2018). Recognising the stated shortcomings in the literature, the paper seeks to explore the effects of delay risk and find solutions to mitigating the effects in building construction projects in Ghana.

2. Literature review

2.1. Delays in construction project

Project delay can be defined as an incident that causes an extension in the time for the completion of all or part of a particular project (Chan & Kumaraswamy, 2014). The delay can also be defined as the time overrun, either ahead of the date for the completion of the project as specified by the contract or further than the extended contract period, where additional time has been granted (Alkass et al., 1996). Project delays in the construction industry are a universal or large-scale observable fact affecting not only the construction industry but the overall economy of countries as well. Project delays involve manifold, multifaceted issues, all of which are perpetual and of decisive magnitude to the parties to the construction contract (Akinsola, 1996).

However, this is an idealistic situation, in reality, changes are inherent to nearly all projects of substantial size because projects rarely commence after all the designs are completed and approved. All the key stakeholders for the project must agree as to how the changes to the project would be handled and by whom. This is in the interest of the project as beneficial to the owner and the contractor. The continuous striving for improvement makes it necessary to incorporate changes even though they may disrupt the work to a certain extent. However, the overall result is likely to be better than the initial after incorporating the changes and the satisfaction of achieving a better final product makes the changes more acceptable rather than no changes at all. The stage at which changes are proposed to be implemented is important as any major changes proposed when the project is in an advanced stage of progress will complicate the works, impact the schedule, and be likely to cause delays to the completion. The changes will increase the cost of the project as abortive works, modifications, and changes will come with a cost. “Changed work complicates a project, invites delays, and increases the project cost – all things that make owners unhappy.” (Molner, 2007).

Several studies have been done on finding the key causes of construction project delays as shown in Table 2. The studies considered in the present paper are those that are relevant in terms of country of the study, the year publication and impact factor of the journal in which the study is published. In terms of country of origin of the studies, those of developing countries are relevant given the national context of the present study. In keeping with seeking for cutting-edge research, year of publication and the citation index and/or impact factor of journals in which the studies are published are of prime importance.

Table 2. Causal factors of construction project delays.

Author (s) and country	Causal Factors of Construction Delays
Fugar and Agyakwah-Baah (2010). Ghana	Delay in honouring certificates, underestimation of the costs of projects, underestimation of the complexity of projects, difficulty in accessing bank credit, poor supervision, underestimation of time for completion of projects by contractors, shortage of materials, poor professional management, fluctuation of prices/rising cost of materials, poor site management.
Buertey et al. (2014). Ghana	Client, contractor, material and finance category factors significantly resulted in the schedule delay of large infrastructural projects. Factors that result in delays to large construction projects are time constraint, cost overrun, payment problems, dispute and litigation.
Yap et al. (2021). Malaysia	The prime causes of schedule delays were found to be; financial problem of contractors, incompetent sub-contractors, incompetent site management and supervision, too many change orders by clients, and lack of proper planning and scheduling.
Alsuliman (2019). Saudi Arabia	Causes of delays were found to include; focus finance and award to lowest bidder, lack of capacity of contractors, selecting nonperforming contractors, low public interest in development, government giving financial rights to contractors late, lack of punitive measures for faltering contractors, weak technical analysis of the competitors, lack of interest in timetables and updating them constantly, expanding the use of subcontractors who are not qualified, poor salaries and financial incentives for engineers, variations, errors relating to quantities and design, poor coordination, incompetence of engineers, poor training, poor supervision, and poor implementation of projects.
Durdev and Hoseini (2020)	Weather/climate conditions, poor communication, lack of coordination and conflicts between stakeholders, ineffective or improper planning, material shortages, financial problems, payment delays, equipment/plant shortage, lack of experience/qualification/competence among project stakeholders, labour shortages and poor site management were identified as the ten most common causes of delays.
Wang et al. (2018). China	The results show that the causes of variations, delays in progress payments, exceptionally low bids and subcontractors’ poor performance and communication issues were the most important causes of delays in China.
Agyekum-Mensah and Knight (2017). UK	The top 15 causes of delay were revealed to be; knowledge and competence shortage, poor commercial decisions, unnecessary health and safety restrictions, poor risk management and poor space and logistics management.
Song et al. (2016). Burkina Faso	The top five most important delay factors leading to schedule delays include; financial capability of the contractor, financial difficulties of the owner, equipment availability of the contractor, slow payments for completed work, and poor subcontractor performance by the contractor.
Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) Nigeria	The findings showed that time and cost overruns were frequent effects of delay. Delay had significant effect on completion cost and time of 61 building projects studied. Client-related delay is significant in Nigeria. Acceleration of site activities coupled with improved clients’ project management procedure and inclusion of appropriate contingency allowance in pre-contract estimate should assuage the adverse effect of construction delays.

2.2. Effects of delays

According to a study by Sambasivan and Soon (2007), on the impact of construction delays in the industry of construction, the following six impacts were pinpointed: total abandonment; Arbitration; time overrun; Cost overrun; dispute; and Litigation. Additionally, Ahmed and Castillo (2000) stated that the impact of delays in construction projects could cause; provocative relationships, cash flow problems, disbelief, project rejection, a general sense of trepidation among parties and lawsuits.

The study by Kikwes (2012) also revealed that disruption and delays in construction projects create the following consequences; negative social impact, misunderstanding causing dispute, time overrun, resources wasting concerning equipment as well as labour, and work going beyond the budget. Most construction contract deals with delays in construction projects and disruption by making provisions inside a contract that a contractor ought to submit claims for time extension and cost recovery after proper notification that events met are expected to or are resulting in delays to completion (Hamzah et al., 2011; Braimah & Ndekugri, 2009) cost budgeted as well as specified quality outcome in other unanticipated negative effect and failure to achieve the beset time. Mostly, in times when projects are being delayed, projects are one or the other protracted or time accelerated and thus, invites extra cost (Fawzy et al., 2018; McGraw, 2009).

The effect of delays on projects can cause confrontational relationships, a general sense of trepidation, lawsuits, project rejection, disbelief, and cash flow problems (Ahmed & Castillo, 2000). Ahmed and Castillo (2000) further identified wrong project appraisal and price fluctuation to be among the causes of construction project delay. Nwachukwu (2009) adopted a systematic strategy to analyse the effect of material constraints on the success of managing projects in the construction industry of Nigeria. He established that the attitude of a project client together with the management team towards the management of material resources is significant as it affects the achievement of the objectives of the project. Particularly, materials ‘procurement delays can affect negatively the construction program and this could cause delays in achieving the set time for the project. Research carried out by Kikwasi (2012) indicates that disruption, as well as delays in projects, lead to time overrun, disagreement resulting in dispute, work exceeding budget, wasting of labour and equipment resources, and negative social impact.

According to Li et al. (2000) when a delay happens there exist conceivable conditions that a manager of the project might face the challenge of extra money to finish the task conceding the quality of the project by reducing specification and standards as well as reworking consequently to amend the project. The research conducted by Aibinu and Jagboro (2002) on the effect of the delivery of projects in the construction industry of Nigeria discovered the following; cost overrun, time overrun, project budgeted cost, work exceeding schedule, arbitration (ADR) disagreement, lawsuit, and complete abandonment. A study carried out by Kamming et al. (1997) on manipulating factors on thirty-one (31) multi-story projects in the Indonesian setting showed that the overrun of cost happens mostly and is thus severe as compared to time overruns. Again, they explain that key factors affecting overruns of cost include inflation on material cost, as well as wrong assessment of the material degree of densities concerning scarcity and availability.

In the research ‘s quest to examine the effect pinpointed by other researchers and their related studies universally, the following were observed to be the main effects in project adversarial relationships, time overrun, cost overrun, distrust, cash flow problems, arbitration, litigation and complete abandonment.

2.2.1. Escalation of cost of project

Project Management’s interest in escalation has heightened considerably in the last few years. This is not only because of the dramatic impact on project costs due to inflation but also because cost overruns blamed on inflation have been poorly received by Owners. There is the feeling that inflation has been used as an excuse and as a cover-up for poor management. Project managers feel equally frustrated since it has been virtually impossible to identify the effects of escalation with any degree of accuracy. Recognition of this situation has resulted in the development of a system** that provides analysis of the actual effects of inflation on the project costs to-date and develops cumulative future effects over the remaining duration of the project. Variance from budget due to normal contingent unforeseen are separated from that variance due to schedule changes, estimate revision and inflation rate fluctuations.

Establishing the escalation provision on the project based on the conceptual estimate becomes a simple task. The estimate is usually cast along the code of accounts structure, in which case each item of the escalation is assigned its appropriate index. The project master schedule is used to provide the installation or manufacturing timing. The acceptance of the project estimate and its escalation provision by the Owner provides the base from which all trends and variances can be monitored and hopefully controlled.

2.2.2. Economic losses

The conventional approach to managing the extra cost is to include a percentage of the project cost as a contingency in the pre-contract budget. Omoregie and Radford (2006), however, stated that these contingencies (5- 10% of the pre-contract estimate) which are often based on discretion and assumption are inadequate and unrealistic but should be increased to 15- 20% as recommended by the United State Department of Energy (DOE) for budget estimating. This is because construction projects are unique and each may have distinctive sets of objectives that require the application of new technology or technical approaches to achieve acquired results. There is therefore need to remove all forms of bureaucracy militating against project development to create an enabling environment for potential investors (Aibinu & Jagboro, 2002). To achieve this objective, there is a need for procurement guidelines to be effectively followed as it will improve standards in many ways while excluding unqualified competitors from the bidding process. This process would encourage the active involvement of qualified contractors and suppliers in the bidding process. It would also limit the recurring incidence of fraud (Omoregie & Radford, 2006). Many articles and studies conducted recently on the effect of delay on project delivery, both locally and internationally have been reviewed. Surveys conducted by Kaming et al. (1997) on 31 high-rise projects in Indonesia, found that cost overruns occur more frequently and are a more severe problem than time overruns. They pointed out that the major factors influencing cost overrun are material cost increase due to inflation, inaccurate material estimation and degree of complexity.

Li et al. (2000) argue that when a delay occurs there are three possible situations in which a project manager may be confronted with additional costs, a decline in quality and rework. Yet, the project manager is often faced with the following options: either prescribe overtime work and/or inject additional resources, to meet the project’s schedule. While injecting additional resources can significantly increase project costs, prolonged overtime work may cause declines in productivity and performance, which may also generate rework. Tse and Love (2003) further admitted that the problem arising from overtime work can be generally represented by a cost function. This problem can thus be minimized by reducing the linear cost function subject to stochastic work target constraint. He therefore concluded that the resources spent on overtime work relative to other additional resources depend upon the irrelative unit cost and the productivity loss due to overtime work.

Among the variables associated with economic risk drivers are poor financial markets, inflation, and price fluctuations, with the notable consequence being project overruns (Agyakwa-Baah, 2007, 2009; Frimpong et al., 2003; Denini, 2009). Cost overruns due to inflation come about as a result of currency instability. Currently, the currency is stable; but, even so, the rapid increase in oil prices still keeps project cost overruns very high. A study conducted by Berko (2007) established that between 2001 and 2007, the cost of fuel in Ghana had increased by as much as 280%. The fluctuation in price in one project was about 300% between 2001 and 2007, so one can appreciate the effect of oil hikes. Frimpong et al. (2003) attributes high inflation to demand exceeding supply. The economic drivers used within this study can also be found in the seminal work by Edwards and Bowen (1998). For example, the economic risks categorized by Edwards and Bowen (1998) include material supply, labour supply, equipment availability, inflation, tariffs, fiscal policies, and exchange rates.

Lowe (1987) identified inflation and interest rates among the economic factors. Salifu et al. (2007) identified exchange rate variability as a source of cash flow risk. Financial drivers such as ‘financial failure’ and ‘delay in payments’ have been found to affect project performance in terms of cost and time overruns. For example, Dada and Jagboro (2007) in their study of the impact of risk on project performance, identified finance as one of the main risk factors; however, the emphasis of that study was on building procurement. Hassanein and Afify (2007) also identified financial risk as one of the most significant risks relevant to construction contracts in Egypt. In Ghana, a study by Agyakwa-Baah (2007) on stakeholders’ perceptions of causes of delays in construction projects found that delay in payment was the major cause of delays in construction projects.

2.2.3. Dispute between parties to a contract

In the construction industry, some projects are delayed because of disputes between contractual parties such as clients, consultants, contractors and some relevant parties. Those disputes are because the client fails to make payment to the contractor. Once a dispute happens, the relevant parties will go through with mediation. The mediator will decide to solve the problem. But if one of the parties does not accept the decision made by the mediator, the parties will appeal the decision with the arbitrator. If both parties accept the decision the fault parties will take responsibility to pay damages for project delay.

In the current delay project, some of the contractual parties do not accept the mediator’s decision and they appeal in arbitration. The arbitrator will also decide to solve the problem. But if one of the parties does not accept the decision made by the Arbitrator, they still can appeal the decision in litigation. In some delayed projects, the relevant parties because of still do not accept the arbitrator’s decision. They appeal the result in litigation which is dispute resolution in the courts. In litigation, the parties have a trial either by a court alone or by jury. If those parties are not satisfied with the judgment again, then they can appeal again if they have any new evidence to proof their right. But one the parties accept the judgment; the faulty parties need to take responsibility to pay the penalty.

2.2.4. Image of project stakeholders

A stakeholder is any individual or party affected (e.g., Rights violated, restricted, or ignored) by the actions of an organization, company, firm, or project, who therefore needs to be motivated and managed towards support of corporate objectives and cooperation. Whether as internal members of a coalition project team or an external party, each may have vested interests that pose a threat or benefit impacting the outcomes and effective management of construction work. (Harris, 2010). Stakeholders mainly depend upon the nature of projects; the job of the project manager is not only identifying the potential stakeholders but also managing the influence of stakeholders to ensure positive outcomes. Stakeholders may include the project team, customer, sponsor, PMO, operations, customer care, Support team, sellers, legal department, functional managers, program and portfolio managers, and interested entities internal or external to the project. Stakeholders may have varying level of responsibility and authority over a project these responsibilities or authorities may change during the life cycle of a project and ends up in closing the project.

The contractor’s responsible delays are caused by the inability of the contractor to proceed with the project diligently and efficiently as a result of inadequate labour/plant provision and insolvency of the contractor. “Neither” party responsible for delay (Extraneous conditions) exists in situations that are beyond the capacity of either the contractor or the client. Such extraneous circumstances are resultants of strikes, riots, exceptional adverse weather, force majeure and acts of God, loss and damage due to fire and storm, and Inability of the contractor to reason beyond his control and which he could not reasonably have foreseen at the date of the contract to secure such resources and delays caused by nominated subcontractors or suppliers which the contractor has taken all possible steps to avoid or reduce.

2.2.5. Quality project performance

According to Farris et al, (2006), the ability to evaluate the performance of the completed project will assist in determining benchmarks of high-performance projects from low-performance projects for potential improvement. A study carried out by Sweis et al, (2008) indicates that as the complexity of a project upsurges the lesser it is for that particular project will be delivered on time or just after the date of completion when engaging the traditional methods of management. The success of a construction project depends mainly on success performance. Many previous researches have studied the performance of construction projects. Dissanayaka and Kumaraswawmy (1999) indicated that one of the principal reasons for the construction industry’s poor performance has been attributed to the inappropriateness of the chosen procurement system.

Umar (2018) asserted that there are three important structures underlying the dynamics of a project performance which are: the work accomplishment structure, feedback effect from productivity and work quality and effect from upstream phases and downstream phases. According to Thomas (2002), the main quality performance criteria for construction projects are financial stability, the progress of work, the standard of quality, health and safety, resources, relationship with the client, relationship with the consultant, management capabilities, claims and contractual disputes, relationship with sub-contractors, reputation and amount of sub-contracting. Chan and Kumaraswawmy (2014) stated that construction time is increasingly important because it often serves as a crucial benchmark for accessing the project performance of a project and the efficiency of the project organization. Cheung et al, (2022) identify project performance categories such as: cost, people, time, quality, safety and health, environment, client satisfaction and communication.

2.3. Strategies for mitigating the effects of delay

Delays to the projects can be reduced by applying measures that can be reflected as mitigation of delays. This mitigation of delays is possible only by re-sequencing of the works where ever possible and without increasing the resources and manpower. The work that can be achieved without any additional cost to the project is the mitigation. The mitigation of delays can be possible by also applying the knowledge gained through previous projects experience and these can be implemented where ever their application can be suited for any specific requirement in the process of project learning. Such knowledge management will help in mitigating delays and the awareness of such knowledge through lessons learnt feedback can help prevent the delays itself.

2.3.1. Extensive and robust project management plan

Suggestions on how to manage construction delays based on empirical evidence are generally inadequate. Nonetheless, some researchers have suggested that one of the possible ways of reducing delays during the implementation phase of a construction project is to have an extensive and robust, project management plan (Abdelnaser et al., 2005). A study carried out by Nguyen et al. (2004) also suggests five factors that are needed to minimize the occurrence of delays availability of resources, precise preliminary cost estimates recast, competent project team (Nyuyen et al., 2004).

2.3.2. Managing poor qualifications, skills and experience of the contractors’ staff

Lack of project management skills and experience among contractors’ staff for public construction projects in Ghana can be managed using project management principles. The potential staff should be examined for the needed experience for the successful implementation of the project. Also, each team member may be screened to be sure they all possess the requisite competencies needed to complete tasks or activities allocated to them within the system (Cronbach, 1951). Staff knowledge of project stakeholders experience executing similar projects and awareness of nuances of the project environment must be evaluated. Again, regular training can be provided for the project team members to build their capacity and soft skills (PMI, 2013). Also, it is important to 27 acknowledge that the lack of qualified and experienced manpower can be blamed, partly, on the current boom in the construction sector, especially concerning large and more complex construction projects as suggested by Al-Kharashi and Skitmore (2009). Another important factor here may also relate to the education and training system in the country (Baki, 2004; Cordesman, 2003). The policy makers must as a matter of urgency, design policies and incentives that encourage engineering education to create a large pool of educated and well-qualified experts for contractors to recruit from.

2.3.3. Managing delay in progress payment by the client

The managing of delays in headway reimbursement by the project ‘s client (basically the government) may be done by exploring the use of project management principles. A robust cost management plan can be applied to solve the issue of delay in headway reimbursement by the project ‘s client. By adopting the use of an effective cost management plan, policies, procedures and documentation for planning, managing and controlling project costs including cash flows needed for the project can be determined from the outset of the project (PMI, 2013). The use of a cost management plan will help in the realistic determination of the amount, location and timing of progress payment of projects from a client ‘s perspective (Umar, 2018). In addition, the issue of cash flow forecasting should be a concern for all parties, it is also necessary that information in connection with project expenditures be unambiguous to clients. Generally, a robust cost management plan can minimize the time of progress payment delay by the client because it will lay out implications of not making payment available as at when due (Ulusoy & Cebelli, 2000).

2.3.4. Managing change order during construction

A change order is described as an addition or deletion from the project scope which may result in cost or time overruns or underruns (Park & Pena – Mora, 2003). It is a well-known practice in construction projects for clients to change orders during construction by either adding or deleting some activities or deliverables (Umar, 2018). Taking into consideration the importance of change order in project management, it is always necessary to inform all parties about the implication of change order and its potential effect on the project’s progress. To minimize this issue causing unwanted delays in construction projects, change orders proposed by the client may be managed by using project management principles like expert judgment, meetings and change control tools based on the project organization and environmental constraints (PMI, 2013). Quick approval of key alterations concerning the work scope by a consultant is paramount to avoid project delays. The reason is that such changes may impact project management plans, project documents, or deliverables (PMI, 2013). This problem can be avoided by engaging the services of a competent consultant who understands the implications of certain actions on the performance of a project (Berggren et al., 2001).

2.3.5. Proper cash flow forecasting

The significance of this is to identify and understand the cash flow characteristics of an organization, including its strengths and weaknesses, create cash flow forecasts and use related tools to enhance cash flow planning as well as management. Cash flow is improved through the implementation of germane strategies and the use of cash flow information for enhancing the entire operations of the project. According to the Project Management Institute (PMI), a project defines the art of coordinating and directing resources (i.e. human and material resources) through the various phases of the project to achieve a pre-set cost, quality, objectives of scope, time, and participating objectives. The management aspect of the construction project includes planning, coordination, and controlling of the various operations inside the project.

3. Methods

The study adopted a cross-sectional survey design. The target population of the study comprises construction professionals in Ghana. The study used stratified random sampling and purposive sampling techniques were used by the study. Consulting firms, Architects, contractors and construction firms were selected using Stratified random sampling. The construction professionals within these organisations were then selected using a purposive sampling technique. The standard for selection was based number of years of experience and the threshold was 2 years. According to Walliman (2005), purposive sampling is a useful sampling technique that allows a researcher to get information from a simple population that one thinks knows most about the subject matter.

The survey design was based on a questionnaire developed and tested by Bird and Dominey-Howes (2008). However, some questions were added while others were adjusted or removed from the original questionnaire to suit the regional setting and hazards. The purpose of developing and implementing the questionnaire was to generate data that may be useful to emergency management agencies for developing mitigation strategies. To identify insights and differences in perceptions between stakeholder groups, distinct questionnaires were drafted for the various parties in the construction industry in the selected regions. The proposed contents were discussed with key management personnel from the locality before this pilot investigation and minor adjustments were made according to their comments and views. To produce quantifiable and in-depth results that will be meaningful to emergency management agencies, open and closed questions were incorporated into the design. Check-box answers were provided for certain closed questions with the option “other, please specify” so as not to limit participant responses to pre-defined answers. To gain an in-depth understanding of knowledge and motivations participants were asked “why”, or “if yes/no, can you tell me/can you describe, following certain closed questions. Where applicable, open questions were used to avoid leading participants into pre-defined answers and to gather more detailed responses. The data for the questionnaire was collected using five-point Likert’s scale questionnaires at a single point in time. The questionnaire was administered by the researcher to the participants directly in May 2021.

A pilot study was conducted at Koforidua (Ghana) in the eastern region to assess the validity (internal consistencies) and reliability of the questionnaires to enhance their accuracy for assessment and evaluation. Participants for the pilot study were drawn from the various clients, contractors, subcontractors, engineers, architects and consultants and other workers at Koforidua. They completed the questionnaire and in addition, provided suggestions for its modification to help remove any ambiguity. The reliability of the questionnaire, which was concerned with its ability to measure consistently, was determined using Cronbach’s alpha. A Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.84 was obtained for the questionnaires used which were considered to be adequate.

4. Results

4.1. Demographics

Six hundred and forty-four (644) questionnaires were distributed to the respondents. Three Hundred Thirty (330) questionnaires were recovered and considered fit for analysis. Therefore, a response rate of 51% was achieved. This response rate may be considered high as according to (mbeah (2012) and Kheni and Ackon (2015).

According to the Table 3, 10 of the respondents representing 3% were female while 320 representing 97% were male. These results confirm that the construction industry is male dominated as found by Jerie (2012).

Table 3. Gender distribution of respondents.

Gender	Frequency	Percent	Cumulative Percent
Male	320	96.9	96.9
Female	10	3.1	100.0
Total	330	100.0

In relation to the age distribution of the respondents as shown in Table 4, 91 representing 28% were between 21 and 30 years, 101 representing 31% were between the ages of 31–40 years, 87 representing 26% were between 41 and 50 years, and 51 representing 15% of the respondents were above 50 years.

Table 4. Age categories of respondents.

Age Category	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
21–30 years	91	27.6	28.2	28.2
31–40 years	101	30.6	31.3	59.4
41–50 years	87	26.4	26.9	86.4
Above 50 years	44	13.3	13.6	100.0
Total	330	100.0

In relation to their experience, 36 respondents representing 11% indicated that, they have been in the construction industry for less than 5 years, 124 respondents representing 38% had worked in the construction industry between 5 and 10 years, 51 respondents representing 15% have worked in the construction industry between 11 and 15 years, 99 respondents representing 30% had worked in the construction industry between 15 and 20 years whiles the remaining 21 respondents representing 6% had worked in the construction industry for more than 10 years. Table 5 shows working experience of the respondents.

Table 5. Working experience of respondents.

Number of Years of Experience	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Less than 5 years	36	10.9	10.9	10.9
5–10 years	124	37.6	37.6	48.5
11–15 years	50	15.2	15.2	63.6
15–20 years	99	30.0	30.0	93.6
Over 10 years	21	6.4	6.4	100.0

The distribution of positions of the construction professionals surveyed as indicated in Table 6 showed that; 34 respondents representing 10% were project managers, 105 respondents representing 32% were site managers/engineers, 78 respondents representing 24% were quantity surveyors, 45 respondents representing 14% were architects, 46 respondents representing 14% were general foremen with the remaining 22 respondents representing 7% were other professionals.

Table 6. Position of respondents.

Work Schedule	Frequency (f)	Percentage (%)	Cumulative Percent
Project Manager	34	10.3	10.3
Site Manager	105	31.8	42.1
Quantity Surveyor	78	23.6	65.7
Architect	45	13.6	79.3
General Foreman	46	13.9	93.2
Others	22	6.8	100

Seventy-two (72) out of 330 respondents representing 22% had Construction Technician Course Part III, 82 respondents which form 25% had a Diploma, 121 respondents representing 37% had a First degree, and 55 respondents representing 17% were Master’s degree holders. Table 7 shows the educational level of the respondents.

Table 7. Educational level of respondents.

Level of education	Frequency (f)	Percentage (%)	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Technician course part III	72	21.8	21.8	21.8
High National Diploma	82	24.8	24.8	46.7
First degree	121	36.7	36.7	83.3
Master’s degree	55	16.7	16.7	100.0
Total	330	100	100.0

4.2. Causal factors of delays

Both the Guttman-Kaiser rule and the Cattell scree test were embraced in deciding the number of elements to take out. Guttman-Kaiser’s conclusion proposes that those variables with an Eigenvalue greater than 1 ought to be retained, while the Cattell scree test recommends that any remaining parts after the one starting from the elbow ought not to be involved. Applying these procedures to Table 8: the number of principal components to be removed recommends that eight (8) components ought to be extracted for causal factors of delay in construction projects (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Scree plot.

Table 8. Component matrix.

	Component
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
Problems in financing or payment of completed work.	.498	.220	−.114	−.420	.149	.037	−.210	.382
Frequent variation orders/changes of scope of project	.449	.285	−.306	−.397	.271	−.180	.153	.230
Contractor selection methods (negotiation, lowest bidder)	.743	−.193	.006	−.198	−.335	−.219	.142	.156
Frequent interference by client during project execution	.782	.121	−.241	−.052	.104	−.167	.129	.232
Incompetence on the part of project team	.730	−.412	.177	−.097	−.311	.006	−.141	.025
Excessive bureaucracy of client organization	.435	−.005	−.238	.511	−.263	−.365	.137	−.175
Late release of site and or land acquisition problems.	.316	.374	−.413	−.028	.035	.244	.442	−.273
Unrealistic or optimistic deadline set by client	.689	−.013	−.316	.110	.217	−.033	.211	−.003
Inadequate contractor experience/incompetent contractor	.496	−.642	.205	.045	.067	.424	.041	.036
Lack of technical professionals/incompetent project team	.617	−.509	−.048	−.002	.099	.483	.007	−.030
Ineffective planning and scheduling	.327	−.746	.014	.050	.012	−.004	.199	.063
Inaccurate estimating of construction materials	.412	−.691	.120	−.097	.245	.251	−.140	−.100
Poor site management and supervision	.618	−.502	−.044	.017	−.329	−.060	.237	.137
Poor site coordination	.734	−.162	−.140	.045	−.034	.120	−.244	.215
Late delivery/shortage of construction materials or fuel	.180	.533	.062	−.076	−.034	.130	−.354	.132
Financing difficulties faced by contractor	.511	.342	−.133	.198	−.035	.652	−.147	.120
Problems or challenges relating to subcontractors	.249	.210	.040	.175	−.592	.430	.043	−.383
Rework due to mistakes or defects in construction	.343	.228	−.150	.318	.115	−.088	−.670	−.295
Low productivity level of labours	.318	.373	.176	.175	−.104	.024	−.035	−.324
Shortage of labour	.545	.260	−.203	.111	−.304	.240	−.355	.128
Unqualified workface or low levels of skill of labour	.462	.377	−.033	.101	−.352	.265	.115	−.085
Labour disputes and /or strike actions	.592	.447	−.239	−.112	.331	.050	.086	.086
Low level of mechanization	.667	−.389	.099	−.225	.148	.053	.152	−.125
Inadequate site investigation/unforeseen subsurface	.783	−.252	.018	−.083	.053	−.262	−.026	.035
Lack of clarity in project scope	.609	−.194	−.023	−.027	−.066	−.294	.077	−.344
Lack of constructability reviews in design	.675	−.178	−.218	.013	.120	−.281	.041	−.302
Substandard contract/incompetent or inexperienced staff	.561	.165	.375	.180	.436	.054	−.024	−.140
Economic conditions (Inflation rates, interest rates etc).	.454	−.173	.598	.137	.428	.114	−.105	−.165
Political situations	.607	.460	.032	−.430	−.004	−.110	−.138	−.152
Corruption	.488	.580	.253	−.246	.212	−.139	−.087	−.032
Government regulations and permit approval	.087	.341	.100	.645	−.063	−.214	.185	.310
Shortage of construction materials	−.041	.167	.231	.538	.393	−.043	−.021	.314
Late delivery of material	.194	−.019	−.066	.565	−.010	.033	.279	.300
Poor quality of materials	.009	.101	.531	.274	.376	.230	.259	.011
Escalation of material prices	.265	.611	.120	−.110	−.227	.306	.301	.113
Insufficient number of equipment	.274	.537	−.053	−.125	.335	.108	.427	−.312
Frequent equipment breakdown	.577	.036	−.131	.416	.103	−.360	−.291	−.245
Shortage of equipment parts	.645	.075	−.148	.225	.045	−.071	.009	.249
Weather conditions	.664	.170	.425	.106	−.331	−.160	−.053	.170
Difficult site conditions	.384	.167	.685	−.278	−.241	−.119	−.066	.159
Slow site clearance	.124	.286	.708	−.104	−.242	−.280	.254	−.093

Extraction Method: Principal component analysis.

4.3. Variance explained by factors

Table 9 presents the extracted components with initial Eigen values. A total of eight factors were significant based on a cut Eigen value of 1. Table 10 presents a summary of the descriptive labels of the various Causal Factors of delay risk of the eight (8) components extracted from forty-one (41) factors.

Table 9. Variance explained by factors.

Component	Initial Eigenvalues			Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %	Total	% of Variance	Cumulative %
1	10.728	26.165	26.165	10.728	26.165	26.165
2	5.372	13.102	39.267	5.372	13.102	39.267
3	2.958	7.215	46.482	2.958	7.215	46.482
4	2.724	6.644	53.126	2.724	6.644	53.126
5	2.485	6.061	59.187	2.485	6.061	59.187
6	2.309	5.631	64.818	2.309	5.631	64.818
7	1.986	4.844	69.662	1.986	4.844	69.662
8	1.741	4.247	73.909	1.741	4.247	73.909

Table 10. Summary of the descriptive labels of the various Causal Factors.

Component	Name
Component 1	Problems in financing or payment of completed work.
Component 2	Frequent variation orders/changes of scope of project
Component 3	Contractor selection methods (negotiation, lowest bidder)
Component 4	Frequent interference by client during project execution
Component 5	Incompetence on the part of project team
Component 6	Excessive bureaucracy of client organization
Component 7	Late release of site and or land acquisition problems.
Component 8	Unrealistic or optimistic deadline set by client

4.4. Effects of delays

Table 6 shows a descriptive statistic of the extent of the effects of delays in the construction projects of the Ghanaian construction industry. Utilizing the Likert scale, which ranked “Strongly disagree” as 1, “disagree” as 2, “neutral” as 3, “agree” as 4, and “strongly agree” as 5. From Table 11, a few variables were distinguished as effects of delay in the construction projects of the Ghanaian construction industry. Any ranking that has an indicator having a mean of 2.5 or below is identified as not agreed to and a mean of 3.5 or above agreed to. Eight effects of delay factors were agreed upon namely; Delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants ($\overline{X}=4.37,$ $\sigma =.703$), Delays increase the cost of the project over and above the original tender figure ($\overline{X}=4.32,$ $\sigma =.913$), Economic losses to contractors occur due to delays in project completion ($\overline{X}=4.28,$ $\sigma =.672$), Delays compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders ($\overline{X}=4.23,$ $\sigma =.761$), Reduced profitability of clients’ organizations happens as a result of delays and their related effects ($\overline{X}=4.22,$ $\sigma =.807$), Quantity performance is abysmally low whenever delays in project completion or schedule occur ($\overline{X}=4.21,$ $\sigma =.860$), The outcome of delays in project completion is increased exposure of site operatives and personnel to hazards on site ($\overline{X}=4.20,$ $\sigma =.709$), and Disputes occur in the projects where delays occur or are eminent ($\overline{X}=4.09,$ $\sigma =.822$).

Table 11. Descriptive statistics of effects of delays.

Effect of delay	N	Mean	Std. Deviation
Delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants	330	4.37	.703
Delays result in increase of cost of project over and above the original tender figure	330	4.32	.913
Economic losses to contractor occur due to delays in project completion	330	4.28	.672
Delays compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders.	330	4.23	.761
Reduced profitability of clients organization happens as a result of delays and its related effects.	330	4.22	.807
Quantity performance is abysmally low whenever delays in project completion or schedule occur.	330	4.21	.860
The outcome of delays in project completion is increased exposure of site operatives and personnel to hazards on site.	330	4.20	.709
Disputes occur in the projects where delays occur or are eminent	330	4.09	.822
Valid N (listwise)	330

4.5. Measures for mitigating the effects of delays

Table 12 indicates a descriptive statistic of measures for mitigating the effects of delays in the construction projects of the Ghanaian construction industry. Utilizing the Likert scale, which ranked “Strongly disagree” as 1, “disagree” as 2, “neutral” as 3, “agree” as 4, and “strongly agree” as 5. From Table 12, a few variables were distinguished as measures for mitigating the effects of delays in the construction projects of the Ghanaian construction industry. Any ranking that has an indicator having a mean of 2.5 or below is identified as not agreed to and a mean of 3.5 or above agreed to. Eight factors as measures for mitigating the effects of delays were agreed upon namely; Ensuring affect scheduling and planning of projects ($\overline{X}=4.53,$ $\sigma =.822$), Adhering to the payment schedule and prompt honouring of payment certificates ($\overline{X}=4.38,$ $\sigma =.784$), Drafting effective contract clauses to effectively manage contractual relationships and issues that can adversely affect ($\overline{X}=4.36,$ $\sigma =.739$), Training of site personnel (contractors’ and consultants’) on project management best practices ($\overline{X}=4.26,$ $\sigma =.828$), Contractor’s effective management of the supply chain ($\overline{X}=4.24,$ $\sigma =.748$), Implementation of integrated safety, health, environmental, and quality management systems ($\overline{X}=4.19,$ $\sigma =.730$), Educating the client on the possible repercussions of change orders and other external factors on the project ($\overline{X}=4.00,$ $\sigma =.850$), and Adopting integrated procurement systems ($\overline{X}=3.90,$ $\sigma =1.003$).

Table 12. Descriptive statistics of measures for mitigating effects of delays.

Measure for mitigating effects of delays	N	Mean	Std. Deviation
Ensuring effect scheduling and planning of projects	325	4.53	.822
Adhering to payment schedule and prompt honouring of payment certificates.	318	4.38	.784
Drafting effective contract clauses to effectively manage contractual relationships and issues that can adversely affect.	325	4.36	.739
Training of site personnel (contractors’ and consultants’) on project management best practices.	325	4.26	.828
Contractors effective management of supply chain	325	4.24	.748
Implementation of integrated safety, health, environmental, and quality management systems.	325	4.19	.730
Educating client on the possible repercussions of change orders and other external factors on the project.	325	4.00	.850
Adopting integrated procurement systems.	325	3.90	1.003
Valid N (listwise)	318

4.6. Interactions between causal factors, severity of delays, and mitigating measures

Finding the interactions of variables between causal factors, the severity of delay, and mitigating measures deemed necessary to conduct a reliability test of the various factors under study as well as their relationships. Prior to examining the effects of causal factors (CF), the severity of the effects of delays (SE), and the effectiveness of measures for mitigating the effects of delays (MF), it was deemed necessary to gauge the extent of reliability for each of the variables used in later analysis. Reliability was judged via the calculation of a Cronbach alpha coefficient (Cronbach, 1951). The Cronbach alpha coefficients for causal factors, severity of effects, and measures for mitigating the effects were 0.940, 0.949, and 0.943 respectively. All three coefficients were above the threshold of 0.8 suggested by Nunnally (1978).

4.7. Significance of relationships

Table 13 shows the significant relationships between the variables, thus significant relationships between the effects of causal factors (CF), the severity of effects of delays (SE), and the effectiveness of measures for mitigating the effects of delays (MF). The path diagram for the relationships between the variable are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Relationships between the variables.

Table 13. Significance of relationships.

Observed Variable	Estimate	S.E	C.R	P	Label
CF2 <–- severityofEffect	1.000
CF4 <–- severityofEffect	.932	.204	4.566	***	par_1
CF5 <–- severityofEffect	.889	.220	4.042	***	par_2
CF1 <–- severityofEffect	1.541	.280	5.511	***	par_3
CF9 <–- severityofEffect	1.562	.284	5.491	***	par_4
CF11 <–- severityofEffect	1.372	.261	5.265	***	par_5
CF15 <–- severityofEffect	.747	.154	4.839	***	par_6
CF32 <–- severityofEffect	1.072	.212	5.052	***	par_7
CF20 <–- severityofEffect	.858	.202	4.252	***	par_8
CF21 <–- severityofEffect	.976	.216	4.507	***	par_9
CF28 <–- severityofEffect	.067	.161	.417	.676	par_10
CF30 <–- severityofEffect	−.034	.146	−.229	.819	par_11
CF37 <–- severityofEffect	.587	.196	2.997	.003	par_12
MF1 <–- severityofEffect	.960	.203	4.726	***	par_13
MF2 <–- severityofEffect	1.049	.212	4.959	***	par_14
MF3 <–- severityofEffect	.710	.171	4.157	***	par_15
MF4 <–- severityofEffect	.874	.191	4.571	***	par_16
MF5 <–- severityofEffect	.864	.184	4.695	***	par_17
MF6 <–- severityofEffect	.379	.150	2.534	.011	par_18
MF7 <–- severityofEffect	1.394	.246	5.654	***	par_19
MF8 <–- severityofEffect	1.028	.237	4.345	***	par_20

5. Discussion of results

5.1. Effects of delays

The results show various extents of the effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. Utilizing the Likert scale from the views of the major construction professionals, a few variables were distinguished as effects of delays in the construction industry. Ranked in descending order, eight (8) effects of delay factors were agreed upon, namely; delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants with a mean ($\overline{X})$ of 4.37 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .703. which shows that Delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants and are the most severe effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. This finding supports the samilar findings by Talukhaba (1999) who found that the factors that cause project delays are negatively associated with the project participants. Thus, delays can be caused by all project participants involved in the projects (Noulmanee et al., 1999). Therefore, any delays that affect the integrity or image of the project participants are of great magnitude and should not be overlooked.

Delays increase in the cost of the project over and above the original tender figure with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.32 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .913, which implies that the increase of cost of the project over and above the original tender figure as a result of delays is severe in the Ghanaian construction industry. This is in line with Amoatey and Ankrah (2017) study that affirms that; delays during construction lead to an increase in project cost above the original tender (cost overrun). Again, Amoatey et al. (2015) also found that cost overrun (an increase in the cost of the project over and above the original tender figure) is the most important effect of delay in the Ghanaian construction industry. Therefore, to ensure that the original tender figure is maintained, the project team including the client speed-up decision-making and level of experience become vital to ensure that the project moves on smoothly as scheduled without delays.

Economic losses to contractors occur due to delays in project completion with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.28 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .672, and according to Pall et al. (2019) delays in project completion are considered to be one of the most common problems which create economic losses for contractors. Client-related problems significantly undermine the progress of work causing the project to be delayed and leading to economic loss for the contractor (Yap et al., 2021). It is noted that aside from the contractor is capable of financing the project which could cause the project to be delayed, good site management and supervision accompanied by the ability to plan and monitor project progress appropriately is vital to ensure that optimal project performance is met to prevent delays.

Delays compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.23 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .761. The risk involved in projects is one of the major factors that result in project delays which affect all stakeholders in the construction industry. This result established that delays cause coordination issues between project stakeholders which negatively affect construction project performance (Zailani et al., 2016). Stakeholders need to change their existing practices which causes a delay to ensure the timely delivery of projects (Mpofu et al., 2017). Reduced profitability of clients’ organizations happens as a result of delays and their related effects with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.22 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .807, which implies that the level of profit expected by the clients is reduced due to delays. Musarrat et al., (2016) stated that project profitability is critical due to delay causes.

A quality performance is abysmally low whenever delays in project completion or schedule occur with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.21 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .860, also shows that project completion or schedule delays affect the performance quality of a project. This result is in line with Enshassi et al. (2009), as delay in project completion or schedule affects the quality performance of the project. The outcome of delays in project completion is increased exposure of site operatives and personnel to hazards on site with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.20 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .709. hazards in construction are inevitable, but delays in project completion expose construction staff to a higher risk. This result is in line with Osei-Asibey et al. (2021), that delays in project completion (including abandoned projects) increase the exposure of construction staff to hazards.

Disputes occur in the projects where delays occur or are eminent with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.09 and a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of 0.822. construction delays normally end up in disputes between project parties. This result was in line with the result obtained by Sambasivan and Soon (2007), as disputes occur as a result of the delay of the project. These results indicated that the above severity of effects of delays factors indicates the undesirable effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. Thus, the effects of delay severely result in economic losses to the contractor, affect the integrity or image of project participants, increase the cost of the project over and above the original tender figure, compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders, reduced profitability of clients’ organization, low-quality performance, expose site operatives and personnel to hazards, and Disputes.

5.2. Measures for mitigating the effects of delays

The effects of Delays to projects can be reduced by applying measures that can be returned as mitigation of delays. Measures for mitigating the effects of delays are possible only by re-sequencing the works where ever possible and without increasing the resources and manpower. The work that can be achieved without any additional cost to the project is mitigation. Table 4.11 shows various measures for mitigating the effects of delays in the construction industry from the expert opinion of construction professionals. The first eight (8) distinguished factors were: Ensuring effective scheduling and planning of projects with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.53, a standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .822. This means that, as always, the case, effective scheduling and planning of the project is a highly accepted factor as a measure for mitigating the effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. This statement agrees with Alotaibi et al. (2016) who claim that effective scheduling and planning of projects through the application of appropriate project management techniques, tools, and principles mitigate the effects of delays.

Adhering to the payment schedule and prompt honoring of payment certificates with a means ($\overline{X})$ of 4.53, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .822. This will ensure that adequate funds are available to complete the project and help avoid persistent stoppage of work as a result of payment delays. Effective payment management plans can bring about a reduction in the chances of progressive payments being delayed by the client because it will caution against the consequences of not making the payments when it approaches (Ulusoy & Cebelli, 2000). This is agreed by Bashir et al. (2019) that, initiation of prompt payments adheres to the payment schedule and certificates mitigate delays.

Drafting effective contract clauses to effectively manage contractual relationships and issues that can adversely affect a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.36, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .739. In all types of contractual relationships, there are significant disadvantages undesirably affecting the achievement of quality management. As a result of this, clients are suffering from many problems such as increasing costs, not getting the quality and value for their money, and dissatisfaction with the design and the finished product. The delay analysis cannot be done unless a suitable critical path scheduling system is effectively utilized on-site and governed by relevant clauses of the conditions of the contract. This result confirms the suggestion made by Sambasivan and Soon (2007) that instigating effective contract clauses at the initial stage can effectively manage contractual relationships and issues that affect payments to cause delays.

Training of site personnel (contractors and consultants) on project management best practices with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.26, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .828. Therefore, when organizational procedures and processes are planned, well-defined, proactive, and generally conform to best practices, quality performance, and consistency is achieved. This statement agrees with Abedi et al. (2011) claim that developing professional and skillful human resources in the construction industry through proper training and practices is a measure to mitigate the effects of delay.

Contractors’ effective management of the supply chain with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.24, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .748. Managing the supply chain and adopting effective quality systems and procedures cannot yield the best results without the contractor creating a quality culture for the parties to operate in. In support of this result, Arantes and Ferreira (2021) stated that construction professionals should set up an effective and efficient supply chain management framework as a measure to mitigate the effects of delays.

Implementation of integrated safety, health, environmental, and quality management systems with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.19, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .730. At the construction sites, safety, health, environmental, and quality management systems rank as one of the best available practices that establish a safe environment. The enforcement of an effective safety management system mitigates accidents to reduce delays. This measure agrees with Tamimi et al. (2017), as that health and safety integration and quality management systems implementation addresses major technical and procedural challenges.

Educating the client on the possible repercussions of change orders and other external factors on the project with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 4.00, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of .850. It is quite common in construction projects for the client to issue change orders during the project construction, by either adding or deleting some deliverables or activities (Ibbs et al., 2007). Taking into consideration, the clients of the projects must be made aware of the consequences of the change order and its possible effects on the progress of the project (Alotaibi et al., 2016). In support of this result, Toor and Ogunlana (2008) stated that the client should be educated on the need to minimize change orders to mitigate the effects of delays.

Adopting integrated procurement systems with a mean($\overline{X})$ of 3.90, and standard deviation $(\sigma )$ of 1.003. Integrated procurement systems include all the procedures and responsibilities of design, construction, and management. Normally, an organization or contractor takes responsibility for a specific project. This measure agrees with Moodley-Nyide and Haupt (2020) as that, the adaptation of integrated procurement systems makes provision for the organization or project team to manage the scope of work which would assist in reducing delays.

6. Conclusion

Delays adversely affect the integrity or image of project participants and are the most severe effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. The severity of effects of delays factors indicate the undesirable effects of delays in the Ghanaian construction industry. Thus, the effects of delay severely result in economic losses to the contractor, affect the integrity or image of project participants, increase the cost of the project over and above the original tender figure, compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders, reduced profitability of clients’ organization, low-quality performance, expose site operatives and personnel to hazards, and disputes, delays compromise business/commercial relationships between project stakeholders, and quality performance is abysmally low whenever delays in project completion or schedule occur, and disputes occur in the projects where are eminent.

Applying strategies that can be used as delay mitigation can lessen the effects of delays on projects. Only by rescheduling the tasks when it is feasible and without adding more resources or personnel are actions for reducing the effects of delays achievable. The study found that respecting payment schedule and honoring payment certificates promptly, clear and unambiguous contract provisions, successful supply chain management by contractors, training of site workers (contractors and consultants), implementing project management best practices, and educating clients on the potential effects of change orders were the effective measures to mitigate the effects of delays in building construction projects.

The government should also ensure that project bidding should be based on experience and expertise in a particular area and not full of cronyism. With this in place it implies the best company will get the project and will be completed within the time allocated without any delay. The construction professionals and clients should put mitigation measure in place to prevent delays during the execution of projects since they are directly affected when there are delays in project completion. The study also recommends that payment schedule should be respected by clients (government, organisations, individuals, etc,.) by honoring payment certificates promptly.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Joseph Wesong Wepari

Joseph Wesong Wepari is a member of Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET). GH. He has practiced as an Engineer with Ghanaian and Foreign Civil Engineering firms including LIMEX BAU on Kumasi Town Roads, TAYSEC on Tamale Town Roads, AKANIN Company Limited on Ahwiaa Nkwanta-Manso Nkwanta trunk road and currently he is the C.E.O of WEPSONG COMPANY LIMITED. He holds BSc in Construction Technology in Education-U.E.W, Certificate in Education-U.E.W, Construction Technician part l and Advance Craft Certificate in Block Laying and Concreting from Tamale Polytechnic.

Mark Bright Donkor

Dr. Donkoh Mark Bright is a Lecturer in the Department of Wood Technology Education, Faculty of Technical Education with Bachelor of Education (Technology option) and Doctor of Philosophy in Wood Science and Technology. He is a Professional Teacher with twenty-four (23) years teaching experience. He has taught in all the levels of education: Basic school, Secondary school, College of Education, Technical University and now the University. My research interests are: Wood Workshop Safety, Wood Processes, Woodwork Machines and tools, Seasoning and Preservation, Primary and Secondary Wood Processing, Wood Utilization, Renewable Energy Technology, Wood Physics and Drying and Wood Finishes and Finishing.

Elijah Kusi

Elijah Kusi is a Lecturer in the Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, with Bachelor of Science in Architecture and Master of Philosophy in Construction Technology. He is currently pursuing a PhD. Programme in Construction Technology. He is a Professional Engineer associated with Institution of Engineering and Technology, Ghana (IET, Gh) and the Engineering Council with eleven (15) years industrial experience. He is also specialized in Architectural engineering with knowledge in Designing, Modeling and Simulation of Buildings, Computer Aided Design (CAD), Building Science and Efficient Design and Supervision of construction of timber structures, concrete and reinforced concrete and steel structures.