journal article·2022-01-20Open access

Project Risk in the Context of Construction Schedules—Combined Monte Carlo Simulation and Time at Risk (TaR) Approach: Insights from the Fort Bema Housing Estate Complex

Janusz Sobieraj, Dominik Metelski

Applied Sciences· Volume 12· Issue 3

Abstract

In this article, we present our own construction process model consisting of 16 stages and eight phases, which is particularly applicable to large investment projects. In the context of each project phase, we examine how the appropriate way of scheduling construction processes affects the problem of the risk of prolonging individual phases and the whole project, as well as of not meeting deadlines (which is one of the main problems faced by management practitioners in the construction industry). There are many methods for assessing risk in this context, but they tend to be overly complex and rarely used by construction practitioners. On the other hand, the risks associated with potential schedule delays can be considered holistically. One tool that can serve this purpose is the combined Monte Carlo simulation and Time-at-Risk (TaR) approach, which originates from the world of finance. We show how the implementation of the process model (individual phases) and the whole project can be considered in the context of the covariance matrix between all its phases and how changes in the arrangement of these phases can affect the risk of time extension of the whole project. Our study is based on simulation data for a large development project (Fort Bema/Parkowo-Leśne housing estate complex) in Bemowo, a district of Warsaw, carried out between 1999 and 2012. The entire investment project involved the construction of almost 120,000 m2 of floor space.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Construction Project Management and Performance · Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling · Life Cycle Costing Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Building Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, 00-637 Warsaw, Poland

Faculty of Economics and Management Sciences, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. Confidence based scheduling procedure (CBSP): A pragmatic approach to manage project schedule uncertainty
2. Sobieraj, J., and Metelski, D. (2020). Identification of the key investment project management factors in the housing construction sector in Poland. Int. J. Constr. Manag., 1–12.10.1080/15623599.2020.1844855 ↗
3. Sobieraj, J., and Metelski, D. (2021). Quantifying Critical Success Factors (CSFs) in Management of Investment-Construction Projects: Insights from Bayesian Model Averaging. Buildings, 11.10.3390/buildings11080360 ↗
4. Critical factors in successful project implementation10.1109/TEM.1987.6498856 ↗
5. Cleland, D.I., and King, W.R. (1983). Project Management Handbook, REI. [3rd ed.].
6. The View of Construction Companies’ Managers on the Impact of Economic, Environmental and Legal Policies on Investment Process Management10.24425/ace.2021.136464 ↗
7. Project scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research potentials10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.002 ↗
8. A scheduling methodology for dealing with uncertainty in construction projects10.1108/02644401111179036 ↗
9. Sobieraj, J. (2019). Wpływ Polityki Gospodarczej, Srodowiskowej i Prawnej na Zarządzanie Procesem Inwestycyjnym w Budownictwie Przemysłowym, ITE-PIB.
10. Sobieraj, J. (2020). Investment Project Management on the Housing Construction Market, Aurum Universitas Grupo Hespérides.
11. Comparison of linear scheduling model (LSM) and critical path method (CPM)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2001)127:5(374) ↗
12. East, E. (2015). Critical Path Method (CPM) Tutor for Construction Planning and Scheduling, McGraw-Hill Education.
13. Mohamed, Y. (2002). A Framework for Systematic Improvement of Construction Systems. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Alberta].
14. Koskela, L. (2000). An Exploration Towards a Production Theory and Its Application to Construction, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
15. Howell, G., and Ballard, G. (1997). Lean production theory: Moving beyond “Can-Do”. Lean Constr., 17–23.10.4324/9780203345825_Lean_production_theory ↗
16. Kong, Z., Zhang, J., Li, C., Zheng, X., and Guan, Q. (2015, January 12–13). Risk assessment of plan schedule by Monte Carlo simulation. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information Technology and Management Innovation (ICITMI), Shenzhen, China.10.2991/icitmi-15.2015.83 ↗
17. Frein, J. (2012). Handbook of Construction Management and Organization, Springer Science & Business Media.
18. Hulett, D. (2016). Practical Schedule Risk Analysis, Routledge.10.4324/9781315601885 ↗
19. Study on uncertainty of activity duration in PERT
20. Petroutsatou, K. (2019). A proposal of project management practices in public institutions through a comparative analyses of critical path method and critical chain. Int. J. Constr. Manag., 1–10.10.1080/15623599.2019.1619225 ↗
21. ProjectManagement: An R Package for Managing Projects10.32614/RJ-2020-009 ↗
22. Line-of-balance scheduling in pavement construction10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(1986)112:3(411) ↗
23. Delay Risk Assessment of Repetitive Construction Projects Using Line-of-Balance Scheduling and Monte Carlo Simulation10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001595 ↗
24. Challenges in line-of-balance scheduling10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:6(545) ↗
25. Resource leveling in line-of-balance scheduling10.1111/mice.12038 ↗
26. Soini, M., Leskelä, I., and Seppänen, O. (2004, January 3–5). Implementation of line-of-balance based scheduling and project control system in a large construction company. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Helsingor, Denmark.
27. Majumder, S., Majumder, S., and Biswas, D. (2021). Impact of effective construction planning in project performance improvement. Qual. Quant., 1–12.10.1007/s11135-021-01224-5 ↗
28. Sulbaran, T., and Ahmed, F. (2017, January 5–8). Expert System for Construction Scheduling Decision Support Based on Travelling Salesman Problem. Proceedings of the 53rd ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings, Seattle, WA, USA.
29. Resource-oriented scheduling10.1016/S0263-7863(84)80002-2 ↗
30. Factors Affecting Implementation of Resource Scheduling in Indian Construction Projects10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.174-177.2782 ↗
31. Improving construction management practice with the Last Planner System: A case study10.1108/ECAM-03-2012-0032 ↗
32. Gantt charts revisited: A critical analysis of its roots and implications to the management of projects today10.1108/17538371211268889 ↗
33. Beyond the Gantt chart: Project management moving on10.1016/S0263-2373(00)00074-8 ↗
34. Project Scheduling: Improved approach to incorporate uncertainty using Bayesian Networks10.1177/875697280703800205 ↗
35. Project cost risk analysis: A Bayesian networks approach for modeling dependencies between cost items10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.01.001 ↗
36. Machine learning algorithms for construction projects delay risk prediction10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001736 ↗
37. Quantifying schedule risk in construction projects using Bayesian belief networks10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.03.003 ↗
38. Empirical assessment of the likelihood and duration of highway project time delays10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000437 ↗
39. Lower bound for the mean project completion time in dynamic PERT networks10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.015 ↗
40. Sobieraj, J., Metelski, D., and Mihi Ramírez, A. (2019, January 28–30). Pivotal project management factors in the context of polish residential construction projects. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industry, Business and Social Sciences (IBSS), Osaka, Japan.
41. A quantile-based Time at Risk: A new approach for assessing risk in financial markets10.1016/j.physa.2013.07.020 ↗
42. Kovalenko, T., and Sornette, D. (2012). Dynamical Diagnosis and Solutions for Resilient Natural and Social Systems. arXiv.
43. Sobieraj, J., Metelski, D., and Mihi Ramírez, A. (2019, January 3–4). The view of SME construction companies’ managers on the impact of economic, environmental and legal policies on investment process management. Case of Polish Companies. In Proceedings of the XXVIII AEDEM International Conference, Tokyo, Japan.
44. The $2000 hour: How managers influence project performance through the rework cycle
45. Struktura i uwarunkowania współczesnego procesu inwestycyjno-budowlanego
46. Koordynacja budowlanego procesu inwestycyjnego
47. Laufer, A., and Howell, G.A. (1993). Construction Planning: Revising the Paradigm, Project Management Institute.
48. Impact of spatial planning on the pre-investment phase of the development process in the residential construction field10.1515/ace-2017-0020 ↗
49. Project Management Institute (2004). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project Management Institute.
50. Basu, A. (1998). Practical Risk Analysis in Scheduling, AACE International Transactions.
51. Rubinstein, R.Y., and Kroese, D.P. (2016). Simulation and the Monte Carlo Method, John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781118631980 ↗
52. Selection of Value-at-Risk models10.1002/for.868 ↗
53. Managing product development projects: On the significance of fountains and deadlines10.1177/017084069801900602 ↗
54. Managing inter-institutional projects: The significance of isochronism, timing norms and temporal misfits10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.02.007 ↗
55. Charting time: Timelines as temporal boundary objects10.2307/3069324 ↗
56. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at Nasa, University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226346960.001.0001 ↗
57. Sobieraj, J. (2017). Review of Knowledge on Strategy Development, Strategic Management and Strategic Analysis, Wydawnictwo ITEE.
58. A retrospective look at our evolving understanding of project success10.1177/875697280503600403 ↗
59. Delusion and deception in large infrastructure projects: Two models for explaining and preventing executive disaster10.2307/41166485 ↗
60. Delusion and deception in large infrastructure projects: Two models for explaining and preventing executive disaster
61. A risk-management approach to a successful infrastructure project
62. The price of robustness10.1287/opre.1030.0065 ↗
63. Methodology for enhancing reliability of predictive project schedules in construction10.17531/ein.2015.3.20 ↗
64. A bi-objective model for robust resource-constrained project scheduling10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.04.002 ↗
65. The use of buffers in project management: The trade-off between stability and makespan10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.08.004 ↗
66. Namazian, A., Yakhchali, S.H., Yousefi, V., and Tamošaitienė, J. (2019). Combining Monte Carlo simulation and Bayesian networks methods for assessing completion time of projects under risk. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 16.10.3390/ijerph16245024 ↗
67. Fitzsimmons, J., Hong, Y., and Brilakis, I. (2020, January 27–28). Improving Construction Project Schedules before Execution. Proceedings of the 37th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Aarhus, Denmark.10.22260/ISARC2020/0157 ↗
68. Construction project network evaluation with correlated schedule risk analysis model10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2008)134:1(49) ↗
69. Relational incentive contracts10.1257/000282803322157115 ↗
70. Causes of conflicts in a construction industry: A communicational approach10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.922 ↗
71. Factors influencing construction time and cost overruns on high-rise projects in Indonesia10.1080/014461997373132 ↗
72. Estimating weather impact on the duration of construction activities10.1139/l96-122 ↗
73. Recession effects in United States public sector construction contracting: Focus on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 200910.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000075 ↗
74. Safety, space and structure quality requirements in construction scheduling10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00193-8 ↗
75. Front-end planning for large and small infrastructure projects: Comparison of project definition rating index tools10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000611 ↗
76. Ortiz-González, J.I., Pellicer, E., and Howell, G. (2014, January 25–27). Contingency management in construction projects: A survey of Spanish contractors. Proceedings of the IGLC-22, Oslo, Norway.
77. Mubarak, S.A. (2015). Construction Project Scheduling and Control, John Wiley & Sons.
78. Grzywiński, J. (2015). Proces Inwestycyjny Zgodnie z Polskim Prawem Budowlanym, Wyd. Kancelarii Furtek Komosa Aleksandrowicz.
79. Zabielski, J. (2014). Proces Inwestycyjno-Budowlany. Materiały Dydaktyczne Wydziału Prawa i Administracji UW, Wyd. CRE Edukacja.
80. Dzierżewicz, Z., and Dylewski, J. (2011). Proces Budowlany w Świetle Ustawy Prawo Budowlane, Wyd. Grupa APEXnet.
81. Strzelecka, E., Glinkowska, B., Maciejewska, M., and Wiażel-Sasin, B. (2014). Zarządzanie Przedsięwzięciami Budowlanymi. Podstawy, Procedury, Przykłady, Wyd. Politechniki Łódzkiej.
82. Połoński, M. (2009). Kierowanie Budowlanym Procesem Inwestycyjnym, Wyd. SGGW.
83. Baryłka, A., and Baryłka, J. (2015). Funkcje Techniczne w Budownictwie. Przewodnik Po Inwestycyjnym i Eksploatacyjnym Procesie Budowlanym, Polcen.
84. Risk management of construction schedule by PERT with Monte Carlo simulation10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.548-549.1646 ↗
85. Hendradewa, A.P. (2018, January 27–29). Schedule Risk Analysis by Different Phases of Construction Project Using CPM-PERT and Monte-Carlo Simulation. Proceedings of the 11th International Seminar on Industrial Engineering & Management (ISIEM), Technology and Innovation Challenges towards Industry 4.0 Era, Makasar, Indonesia.
86. Evaluating project completion times when activity times are Weibull distributed10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00269-8 ↗
87. Letter to the editor—The PERT model for the distribution of an activity time10.1287/opre.10.3.405 ↗
88. Johnson, N.L., Kotz, S., and Balakrishnan, N. (1995). Continuous Univariate Distributions, John Wiley & Sons.
89. Kay, M. (2022, January 18). ggdist: Visualizations of Distributions and Uncertainty. R Package Version 3.0.1. Available online: https://mjskay.github.io/ggdist/.10.31219/osf.io/2gsz6 ↗
90. Vose, D. (2008). Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide, John Wiley & Sons.
91. Buchsbaum, P. (2012). Modified PERT Simulation, Great Solutions.
92. Probabilistic control of project performance using control limit curves10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2007)133:12(957) ↗
93. PERT vs. Monte Carlo Simulation along with the suitable distribution effect
94. Measuring the efficiency of project control using fictitious and empirical project data10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.05.006 ↗
95. Koulinas, G.K., Xanthopoulos, A.S., Tsilipiras, T.T., and Koulouriotis, D.E. (2020). Schedule delay risk analysis in construction projects with a simulation-based expert system. Buildings, 10.10.3390/buildings10080134 ↗
96. Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters
97. Research and development projects upon real options view10.5755/j01.ee.25.3.2737 ↗
98. Construction documentation used as indicators of delays
99. PMBoK vs. PRINCE2 in the context of Polish construction projects: Structural Equation Modelling approach10.24425/ace.2021.137185 ↗
100. Próba standaryzacji procesu zarządzania na etapie planowania i realizacji przedsięwzięć budowlanych