Insights into the application of risk tools and techniques by construction project managers

Abstract This study analyses the practical application of risk management tools by project managers in their construction projects. Using a grounded theory approach we applied purposive sampling to select 25 Australian construction project managers to identify tools utilised to analyse risk and tool preferences. Themes were developed though analysis of the in-depth interviews using QSR-NVivo11. The results indicate that the most common methods are within the look-up and supporting methods categories, followed by the evaluation and scenario methods. There is poor utilisation of statistical methods, due to the uniqueness of projects, the lack of data and time pressure on projects. The results were consistent across project managers; irrespective of project size, type of organisation or experience. However, more experienced project managers rely less on evaluation tools. The research provides evidence that many of the tools promoted by the risk standards/associations do not seem to reflect current project manager practice. The implication is that more effort should be given to appreciating the risk tools that are appropriate for projects and the importance of transferring and spreading experience among PMs.

[1]  P. Zou,et al.  Managing Risks in Construction Projects: Life Cycle and Stakeholder Perspectives , 2009 .

[2]  Anna Corinna Cagliano,et al.  Choosing project risk management techniques. A theoretical framework , 2015 .

[3]  Jeff Breckon,et al.  Using QSR‐NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project: an account of a worked example , 2010 .

[4]  Abdulmaten Taroun,et al.  Towards a better modelling and assessment of construction risk: Insights from a literature review , 2014 .

[5]  Adiel Teixeira de Almeida,et al.  A systematic literature review of multicriteria and multi-objective models applied in risk management , 2017 .

[6]  Terry Lyons,et al.  Project risk management in the Queensland engineering construction industry : a survey , 2004 .

[7]  E. Kutsch,et al.  Deliberate ignorance in project risk management , 2010 .

[8]  M. Skitmore,et al.  The Management of Transport Construction Projects: A Survey of Public Sector Organisations in Queensland Australia , 2010 .

[9]  Mike Metcalfe,et al.  Concept Mapping as a Methodical and Transparent Data Analysis Process , 2015 .

[10]  A. Carlsen.  On the tacit side of organizational identity: Narrative unconscious and figured practice , 2016 .

[11]  Grant Purdy,et al.  ISO 31000:2009—Setting a New Standard for Risk Management , 2010, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[12]  W. Duncan.  A GUIDE TO THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE , 1996 .

[13]  Konstantinos Kirytopoulos,et al.  Risk management for SMEs: Tools to use and how , 2006 .

[14]  H. Suri.  Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis , 2011 .

[15]  V. Marconi,et al.  Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation , 2017, Qualitative health research.

[16]  Ximena Ferrada,et al.  Risk Management in Construction Projects: A Knowledge-based Approach , 2014 .

[17]  R. Perey.  Making sense of sustainability through an individual interview narrative , 2015 .