Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265602951
CITATION READS
1 3,207
2 authors, including:
Nicholas Chileshe
University of South Australia
232 PUBLICATIONS 693 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Designing for reverse logistics (DfRL) within the building life cycle: Practices, drivers and barriers View
project
Reverse logistics supply chain and building information modelling: An integrated and standardised
approach for testing, grading and re-processing of salvaged construction industry products View
project
All content following this page was uploaded by Nicholas Chileshe on 15 September 2014.
Abstract: Risk events associated with highway and road construction projects have a major impact on issues related to cost, time and
quality of project delivery. Unexpected risk events result in either positive or negative outcomes often causing deviations from project
plans and making construction projects particularly prone to risk. Despite the extensive research on risk management in the construction
industry, there is limited literature dealing specifically with project risk in developing countries, especially within the African context. It is
against this background that this study investigates the use and awareness of risk assessment and management processes, and the impact of
risk events in Nigerian highway and road construction projects. A questionnaire instrument containing these 10 risk events was sent out to
professionals working on highways and road schemes in Nigeria, and 44 completed questionnaires were received from 33 private and 11
public sector related organisations. The findings are investigated using appropriate statistical tests. The findings revealed that the level of
awareness of risk events in Nigeria was found to be relatively high but the plan and the management of risk has not yet been developed for
the highway and road construction projects. The top three ranked risk events according to the likelihood of occurrence were contaminated
soil and unstable soil condition, design changes and inaccurate design details, and defective material and material shortages. Contract
flaws, and wildlife and preservation of natural environment were the two least ranked risk events for the likelihood of occurrence. Relative
to the degree of impact, the top three ranked risk events were defective material and material shortage, poor quality control and
performance control, and design changes and inaccurate design details whereas contract flaws, and wildlife and preservation of
natural environment were the two least ranked risk events. The research limitations of the study were that the cross-sectional data and the
relatively small sample made it difficult to generalise the findings. The findings have several practical implications; they provide the
criteria for development of a risk assessment and management framework. This enabled the grouping of the risk events under the three
levels within the project life cycle as follows; planning phase, preliminary engineering and final design phase; and the construction phase.
Practitioners are thus able to critically evaluate the risk events at each stage and analyse how the risk events could be mitigated. The risk
assessment framework thus developed can be used as a guide on how risk can be assessed and managed for a road construction scheme.
Keywords: Construction industry, Highway and road schemes, Risk management, Nigeria
3.1.5 Contaminated soil and unstable soil Survey targets were limited to the representatives of
condition contractors and consultants working on projects under Federal
Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition is a risk event Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA), Niger Delta Development
that is usually apparent with state agency and local government Commission (NDDC) and Federal Ministry of Woks (FMOW) in
road projects in Nigeria. The likelihood of these risk events in a Nigeria. A total of 50 questionnaires were sent out by post to the
high profile federal highway is low but the lack of funds and specific highway and road construction projects that were between
technical expertise in geotechnical and soil engineering has made two major cities in Nigeria and within high risk. The target
the risk a major factor to the structural failure that is prominent respondents were consultant and government or client
with interstate and urban roads in Nigeria. Time limitations representatives for the schemes. A total of 44 completely filled
established by the client also contribute to the prevention of an questionnaires were returned, comprising 33 private 11 public
adequate soils report (de la Cruz et al., 2006) sector (i.e. governmental) organisations. The effective return rate
(88.0 per cent) was considered very high despite the difficulties 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
encountered in engaging the construction organisations
participation in the study. Furthermore, the sample size is similar to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS Release 17.0.0)
that of Santoso et al. (2003), who conducted assessment of risk in computer program was used to analyse the data generated by the
Jakata with 55 respondents. The response was therefore deemed research questions. The total likelihood index and total impact
adequate for the purpose of data analysis. Akintoye and Fitzgerald index of the risk events are the sum of all rated indices (1 to 5) and
(2000 cited in Odeyinka et al., 2008) argue that this is way above the mean index is the total sum divided by the total respondent
the norm of 20-30 percent response rate in most postal whereas the importance index is the mean index divided by the
questionnaire of the construction industry. highest ranking index.
3.3 Measurement Instrument 4.1 Computation of risk importance index (RII)
The risk importance index (RII) was derived to summarize the
The questionnaire distributed contained 15 questions in two importance of each risk event can be computed using the following
different sections as follows: expression:
Questions 19. General demographics of the organisations
w
(organisation size, profile of respondent, turnover, sector of
construction industry, contract value of projects, length of
experience of respondent), and Questions 1015. Data on RII = ..........................................(1.0)
determination of risk assessment including the likelihood of AxN
occurrence and degree of impact of 10 risk events.
Where: w = weighting as assigned by each respondent in a
The statements of the 10 RE are as follows: range 1 to 5, where 1 implies 'very low' and 5 implies 'very high'; A
RE1. Defective material and material shortage; = the highest weight (5); N= the total number in the sample.
RE2. Poor quality control and poor performance Previous studies have also used this index approach such as Thuyet
control et al., (2007); Kumaraswamy and Chan (1998).
RE3. Design changes and inaccurate design details
RE4. Poor communication among the project team
RE5. Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition; 4.2 Computation of total impact index
RE6. Site flooding and landslide; The total impact index was derived to summarize the
RE7. Incremental weather; aggregate score of each risk event can be computed using the
RE8. Quality of brief; following expression:
RE9. Contract flaws;
RE10. Wildlife and preservation of natural
environment.
TII = MsxN ..........................................(2.0)
Where: Ms = mean score assigned to the risk event; and N=
The results presented here and discussed relate only to the
the total number in the sample.
first, and part of second sections of the questionnaire.
Wang et al. (2004), investigated risk events for a proposed Table 1.0: Organisational sector of respondents
risk management framework for construction industry in China, the Sector Frequency % Cumulative
study implored ranking system, statistical indicators, mean and %
standard deviation to sort out the degree of critical events. Wang et Private 33 75 75.0
al. (2004) ranking system will be used for the purpose of analysis Public 11 25 100.0
in this study. The total likelihood index and total impact index of Total 44 100.0
the risk events are the sum of all rated indices (1 to 5) and the mean
index is the total sum divided by the total respondent whereas the Table 1.0 shows that the majority 33 (75%) of the respondents
importance index is the mean index divided by the highest ranking were drawn from the private sector, however further analysis
index. indicated that based on the actual percentage of clients involved in
the various projects, the federal government as a major client had
47%, the state government (29%), with private developers directly The Table shows that the majority 31 (70.0 per cent) of
involved in 10% of the projects and joint ventures accounted for respondents have more than five years experience on highway and
14% of the project at which risk assessment and management was road schemes. As advocated by Tah and Carr (2000), risk
carried out. management is unplanned and mostly dependent on the particular
Table 2.0 shows the frequency of the respondents according to skills, experience and risk orientation of individual stakeholder to a
their designation of respondents. More than two thirds (72.7 per project. A summary of all the 10 risk events likely to occur and
cent) of the respondents were engineers (civil, roads and their degree of impact on highway and road construction schemes,
structural). At least a fair proportion (18.18 percent) of the ranking by all the respondents are is shown in Tables 5.0 and 6.0.
respondents were project managers. The background of the The three most important risk events agreed by the all the
respondents supports the notion that they were involved with respondents as most likely to have a high likelihood of occurrence
running of projects at both operational and strategic levels, on highway and road construction schemes were (see Table 5)
therefore had some knowledge of issues related to the evaluation of contaminated soil and unstable soil condition (mean value =
risk events and project management in general. 4.54); design changes and inaccurate design details (mean value
= 4.31); and defective materials and material shortage (mean =
Table 2.0: Designation of respondents 4.25).
Position Frequency % Cumulative
Percentage Table 5: Ranking of the 10 risk events according to the likelihood of
Road Engineer 7 15.91 15.91 occurrence
Engineers (C &S) 11 25.00 40.91
Project Manager 4 9.09 50.0 RE Total Mean Std. Rank Risk
Section Engineer 2 4.45 54.45 Impact score Dev Importance Index
Senior Engineer 12 27.27 81.72 Index
Others 8 18.18 100.0 RE8. 156 3.54 1.33 8 0.708
Total 44 100.0 RE9. 152 3.45 0.98 9 0.690
RE3. 190 4.31 0.79 2 0.862
RE4. 161 3.65 1.24 7 0.730
According to Bing et al., (2005), this also enhances the RE7. 178 4.04 1.06 6 0.808
internal data validity. Table 3.0 shows the frequency of the RE1. 187 4.25 1.06 3 0.850
respondents according to their academic qualification. The RE10. 120 2.72 1.44 10 0.544
inclusion of the academic qualification of the respondents was to RE5. 200 4.54 1.01 1 0.908
determine the evolution of risk assessment and management in RE6. 181 4.11 1.05 5 0.822
RE2. 182 4.14 0.96 4 0.828
Nigeria Highway and Road Construction.
The following sub section presents a discussion on the
Table 3.0: Academic qualification of respondents likelihood of occurrence of these identified three risk events.
Qualification Frequency % Cumulative
Percentage Analysis of the means for the likelihood of
Postgraduate 7 15.91 15.91 occurrence of risk events
Graduate / HND 37 84.09 100.0
Total 44 100.0
For the likelihood of occurrence, the means ranged between
Examination of Table 3.0 indicates that the majority 37 (84 4.54 (contaminated soil and unstable soil condition) to 2.72
percent) of the respondents are either graduates or HND holders, (wildlife and preservation of natural environment). Examination of
and although the country where the qualification was obtained was Table 5 indicates that none of risk event fell into the low (> 1.80
not ascertained within the survey, the likelihood of the respondents 2.60) and very low ( 1.00 1.80) categories. Only three risk
being Nigerian trained would imply lack of awareness of risk events (contaminated soil and unstable soil condition (ms = 4.54);
management issues among those with undergraduate qualifications. design changes and inaccurate design details (mean = 4.31) and
The educational background is important in that most Civil defective materials and material shortage (mean score = 4.25) fell
Engineers at the undergraduate levels do not have risk management within the very high (> 4.20 5.00) category.
modules and there has been a gradual introduction of risk
management for Postgraduate studies in Project and Construction Very high (mean score: 4.20 - 5.00): Contaminated soil and
Management. The summary of respondents work experience on unstable soil condition (Table 5: mean value = 4.54, total
highway and road schemes is presented in Table 4.0. likelihood index = 200) was the risk event ranked as the most
common with every project or will occur during a project life
cycle. Jegede (2000) also indicated that road structures are
Table 4.0: Highways and road schemes experience of respondents affected by inadequate report on the strength of the sub grade
experience
which acts as the foundation of the road structure. The problems
Years Number of % Cumulative
respondents Percentage associated with design changes and inaccurate design details
<1 2 4.54 4.54 (Table 5: mean value = 4.31, total likelihood index = 190) are due
1-5 11 25.0 29.54 to client frequent changes in design due to inability to have to
6-5 9 20.5 49.99 provide information on the strength of the sub grade (road
10-15 5 11.4 61.35 foundation). This finding is consistent with Santoso et al., (2003)
Over 15 17 38.7 100.0 ranked change order as a high risk event whose consequence was
Total 44 100.0 rework, redraw and delays. Failure to understand complex or
interpret design details for bridges, roads and drainages. Another
major cause of inaccurate design details arises when the
consultants are inexperienced, are not competent or do not have the
structure to handle such complex and high risk projects. The issue risk event fell into the low (> 1.80 2.60) and very low (
related to defective materials and material shortage (Table 5: mean 1.00 1.80) category. Only two risk events (quality of brief, and
value = 4.25, total likelihood index = 187) was the risk event contract flaws) fell within the very high (> 4.20 5.00) category.
ranked as the third likely to occur. This is a widely recognised The following sub section presents a discussion on the degree of
problem on highway and road construction sites. Defective impact of two of the identified three risk events given that the
materials usually arise in situations where there is a considerable issues pertaining to the first, defective materials and material
degree of incompetence from the contractor supply chain shortages has been discussed in the preceeding section.
management. The introductions of additional works by the clients,
incomplete design and errors in the bill for engineering Very high (mean score: 4.20 - 5.00) : The following two risk
measurement are the common factors that cause material shortages events fell within the very high mean scores: defective material
at most road construction sites. and material shortage and poor quality control and poor
performance control (mean value = 4.25). Public projects are
High (mean score: 3.40 - 4.20): Within this category of high prone to low or poor quality of work done. There have been claims
score, the following 6 risk events were included: poor quality and counterclaims from contractors, consultants and federal agency
control and poor performance control (mean value = 4.14), site on who should be held accountable for poor quality control and
flooding and landslide (mean score = 4.11), incremental weather performance control. Another factor that has contributed to poor
(mean score = 4.04), poor communication among the project team quality control is competitive bidding at which the government
(mean score = 3.65), contract flaws (mean score = 3.54) and selects the lowest bids and the contractor in most cases is willing to
quality of brief (mean score = 3.45) whereas the medium (mean maximise is profit by comprising on quality. This finding is
score: 2.60-3.40), the issue of wildlife and preservation of natural consistent with the literature on developing countries. For example
environment (Table 5: mean value = 2.72, total likelihood index = Thuyet et al., (2007) identified inefficient and poor performance
120) was the least ranked risk event. This is hardly surprising as of contractors as one of the significant risks affecting the oil and
the area of wildlife and environment of which most respondents are gas industry of Vietnam. The continuous changes and interference
not aware of is sustainability in construction and the need to at the construction stage is a factor that undermines performance
preserve wildlife and thus to most engineers, the issue of wildlife is control.
a controversial risk event. The nature of the project environment in
developing countries does not classify environment protection as a High (mean score: 3.40 - 4.20): Seven risk events were
priority. This finding is consistent with that of Wang et al. (2004) categorised as having high impact. These are, design changes and
which also confirmed environment protection as a least critical risk inaccurate design details, poor communication among the project
event. team, contaminated soil and unstable soil condition, site flooding
and landslide, inclement weather, quality of brief, and contract
Analysis of the means for the degree of impact of flaws. Only one risk event fell within this medium (mean score:
risk events 2.60-3.40) category, namely wildlife and preservation of natural
In Table 6.0, total impact index, means, ranking, risk environment, and it was the least ranked risk event likely to occur
importance indices and standard deviations of the 10 risk events and have a high degree of impact is (mean value = 2.93). This
according to their degree of impact are presented for the full finding is consistent with literature. Sustainability in construction
sample (33 private and 11 public organisations). The means involves the preservation of the natural environment and reduction
ranged between 4.32 (defective material and material shortage) to of pollution that can have sever damages to the ecosystem.
2.93 (wildlife and preservation of natural environment). Since a Preservation of the natural environment in developing countries
five-point Likert type scale was used (1 = very low, 5 = very high). like Nigeria is not considered as a priority during decision-making
A score of 4.20 or more indicates the extremely likelihood of for highway and road scheme although literature such as Dey and
occurrence and impact of the risk events whereas a score of less Ogunlana (2004) shows that environmental risk event should be
than 1.80 indicates that the extremely very low likelihood of considered. The study by Wang et al., (2004), analysis on risk
occurrence and degree of impact of the risk event. description ranked environmental protection as the least critical
risk that can affect a construction project in China. This confirms
Table 6: Ranking of the 10 risk events according to the degree of impact
that in most developing countries environmental protection is not
RE Total Mean Std. Rank Risk considered as a critical risk that can affect a construction project.
Impact score Dev Importance Index
Index
RE1 190 4.32 0.73 1 0.864 6. RISK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
RE2 187 4.25 0.74 2 0.850 MODEL
RE3 183 4.15 0.90 3 0.830
RE4 182 4.13 0.62 4 0.826
The risk events are grouped under the following three levels;
RE5 179 4.07 1.09 5 0.814 planning phase, preliminary engineering and final design phase,
RE6 177 4.02 1.32 6 0.804 and the construction phase and summarised in the following Tables
RE7 172 3.90 1.04 7 0.780 7, 8 and 9. Drawing on the Wang et al., (2004), it could be argued
RE8 171 3.88 0.98 8 0.776 that the risk events in the planning phase have an influence on both
RE9 159 3.61 1.17 9 0.722
RE10. 129 2.93 1.13 10 0.586
the preliminary engineering and final design, and construction
phases, whereas the risk events within the preliminary engineering
and final design have influence those within the construction
The three most important risk events agreed by the all the phases. The risk events at level 1 as shown in Table 7 relate to the
respondents as most likely to have a high degree of impact on following: RE2 = Poor quality control and poor performance
highway and road construction schemes were (see Table 6) RE1 = control, RE4 = Poor communication among the project team,
defective material and material shortage (mean value = 4.32); RE8 = Quality of brief, RE9 = Contract flaws, and RE10 =
RE2 = poor quality control and poor performance control (mean Wildlife and Preservation of natural environment.
value = 4.25); and RE3 = design changes and inaccurate design
details (mean = 4.15). Examination of Table 6 indicates that no
Table 7: Group Level 1: Planning Phase Step 1: Identification and grouping of risk events into levels
Code Code Mitigation measure A Step 2: Identification of group level and mitigation measures
Step 3: Implementation of mitigation measures
Recruit competent project management team for
RE2 RM1
the project
RE4 RM2 Review Project plans with all stakeholders. Detailed explanations of the activities to be found within the
RE8 RM3 Ensure Partnership arrangement identified steps can be found in Wang et al., (2004)
RE9 RM4 Obtain insurance for political risk
RE10 RM5 Include dispute settlement clauses in the contract
RM6 Adopt effective quality control procedures Identification and Grouping of Risk Events into level 1, 2 and 3.
RM7 Ensure that feasibility study include all parties
Level 1 is the planning phase, level 2 is the preliminary engineering
intention (profit and risk sharing)
RM8 Ensure that project comply with both local and and final design, and level 3 is the construction phase
international environmental standard and
regulatory.
RM9 Adopt a procurement strategy that is not
adversarial. Identify Risk Group Level and Mitigation Measure
Group 1: Planning phase
The risk events at level 2 as shown in Table 8 relate to the Group 2: Preliminary Engineering and final design
following: RE3 = Design changes and inaccurate design details, Group 3: Construction phase
RE5 = Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition, and RE6 Source: (Tables 7, 8 and 9)
= Site flooding and landslide.
Implement
Yes
Table 8: Group Level 2: Preliminary Engineering and Final Design mitigation
If the Risk
Code Code Mitigation measure B measures A
according to is level 1
Recruit competent project management team for
RE3 RM1 the risk event
the project
RE5 RM2 Ensure a comprehensive site investigation is in group level
conducted. 1 No
RE6 RM3 Review design with all parties involved.
RM4 Ensure that the design is innovative and is of
international standard
Implement
RM5 Review traffic analysis and population growth. Implement Yes
RM6 Review right of way and construction methods mitigation
mitigation
RM7 Ensure that recycled materials are designed for the If the measures B
measures C
infrastructure Risk is according to
RM8 Value Engineering and Value management concept according to
level 2 the risk event
is implemented whilst selecting materials. the risk event
in group level
in group level
2
The risk events at level 3 as shown in Table 9 relate to the 3
following: RE5 = Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition, No
RE6 = Site flooding and landslide, RE7 = Incremental
weather, and RE10 = Wildlife and preservation of natural
environment. Implement Implement
Table 9: Group Level 3: Construction Phase mitigation mitigation
Code Code Mitigation measure B measures C measures C
according to according to
RE5 RM1 Incorporate adverse weather impact into project
the risk the risk
schedule
RE6 RM2 Appoint both local and international pollution event in event in
specialist. group level group level 3
RE7 RM3 Ensure that there is periodical site investigation on 3
soil and update geotechnical report.
RE10 RM4 Include a flood disaster risk management process Figure 1.0: Risk Assessment and Management model for Highway and
RM5 Ensure that major project activities are not Road Schemes (Adapted from Wang et al. 2004)
executed during adverse weather conditions
RM6 Implement ISO9000
RM7 Review risk management process with all project Whereas the Wang et al. (2004) model comprised the three
team members hierarchy levels namely Country, Market and Project, the proposed
RM8 Include Benchmarks and monitor construction model also comprises three hierarcy levels but is focussed on the
productivity with all stakeholders
following three important stages in highway and road schemes
RM9 Adopt proper safety programs for the project.
namely, the feasibility study, the design and construction stages.
The model deals with actual processes in the highway and road
To develop a risk assessment and management framework for schemes, the formulation of the risk management team and the
the Nigerian highway and road construction project there is a project life cycle. The risk events identified in Tables 7, 8, and 9
critical evaluation of the risk events that are have to analysed and are the primary risk events that are prevalent in highway and
these are summarised and presented in Tables 5 and 6; and how construction schemes and are not representative of all risk events.
they can be mitigated at each stage of the project life cycle. The Furthermore, the proposed Risk Assessment and Management
steps to be undertaken in the proposed risk assessment and model for Highway and Road Schemes is limited only to highway
management model for highway and roach schemes are shown in and road schemes with little emphasis on the technicalities
figure 1.0. involved in design and construction but from the project and
management approach. The risk assessment framework should be
used as a guide on how risk can be assessed and managed for a actual processes in highway and road schemes, the formulation of
road scheme. the risk management team, and the project life cycle. The main
conclusions of the study are as follows:
7. STRATEGIES FOR MITIGATING MAJOR RISK
EVENTS According to the respondents, defective material and material
shortage was ranked as the most important risk event based on the
degree of impact; and contaminated soil and unstable soil condition
This study had identified the risk events impacting highway based on the likelihood of occurrence. Wildlife and preservation of
and road construction projects in Nigeria. The proposed model natural environment was the least ranked (10th) risk event both for
classified the mitigating measures into three levels according to the the degree of impact and likelihood of occurrence.
project life cycle. Drawing heavily on the seminal work of Renn
(1998), it was pointed out that risk management implied value The level of awareness of risk events in Nigeria was found to
judgment on three levels and the identification of resilient be relatively high and the management of risk has not yet been
startegies for coping within remaining uncertainties should form developed for the highway and road construction schemes
the third level. The first related to list of the criteria which could be
equated to identification of risk events as conducted within this Drawing on past studies such as Santoso et al. (2003), risks
study, whereas the second involved the determination of trade offs. were identified and classified under the three main phases of
Given that background, the following sub sections now highway and road construction projects in Nigeria as follows;
demonstrate the mitigating measures for the identified risk events under the planning / feasibility stage, the following five (5) risk
impacting highway and road construction projects. events were identified and considered to be critical; poor quality
control and poor performance; poor communication among the
7.1 Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition project team; contract flaws; quality of the brief; and wildlife and
(RE5) preservation of natural environment. The preliminary engineering
Contaminated soil and unstable soil condition risk event and final design phase was found to be affected with the
ranked highly according to the likelihood of occurrence out of the probability of the following (2) two risk events in design changes
ten risk events investigated. Although it ranked fifth according to and inaccurate design details; contaminated soil and unstable soil
the degree of impact, in most projects, the identified risk event conditions; and Finally the construction stage established that risk
usually delay the work schedule or are an additional cost for the events could differ according to magnitude and the impact they
project. It is suggested that at the feasibility, planning and design may have on the whole project where is some cases the uncertainty
stage, the design team must be able to have reliable information on focused on the productivity, conflict, performance related while the
the state of the subsurface conditions-rocks, soils, water levels, most critical and perceived to be unequivocally a risk events
hazardous wastes, archaeological encounters, existing utilities notably site flooding and landslide; contaminated soil and unstable
within the project environments. The gradual and continuous soil condition; inclement weather.
checks of the likelihood of the risk events and how they can be
managed must be carried out throughout the project life cycle. One
9. RECOMMENDATIONS
of the mitigating measures for this risk event as illustrated in Table
There are no clear-cut solutions to the use of risk management
8 (Group Level 2) is to ensure that a comprehensive site
processes but the following recommendations which will be of
investigation is conducted during the Preliminary Engineering and
benefit to higher educational institutions, government, clients, and
Final Design phase.
practitioners for the usage of an effective risk assessment and
management processes in Nigerian highway and road construction
7.2 Poor quality control and poor performance projects are suggested:
control (RE2)
Poor quality control and poor performance control risk Adopting of Best Practice: The Nigerian highway and
event is common in Nigeria due to competitive bidding resulting in construction industry should be ready to adopt project
the lowest tender being selected. This has a knock on effect of management practices and techniques.
affecting the project duration, cost of the project and quality of the
work. One of the mitigating measures for this risk is through the Training Issues: Risk management should be introduced at
adoption of effective quality control procedures. institutional levels and organisations should be investing in
training engineering and construction staff on risk assessment
7.3 Design changes and inaccurate design details implement.
(RE3)
Design changes and inaccurate design details is also very Tendering Processes: The Government Agency should adopt
prevalent in Nigeria. One of the mitigating measures for this risk new approaches to tender adjudication by ensuring that the
event as illustrated in Table 8 (Group Level 2) is to review design most qualified contractors having an effective project risk
with all parties involved. management processes are selected than the lowest bidder.