CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Construction Project Management and PerformanceValue Engineering and ManagementBIM and Construction Integration

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A quantitative assessment of the cost and time impact of variation orders on construction projects

Oladapo, A.A.·2007·Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology
DOI 10.1108/17260530710746597
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose Variation orders are a common occurrence in construction projects and their impacts have been studied by various authors. However, the contribution of project variations to construction cost and time overruns is yet to be established. The purpose of this study is to assess the significance of variations as a cause of cost and time overruns. Design/methodology/approach Using a questionnaire survey, responses were obtained from 50 project participants on the causes and effects of project variations. Cost and time data were also collected on 30 completed building projects. The analysis used importance indices and F‐ and t‐tests. The results indicated that variations had a significant effect and accounted for about 79 and 68 per cent of the cost and time overruns, respectively, for the projects studied. Findings The results indicated that variations had a significant effect on project cost and time overruns and accounted for about 79 and 68 per cent of the cost and time overruns, respectively, for the projects studied. Project type and size were found to have no significant effect on the contribution of variations to cost and time overruns. The results also showed that changes in specifications and scope, initiated mostly by project owners and their consultants, were the most prevalent sources of variation. Originality/value The results of this study indicates the cost and time significance of project. This will enable project owners, consultants, contractors and other stakeholders to better understand and appreciate the real impact of variations on project performance.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/17260530710746597

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Adeyemi, A.Y., Oladapo, A.A. and Akindele, O. (2005), “Balancing globalisation, glocalisation and the sustainable development equation in the Nigerian construction industry”, paper presented at 3rd Postgraduate Conference, Johannesburg, 9‐11 October.
  2. AfDB/OECD (2004), “African economic outlook”, pp. 247‐60, available at: www.chathamhouse.org.uk/pdf/research/Africa/NIGERIA.pdf.
  3. Baxendale, A.T. and Schofield, T.J. (1986), “Planning and progressing project variations”, in Langford, D.A. and Retik, A. (Eds), The Organization and Management of Construction: Shaping Theory and Practice, Vol. 2, E&FN SPON, London.
  4. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (1998), “Department of transportation, highways and rail programs performance audit”, Report 98‐2, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Cambridge, MA.
  5. Elhag, T.M.S. and Boussabaine, A.H. (1999), “Evaluation of construction costs and time attributes”, Proceedings of the 15th ARCOM Conference, Liverpool John Moores University, 15‐17 September, Vol. 2, pp. 473‐80.
  6. Gbeleyi, S.A. (2002), “An evaluation of the causes and effects of variation on building project execution in Nigeria”, unpublished BSc dissertation, Department of Quantity Surveying, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile‐Ife.
  7. Morris, P.W.G. (1998), “Why project management doesn't always make business sense”, Project Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 12‐16.
  8. Motete, L., Mbachu, J. and Nkado, R. (2003), “An investigation into material wastages on building sites”, Proceedings of CIDB 1st Postgraduate Conference, Port Elizabeth, South Africa, pp. 288‐95.
  9. Odeyinka, H.A. and Yusif, A. (1997), “The causes and effects of construction delays on completion cost of housing projects in Nigeria”, Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 31‐44.
  10. Oma‐Williams, O.W. (1991), “Reorganising for project management in Nigeria”, The Nigerian Quantity Surveyor, Vol. 13, pp. 5‐8.
  11. Revay, S.O. (2002), “Coping with extras”, The Revay Report, Vol. 21.
  12. Smallwood, J. (2000), “Contractor performance: clients' perceptions”, Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries: Challenges facing the Construction Industry in Developing Countries, Gaborone Botswana, available at: http://buildnet.csir.co.za/cdcproc/docs/2nd_proceedings.html#key (accessed 15‐17 November).
  13. Ssegawa, J.K., Mfolwe, K.M., Makuke, B. and Kutua, B. (2002), “Construction variations: a scourge or a necessity”, Proceedings of the 1st CIB‐W107 International Conference on Creating a Sustainable Construction Industry in Developing Countries, Cape Town, South Africa, available at www.odsf.co.za/cdcproc/docs/3rd/ssegawa_jk_mfolwe_km.pdf (accessed 11‐13 November).
  14. Sutrisna, M., Potts, K. and Buckley, K. (2003), “An expert system as a potential decision‐making tool in the valuation of variations”, Proceedings of The RICS Foundation Construction and Building Research Conference (COBRA), 1‐2 September, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton.
  15. Weisfeld, M. and Ciccozzi, J. (1999), “Software project management software by committee”, Project Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 30‐6.
  16. Zaneldin, E. (2005), “Construction claims in the United Arab Emirates: causes, severity, and frequency”, Proceedings of The Sixth Annual UAE University Research Conference, pp ENG 96‐ENG 105, available at: http://195.229.164.112/Conference_6/Proceedings/PDF/Engineering/ENG_12.pdf.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Oladapo, A. A.
Affiliations
University of KwaZulu-Natal (ZA)
Corresponding author
Oladapo, A.A.
Venue
Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2007-04-03
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
35-48
ISSN
1726-0531 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/17260530710746597
OpenAlex
W2074309917
Cited by
93
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Engineering Design and Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Construction Project Management and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Value Engineering and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › BIM and Construction Integration
Keywords
change orders, construction cost overruns, construction time overruns, specification changes, scope changes, project performance, construction projects

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review