Abstract
The research concerns the EPC world and Mega-Projects. The focus is on two disciplines: Risk Management and Constructability. An innovative integration model is proposed, aiming to bridge the existing gaps, to support a structured decision-making process and to facilitate the integration of the two disciplines characterised by different approaches and competences, but with a common target: the megaproject success. The validation of the model is carried out by mean of a cost/benefit analysis on four case studies of an EPC contractor (Saipem SpA).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Nowadays Saipem SpA is the Italian leader EPC contractor in Oil & Gas sector.
- 2.
Among the projects characterised by being closed, recent, data abundant, covering the cluster domain and with criticalities not strongly influenced by big company-independent issues, the cases have been chosen through judgment sampling, aided by company experts.
- 3.
To see a more complete list, please consult Nima, M., Abdul-Kadir, M. and Jaafar, M., 2001. Evaluation of the role of the contractor’s personnel in enhancing project constructability.
- 4.
The benefits of Constructability are multiple, e.g. minimized contract change orders, reduced project cost and duration, enhanced project quality, increased owner satisfaction, and higher trust among project team, as well as a better design and a more effective construction planning (Pocock et al. 2006).
- 5.
RM and Constructability involve external environment, laws, financial/economic aspects, engineering, procurement/subcontracting, the execution plan, construction/installation, safety.
- 6.
Each function box, processes the inputs (by left side) to create outputs (coming out from the right side). Controls enter in the upper side of the box, whereas mechanism from the lower side.
- 7.
Construction Standard Man Hours do not consider the delocalization and the productivity factors, but are an index consistent with the dimension and construction complexity of the project.
- 8.
Spatial availability, interference with running plants, Saipem SpA presence in the country, country industrial development, soil and geotechnical characteristics.
- 9.
An occurred risk becomes an issue.
- 10.
The number should not be considered by itself: current internal statistics have revealed that the Contractor has a ratio of 1 contract award out of 10 bids. The implementation cost shall include the additional resources spent for the unsuccessful bids as well.
References
APM (2012) Body of knowledge. APM Publishing, VI
Bryman A (2004) Triangulation. Encyclopedia of science research methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 1142–1143
Gajewska E, Ropel M (2011) Risk management practises in a construction project—a case study. Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design and Construction Project Management, pp 1–60
Hiley A, Paliokostas PP (2001) Value management and risk management: an examination of the potential for their integration and acceptance as a combined management tool in the UK construction industry. Manchester, RICS Foundation
Hillson D, Simon P (2007) Practical project risk management: the atom methodology. Management Concepts Inc, s.l
Kumar R (2011) Research methodology—a step-by-step guide for beginners. Sage Publications
Kutsch E, Hall M (2010) Deliberate ignorance in project risk management. Int J Project Manage 28:245–255
Mohebbi AH, Bislimi N (2012) Project risk management: methodology development for engineering, Procurement and Construction Projects
Mootanah DP (1998) Developing an integrated Risk and Value Management framework for construction project management. In: Proceedings of the 14th annual ARCOM conference. Reading: Association of Researchers in Construction Management. pp 448–453
Othman AAE (2011) Improving Building Performance through Integrating Constructability in the Design Phase. Int J Organ Technol Manage Constr 3(2):333–347
Pocock J, Kuennen S, Gambatese J, Ruaschkolb J (2006) Constructability state of practice report. J Constr Eng Manage 132(4):373–383
Schieg M (2006) Risk management in construction project management. J Bus Econ Manage 7:77–83
Virginia Department of Commerce (1993) Integration definition for function modeling (IDEF 0), Springfield, VA: Virginia Department of Commerce
Yin RK (2012) Applications of case study research. Sage, Washington DC
Zhao Z-Y, Duan LL (2008) An integrated risk management model for construction projects. Cape Town, pp 1389–1394
Zolfagharian S, Nourbakhsh M, Mydin SH, Zin RM, Irizarry J (2012) A Conceptual Method of Constructability Improvement. Int J Eng Technol 4(4):456–459
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Saipem SpA personnel, in particular L. Calvara, M. Spongano, A. Gebbia, A. Lasagni, A. Saini, F. L. Fossati, P. Pensotti, G. Santese, A. Podestà and L. Di Rocco, S. Scaglia, L. Ferrazzi.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Farina, L., Danesi, E., Travaglini, A., Mancini, M., Trucco, P. (2018). Integration of Constructability and Project Risk Management. In: Viles, E., Ormazábal, M., Lleó, A. (eds) Closing the Gap Between Practice and Research in Industrial Engineering. Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58409-6_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58409-6_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58408-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58409-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)