Abstract
Rail-based metro system is crucial for supporting a city’s expansion and growth. However, urban metro projects being capital intensive with long gestation and pay back periods may not be financially viable but socially desirable. More and more cities in India are announcing metro projects committing huge budgetary resources to these projects at the cost of sectors such as health and education. Given the huge requirement of capital and possibility of attracting willing as well as capable private investors to undertake urban transport projects, promoting public–private partnerships (PPPs) could be a key priority. However, none of the metro projects launched during past 7 years in India have been planned on PPP framework. International experience in PPP metro and our own Delhi airport metro experience have demonstrated that many issues can influence the successful implementation of PPPs in such projects. In this context, outcome of Hyderabad metro is keenly watched as it is one of the largest metro rail projects built under a PPP framework anywhere in the world. The paper reviews the research conducted on critical success factors (CSFs) that are necessary for adopting PPP models in urban metros in Indian context. Eighteen CSFs identified through literature survey have been validated in a pilot study through structured questionnaire and grouped in seven macro-factors through hierarchical cluster analysis. A case study has been attempted using SAP–LAP framework to analyse the identified CSFs in real-life settings of the first two stages of Hyderabad metro project. Key players working on the project were interviewed during a field study to gather feedback on actions they took on factors critical to success. Observations and findings have been synthesised as learnings for future such projects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Based on approved metro projects in Jaipur, Lucknow, Nagpur, Kochi, Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai, Gurgaon, Pune and Noida up to 31 December 2016 (Source: MoUD).
Out of three stages of a metro project (pl refer “What Defines Success of a PPP Metro Project?” section), only contract success and implementation success up to the progress made till December, 2016 have been analysed as the ‘post-implementation success’ can be analysed only after commissioning of the project.
Up to the progress made till December, 2016.
References
12th FYP (2012–2017). Twelfth five year plan. In Five year plan documents, planning commission. Government of India, II (p. 341).
Ahluwalia, I. J. (2014). Hyderabad metro shows the way. In I. Ahluwalia (Ed.), Transforming our cities: Post cards of change (p. 274). Noida: HarperCollins Publishers.
Allport, R. (2008). Success and failures in Urban transport infrastructure projects. https://workspace.imperial.ac.uk/rtsc/public/Success%20and%20Failure%20in%20Urban%20Transport%20Infrastructure%20Projects.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2015.
Babatunde, S. O., Perera, S., Udeaja, C., & Zhou, L.(2014). Identification of barriers to public private partnerships in developing countries. Retrieved 23 Dec 2014 from http://www.cib2014.org/proceedings/files/papers/494.pdf.
Budget (2017–18). Speech of Minister of Finance, Government of India. http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2017-18/bs/bs.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2017.
Chan, P. (2010). Critical success factors for PPPs in infrastructure development: Chinese perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(5), 484–494.
DMRC. (2007). Executive summary of detailed project report prepared by DMRC for corridor 1, 2 & 3. Hyderabad: Government of Andhra Pradesh.
ESCAP (2011). A Guidebook on PPP in Infrastructure. Retrieved 12 Dec 2014 from http://www.unescap.org/resources/guidebook-public-private-partnership-infrastructure.
Famakin, I. (2014). Assessment of critical success factors and benefits of public private partnership in construction projects. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 4(6), 742–751. http://www.ijetae.com/index.html. Accessed 30 Mar 2015.
Gangwar, R., & Raghuram, G. (2013). Framework for structuring PPP framework for railways. www.iimahd.ernet.in. Accessed 23 Feb 2015.
Gates, L. P. (2010). Strategic planning with critical success factors and future scenarios: An integrated strategic planning framework. Technical Report, Carnegie Mellon University. http://www.sei.cmu.edu. Accessed 20 Feb 2015.
Goel, S., Dwivedi, R., & Sherry, A. M. (2012). Critical factors for successful implementation of E-governance: A case study of HUDA. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 13(4), 233–244.
Hardcastle, C., Eswards, P. J., Akintoye, A., & Li, B. (2005). Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry: A factor analysis approach. Construction Management and Economics, 23(5), 459–471.
Ismail, S., & Ajija, S. (2013). Critical success factors of public partnership implementation in Malaysia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 5(1), 6–19.
Kabra, G., & Ramesh, A. (2015). Analyzing ICT issues in humanitarian supply chain management: A SAP-LAP linkages framework. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 16(2), 157–171.
KPMG. (2010). Success and failures in Urban transport infrastructure projects. UK: KPMG International.
Kulshreshtha, R., Kumar, A., Tripathi, A., & Likhi, D. K. (2016). Critical success factors for public private partnerships in Urban metro systems in Indian context. Urban Transport Journal, 15(1), 60–75.
Leedy, A. (1977). Practical research: Planning and design. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Li, B. (2005). Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 23(5), 459–471.
Millones, G. M. (2010). Breaking down factors of public private partnership in Urban rail. www.tbm.tudelft.nl/…/Thesis_Guiseppe_Manrique.pdf. Accessed 15 Jan 2015.
Nasim, S., & Sushil (2014). Flexible strategy framework for managing continuity and change in E-Government. In Sushil and E. A. Stohr (Eds.), The Flexible Enterprise, Flexible Systems Management (pp. 47–66). New Delhi: Springer.
Owens, M. G., & Reddy, N. V.S. (2010). Hyderabad metro rail: A renaissance of Urban rail. http://hmrl.telangana.gov.in/articles/2010.09.12-15. Accessed 15 Mar 2016.
Reddy, N. V. S. (2011). Hyderabad metro is not just a metro but an effort to transform Hyderabad into a competitive global city. C.E. & C.R. Review, Interview. http://hmrl.telangana.gov.in/articles/2011-08-01-CE&CR-Aug-2011-Hyd-Metro-is-not-just-a-Metro,-But-an-effort-to-transform-Hyd-into-a-competitive-Global-City.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2016.
Saunders, E. (2007). Research methods for business students. Essex: Prentice Hall.
Smith, N. J., & Gannon, M. (2008). Political risk in light rail transit PPP projects. Management, Procurement and Law, 161(MP4):179–185. ISSN1751-4304. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/55380. Accessed 20 Mar 2015.
Sushil, (2000a). Situation-actor-process options: Mapping and enhancing flexibility. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17(3), 301–309.
Sushil, (2000b). SAP-LAP models of enquiry. Management Decision, 38(5), 347–353.
Sushil, (2001). SAP-LAP framework. Global Journal of Flexible Management, 2(1), 51–55.
Sushil, (2009). SAP-LAP linkages—a generic interpretive framework for analysing managerial contexts. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 10(2), 11–20.
Sushil, (2016). Theory of flexible systems management. In Sushil, J. Connel, & J. Burgess (Eds.), Flexible work organizations: The challenges of capacity building in Asia, flexible systems management (pp. 3–20). New Delhi: Springer.
Sushil, (2017). Theory building using SAP-LAP linkages: An application in the context of disaster management. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-017-2425-3.
US Department of Transport. (2012). Value for Money Assessment for PPPs-a primer. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/pdfs/p3/p3_value_for_money_primer_122612.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2015.
Virginia, T., Allen, & Overy (2012). Advocates for international development-legal guide for public private partnerships. http://a4id.org/sites/default/files/files/%5BA4ID%5D%20Public-Private%20Partnership.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2015.
World Bank (2007). Public private partnership units: Lessons for their design and use in infrastructure. In Public private infrastructure advisory facility. World Bank.
World Bank (2014a). http://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/overview/what-are-public-private-partnerships. Accessed 18 Jan 2015.
World Bank (2014b). PPP reference guide version 2. http://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/library/public-private-partnerships-reference-guide-version-2.0. Accessed 27 Apr 2015.
Yadav, N., & Sushil, (2014). Theoretical roots of flexible strategy game-card: An evolving strategic performance management system. In Sushil & E. A. Stohr (Eds.), The flexible enterprise, flexible systems management (pp. 99–109). New Delhi: Springer.
Zhang, X. (2005). Critical success factors for public private partnerships in infrastructure development. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(1), 3–14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Exhibit-1 cluster analysis of 18 CSFs into 7 macro-factors
S. nos. | Micro-variablesa | Macro-variables | Type of factors |
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Political/social environment/support | Socio-political environment | External |
Consultation with stake holders | |||
Multi-benefit objectives | |||
2 | Stable macroeconomic environment | Stable macro-economics and institutional, legal, framework | |
Financial market availability | |||
Institutional legal framework | |||
3 | Thorough cost–benefit assessment | Government support | |
Government support and guarantee | |||
3 | Capable and well-organised public agency | Good governance | Internal |
Good governance | |||
5 | Competitive and transparent procurement | Effective procurement | |
Strong consortium | |||
6 | Appropriate risk allocation and sharing | Well-structured PPP project | |
Contract agreement | |||
7 | Techno-economic feasibility of project | PPP implementation processes | |
Commitment, responsibility and defined role of partners | |||
Contract compliance for results | |||
Shared authority between public and private |
Exhibit-2 Success Criteria and Performance Indicators in a PPP Project
Success criteria | Performance indicators |
|---|---|
1. Contract success | a. Quality and completeness of the contract |
b. Appropriate risk sharing and risk allocation | |
c. Selection of concessionaire and contract agreement | |
d. Financial closure within stipulated time | |
2. Implementation success | a. Timely project delivery |
b. Project completion within budget | |
c. Scope of the project as per contract | |
d. Quality of construction | |
3. Post-implementation success | a. Ridership recovery in short and long terms |
b. Last mile connectivity | |
c. Service quality in O&M | |
d. User satisfaction |
Exhibit-3 Key Questions
1. Who are the main actors involved in planning and implementation of Hyderabad Metro? |
2. Which critical factors have contributed to the success of Hyderabad metro in achieving contract success and financial closure? Have these factors contributed in the same way during implementation? |
3. What is your opinion on the concessionaire agreement for Hyderabad Metro with regard to complete clarity on the contract with respect to scope, time, deliverables, etc.? Do you think the risks in the project have been allotted to the party which is best placed to bear that risk? |
4. Please describe the role played by your counterpart in public/private agency. How it has affected the project positively? What in your opinion could have been done more or done differently? |
5. What obstacles/problems were faced in the start of the project and during implementation? What are the learning points with respect to concession agreement for PPP metro projects? |
6. What are the key learnings from implementation of Hyderabad metro? |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kulshreshtha, R., Kumar, A., Tripathi, A. et al. Critical Success Factors in Implementation of Urban Metro System on PPP: A Case Study of Hyderabad Metro. Glob J Flex Syst Manag 18, 303–320 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-017-0164-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-017-0164-6