Improvement of Risk Indicator Management and Cost to Quantify Strong Building Design

Risk Indicator Management in Construction
By [Name of the Writer]
[Name of Class]
[Name of the Instructor]
[Name of the Institution]
City and State where it is located
The Date

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my deep appreciation for my supervisor, for his support and guidance with this dissertation, I have been extremely lucky to have a supervisor who has cared so much about my work, and who responded to my questions and queries so promptly. Thanks to the [Insert University Name] for accepting me on the MSc.
Thanks must also go to [insert name of instructor] for his assistance, logistics and facilities provided by him. I would also like to extent my thanks to [Insert a Professor Name in Architecture] for his support in architectural issue.
I would like to thank my mother and my brothers who experienced all of the ups and downs of my research for their encouragement and support during my study.
Finally, I’d be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge the innumerable sacrifices made by my wife, in shouldering far more than her fair share of the parenting and household burdens while I pursued this degree.

Table of Contents
TOC o “1-5” h z u 1Introduction PAGEREF _Toc534114172 h 102Literature Review PAGEREF _Toc534114173 h 122.1Risk Management in Construction Industry PAGEREF _Toc534114174 h 122.2Construction Industry Stakeholders and Risk Management PAGEREF _Toc534114175 h 132.3Knowledge Management PAGEREF _Toc534114176 h 163Research Design and Methodology PAGEREF _Toc534114177 h 183.

1Establishment of Context PAGEREF _Toc534114178 h 183.2Risks Identification PAGEREF _Toc534114179 h 193.3Risk Evaluation and Risk Analysis PAGEREF _Toc534114180 h 213.4Design Considerations in Staad Pro PAGEREF _Toc534114181 h 223.4.1Dead Loads PAGEREF _Toc534114182 h 233.4.2Imposed Loads PAGEREF _Toc534114183 h 233.4.3Wind Loads PAGEREF _Toc534114184 h 233.4.3.1Designed Wind Speed (Vs) PAGEREF _Toc534114185 h 243.4.3.2Pressure of Wind and Forces on Buildings/Structures PAGEREF _Toc534114186 h 253.4.4Seismic Load Design PAGEREF _Toc534114187 h 253.4.4.1Designed Seismic Base Shear PAGEREF _Toc534114188 h 263.4.5Distribution of Designed Force PAGEREF _Toc534114189 h 263.4.5.1.1Base Shear Vertical Distribution towards Different Levels of Floor PAGEREF _Toc534114190 h 263.4.6Input Editor Generation PAGEREF _Toc534114191 h 273.4.7Types of Structures PAGEREF _Toc534114192 h 273.4.8Generation of Structure PAGEREF _Toc534114193 h 283.4.9Material Constants PAGEREF _Toc534114194 h 283.4.10Supports PAGEREF _Toc534114195 h 293.4.11Loads PAGEREF _Toc534114196 h 293.4.12Joint loads PAGEREF _Toc534114197 h 293.4.13Member loads PAGEREF _Toc534114198 h 293.4.14Area/floor load PAGEREF _Toc534114199 h 303.4.15Fixed end member load PAGEREF _Toc534114200 h 303.4.16Load Generator –Moving load, Wind & Seismic PAGEREF _Toc534114201 h 303.4.16.1Moving Load Generator PAGEREF _Toc534114202 h 303.4.16.2Seismic load generator PAGEREF _Toc534114203 h 313.4.16.3Wind load generator PAGEREF _Toc534114204 h 313.4.17Section Types for Concrete Design PAGEREF _Toc534114205 h 313.4.18Design Parameters PAGEREF _Toc534114206 h 313.4.19Beam Design PAGEREF _Toc534114207 h 313.4.20Design for Shear PAGEREF _Toc534114208 h 323.4.21Column Design PAGEREF _Toc534114209 h 323.4.22Design Operations PAGEREF _Toc534114210 h 333.4.23General Perspectives of IS: 800-1984 PAGEREF _Toc534114211 h 333.4.23.1Allowable stresses PAGEREF _Toc534114212 h 343.4.24Post Processing Facilities PAGEREF _Toc534114213 h 343.4.24.1Stability Requirements PAGEREF _Toc534114214 h 343.4.24.2Deflection Check PAGEREF _Toc534114215 h 343.4.24.3Code Checking PAGEREF _Toc534114216 h 343.5Risk Assessment Criteria PAGEREF _Toc534114217 h 354Analysis and Discussion PAGEREF _Toc534114218 h 384.1Key Risk Indicators PAGEREF _Toc534114219 h 384.1.1Delays in Obtaining Permits PAGEREF _Toc534114220 h 384.1.2Delays in Project Funding PAGEREF _Toc534114221 h 394.1.3Changes in the Scope of Work PAGEREF _Toc534114222 h 394.1.4Improper Work Scope Definition for Contractors PAGEREF _Toc534114223 h 404.1.5Delays due to Contractor Disputes PAGEREF _Toc534114224 h 414.1.6Incorporation of Ad-hoc Consultants PAGEREF _Toc534114225 h 424.1.7Third-Party related Delays PAGEREF _Toc534114226 h 434.1.8Poor Coordination with the Sub-Contractors PAGEREF _Toc534114227 h 444.1.9Poor Performance of Subcontractors PAGEREF _Toc534114228 h 444.1.10Lack of the Qualified Personnel PAGEREF _Toc534114229 h 454.1.11Labor Strikes and Disputes PAGEREF _Toc534114230 h 464.1.12Team Experience PAGEREF _Toc534114231 h 474.1.13Incident/Accident Reporting and Safety PAGEREF _Toc534114232 h 484.1.14Bad Productivity and Competence of Labor PAGEREF _Toc534114233 h 494.1.15Shortage of Equipment PAGEREF _Toc534114234 h 504.1.16Bad Productivity of Equipment PAGEREF _Toc534114235 h 514.1.17Delays in Payments PAGEREF _Toc534114236 h 524.1.18Robbery Incidents PAGEREF _Toc534114237 h 534.1.19Exchange Rate Inflation PAGEREF _Toc534114238 h 534.1.20Improper Risk Allocation PAGEREF _Toc534114239 h 544.1.21Natural Disaster PAGEREF _Toc534114240 h 554.1.22War and Terrorist Attacks PAGEREF _Toc534114241 h 564.1.23Corruption of the Officials PAGEREF _Toc534114242 h 574.1.24Political Instability PAGEREF _Toc534114243 h 584.1.25Adverse and Bad Weather Conditions PAGEREF _Toc534114244 h 584.1.26Differences in the Site Conditions PAGEREF _Toc534114245 h 594.1.27Unforeseen Conditions at Site PAGEREF _Toc534114246 h 604.1.28Inadequate Insurance Cover PAGEREF _Toc534114247 h 614.1.29Unavailability of Utilities PAGEREF _Toc534114248 h 624.1.30Design Risk Indicators PAGEREF _Toc534114249 h 634.1.31Defective Design Risk PAGEREF _Toc534114250 h 664.1.32Delays in Availability of Structural Drawings PAGEREF _Toc534114251 h 664.1.33Alteration in the Regulations and Construction Codes PAGEREF _Toc534114252 h 674.1.34Impact of Design on Local Ecosystem PAGEREF _Toc534114253 h 684.1.35Integration of the Design with Supply Chain PAGEREF _Toc534114254 h 694.1.36Complexity of Design PAGEREF _Toc534114255 h 704.1.37Design Error PAGEREF _Toc534114256 h 714.1.38Seismic Load Distribution PAGEREF _Toc534114257 h 724.1.39Wind Load Distribution PAGEREF _Toc534114258 h 734.1.40Structural/Geotechnical Errors PAGEREF _Toc534114259 h 744.1.41Wrong Material Selection PAGEREF _Toc534114260 h 754.1.42Bad Quality of Material and Equipment PAGEREF _Toc534114261 h 764.1.43Lack of Technological Advancements PAGEREF _Toc534114262 h 784.1.44Inaccurate Plan or Schedule of Plan Execution PAGEREF _Toc534114263 h 784.1.45Material, Equipment and Labor Availability PAGEREF _Toc534114264 h 805Conclusion and Recommendation PAGEREF _Toc534114265 h 826References PAGEREF _Toc534114266 h 837Appendix PAGEREF _Toc534114267 h 897.1Appendix A: Risk Assessment Form PAGEREF _Toc534114268 h 897.2Appendix B: Consent Forms PAGEREF _Toc534114269 h 907.3Appendix C: Staad Pro Input File PAGEREF _Toc534114270 h 917.4Appendix D: Beam Force, Support Reactions, Relative and Node Displacement Results PAGEREF _Toc534114271 h 927.5Appendix E: Statics Check Analysis PAGEREF _Toc534114272 h 93

List of Figures
TOC h z c “Figure” Figure 21: Risk Model of a Construction Industry (Iqbal et al., 2015). PAGEREF _Toc534114273 h 14Figure 31: G+4 Building Structure Generated from Staad Pro PAGEREF _Toc534114274 h 28Figure 32: Risk Assessment Matrix PAGEREF _Toc534114275 h 35Figure 41: Risk Indicator: Obtaining Permits Delay PAGEREF _Toc534114276 h 38Figure 42: Risk Indicator: Delays in Project Funding PAGEREF _Toc534114277 h 39Figure 43: Risk Indicator: Changes in Scope of Work PAGEREF _Toc534114278 h 40Figure 44: Risk Indicator: Improper Work Scope Definition for Contractors PAGEREF _Toc534114279 h 41Figure 45: Risk Indicator: Delays caused due to Dispute with the Contractors PAGEREF _Toc534114280 h 42Figure 46: Risk Indicator: Ad-hoc Consultants PAGEREF _Toc534114281 h 42Figure 47: Risk Indicator: Third Party Delays PAGEREF _Toc534114282 h 43Figure 48: Risk Indicator: Poor Coordination with the Subcontractor PAGEREF _Toc534114283 h 44Figure 49: Risk Indicator: Poor Performance of the Subcontractor PAGEREF _Toc534114284 h 45Figure 410: Risk Indicator: Lack of Qualified Personnel PAGEREF _Toc534114285 h 46Figure 411: Risk Indicator: Labor Strikes and Disputes PAGEREF _Toc534114286 h 47Figure 412: Risk Indicator: Safety of the workers, contractors and neighboring building residents PAGEREF _Toc534114287 h 48Figure 413: Risk Indicator: Safety Related Incident/Accident at the Construction Site PAGEREF _Toc534114288 h 49Figure 414: Risk Indicator: Bad Productivity and Competence of Labor PAGEREF _Toc534114289 h 50Figure 415: Risk Indicator: Shortage of Equipment PAGEREF _Toc534114290 h 51Figure 416: Risk Indicator: Bad Productivity of Equipment PAGEREF _Toc534114291 h 51Figure 417: Risk Indicator: Delays in Payment PAGEREF _Toc534114292 h 52Figure 418: Risk Indicator: Robbery Incidents of Materials at Site PAGEREF _Toc534114293 h 53Figure 419: Risk Indicator: Exchange Risk Inflation and Market Fluctuations PAGEREF _Toc534114294 h 54Figure 420: Risk Indicator: Improper Risk Allocation as listed in Contracts PAGEREF _Toc534114295 h 55Figure 421: Risk Indicator: Natural Disaster Risk PAGEREF _Toc534114296 h 56Figure 422: Risk Indicator: War and Terrorist Attacks PAGEREF _Toc534114297 h 57Figure 423: Risk Indicator: Corruption of the Officials PAGEREF _Toc534114298 h 57Figure 424: Risk Indicator: Political Instability PAGEREF _Toc534114299 h 58Figure 425: Risk Indicator: Adverse and Bad Weather Conditions PAGEREF _Toc534114300 h 59Figure 426: Risk Indicator: Differences in the Site Conditions PAGEREF _Toc534114301 h 60Figure 427: Risk Indicator: Unforeseen Conditions at Site PAGEREF _Toc534114302 h 61Figure 428: Risk Indicator: Inadequate Insurance Cover PAGEREF _Toc534114303 h 61Figure 429: Risk Indicator: Unavailability of Utilities PAGEREF _Toc534114304 h 62Figure 430: Geometrical Overview of G+4 Building PAGEREF _Toc534114305 h 63Figure 431: Load Cases PAGEREF _Toc534114306 h 64Figure 432: Wind Conditions PAGEREF _Toc534114307 h 65Figure 433: Risk Indicator: Defective Design PAGEREF _Toc534114308 h 66Figure 434: Risk Indicator: Delays in Availability of Drawings PAGEREF _Toc534114309 h 67Figure 435: Risk Indicator: Alteration in the Regulations and Codes PAGEREF _Toc534114310 h 68Figure 436: Risk Indicator: Impact of Design on Local Ecosystem PAGEREF _Toc534114311 h 69Figure 437: Risk Indicator: Integration of the Design with Supply Chain PAGEREF _Toc534114312 h 70Figure 438: Risk Indicator: Complexity of Design PAGEREF _Toc534114313 h 71Figure 439: Risk Indicator: Design Errors PAGEREF _Toc534114314 h 72Figure 440: Risk Indicator: Seismic Load Distribution PAGEREF _Toc534114315 h 73Figure 441: Risk Indicator: Wind Load Distribution PAGEREF _Toc534114316 h 74Figure 442: Risk Indicator: Geotechnical and Structural Errors PAGEREF _Toc534114317 h 75Figure 443: Risk Indicator: Wrong Building Material Selection PAGEREF _Toc534114318 h 76Figure 444: Risk Indicator: Defective Material Received from the Supplier PAGEREF _Toc534114319 h 77Figure 445: Risk Indicator: Bad Quality of Equipment and Material PAGEREF _Toc534114320 h 77Figure 446: Risk Indicator: Lack of Technological Advancements PAGEREF _Toc534114321 h 78Figure 447: Risk Indicator: Inaccurate Plan or Schedule of Project Execution PAGEREF _Toc534114322 h 79Figure 448: Risk Indicator: Inaccuracy in Estimation of the Quantity of Work PAGEREF _Toc534114323 h 79Figure 449: Risk Indicator: Material, Equipment and Labor Availability PAGEREF _Toc534114324 h 80Figure 450: Risk Indicator: Delay or Shortage in the Supply of Material PAGEREF _Toc534114325 h 81

Abstract
Construction industry has different nature of risks involved as part of the industry. It is mainly because of a complex and highly dynamic working environment with a number of stakeholders. Uncertainties and risks are inherent within the construction industry as compared to other industries. Hence, the process pertaining to planning, execution and most importantly, maintaining different project activities is quite time consuming and highly complex. The complete process requires a number of different people having diversified skill-set together with the coordination based on a vast scale of interrelated and complex activities. A total of 48 different risk indicators pertaining to different stakeholders are discussed. For the design approach, a G+4 building has been analyzed using Staad Pro for identifying and subsequently, addressing them as part of the study. For the risk assessment, a 5×5 risk assessment matrix is used for assigning respective risk rating to different risk indicators. The determination of key risk indicators show that most of the risks result in the delays pertaining to timelines and hence, increased cost for project completion. Apart from that, the design aspects of structural engineering and infrastructure planning are a quite complex topic that needs significant development. The risk indicators would also provide ample grounds for corrective and preventive actions pertaining to the issues faced by the construction industries.

Chapter 1
IntroductionThe construction industry is quite susceptible to different risks mainly because of highly dynamic and complex project environments that could create an environment of high risk as well as uncertainty. In this regard, project management and planning plays a pivotal role that require tools, skills, and most importantly, techniques for the fulfillment of different project activities in such a manner that the requirements as well as expectations of the stakeholders are either fulfilled or exceeded. Project risk management can be considered as an important part of the process that aims at the identification of different risks associated with the tasks and subsequently, responding to those identified risks. It can also include the activities that are aimed to maximize the associated consequences of the positive events as well as reducing the impact of the negative events.
Uncertainties and risks are quite commonly inherent within the construction industry as compared to other industries. Hence, the process pertaining to planning, execution and most importantly, maintaining different project activities is quite time consuming and highly complex. The complete process requires a number of different people having diversified skill-set together with the coordination based on a vast scale of interrelated and complex activities. Quite commonly, the situation becomes quite complex through the incorporation of different external factors. As highlighted by Ehsan et al. (n.d.), the construction industry track record has proved the industry to be quite prone to coping with risks thereby resulting in the failure of different projects to meet the timelines and budget targets. As part of the study, different risks pertaining to the construction industry will be identified and analyzed as part of a risk management matrix. In this regard, responses of architects, civil engineers, project engineers and project managers will be collected based on their experiences for elaboration and subsequent understanding of the associated risks along with mitigating factors. As part of the analysis, the risk is analyzed using a standard 5×5 matrix as part of the dissertation.

Chapter 2
Literature ReviewRisk Management in Construction IndustryAs highlighted by Olsson (2007), there has been quite an uncertainty in everyday’s life, in projects and different organizations. It could represent a significant threat to the very business; however, it also provides significant opportunity to different actions that needs to be taken based on associated risks (Hillson, 2011). However, there is a significant link between the risk and uncertainty that implies that the risk can be considered as the measured uncertainty; whereas, the uncertainty can be defined as the risk that is quite impossible to measure (Hillson, 2004). Risk can be considered as a multifaceted outlook (Wang et al., 2004) that can be defined by the probability of the detrimental events associated with the project thereby resulting in negatively implications of objectives (Baloi and Price, 2003; Yu, 2002). As part of the study conducted by Forbes et al (2008), the risk management related practices have grown significantly in the construction industry that would imply that the construction industry is quite prone to risk since the very inception of the project (Schieg, 2006). Hence, the construction projects can be considered to have significantly massive number of risks mainly due to the involvement of different contractors in the stakeholders’ mix (El-Sayegh, 2008). Based on risk management, it is quite important to consider the following aspects:
The risk context origin (Iqbal et al., 2015)
Identification and allocation of different processes (Hanna et al., 2013; Li et al., 2013)
Analysis of information (Zavadskas et al., 2010)
Analysis of the flexibility of the outcomes (Jaskowski and Sobotka, 2012; Kapliński 2008; Ustinovičius et al. 2010)
Risk evaluation and assessment (El-Sayegh, 2007; Markmann et al. 2013; Ke et al. 2012; Skinner et al. 2014)
Remedial actions and risk treatment (Iqbal et al., 2015)
Process or function of the associated risk (Kapliński, 2013; Zavadskas et al. 2010)
Communication and monitoring of the risks pertaining to the construction activities and operations (Zhao et al. 2014)
All of the above-mentioned tasks and activities have a singular aim to minimize the risks associated with the projects thereby lowering the losses with subsequently increasing the opportunities.
Construction Industry Stakeholders and Risk ManagementRisk analysis and subsequent management can be considered as one of the key steps that can help the stakeholders to make critical decisions. Hence, the construction industry together with their clients is quite commonly associated with a variety of macro-, meso- and micro-environmental risks regarding the construction industry (Zavadskas et al., 2010). Nevertheless, the construction industry has quite a bad reputation in dealing with the risks mainly because most of the projects fail to meet cost and deadline benchmarks (Shevchenko et al., 2008). Contractors, clients, the general public and other stakeholders quite commonly suffer as part of the delays in meeting demands of budget and deadlines (Zavadskas et al., 2012). Hence, the construction industry is quite linked with high risk that affects each of the stakeholders; however, effective management and assessment of the associated risks pertaining to the primary stakeholders of construction industry (Kapliński, 2009). Risks can be defined as the events that could affect the objectives of the industry that could have negative results and can result in macro-, meso- and micro-scale environments. Hence, risk management requires the identification and subsequently analysis of the risks that could aid in the decision making process thereby providing remedial actions (Markmann et al., 2013). It implies that the consequence and probability of the events are kept at a minimum level that may be practicably reasonably (Iqbal et al, 2015). As shown in figure 1, BOT (Build-Operate-Transfer) approach can be used as a pictorial representation of the risk modeling depending on the activities of the enterprise and most importantly, the organizational system.

Figure 21: Risk Model of a Construction Industry (Iqbal et al., 2015).As per Abderisak and Lindahl (2015), the construction industry depicts one of the most dynamic and complex industrial environments. Hence, the construction industry as well as its associated projects is highly dependent on the efficiency as well as competence of people involved in the activities. Moreover, the usage of equipments also plays a vital role in this regard. As per Gładysz et al. (2015), it also heavily relies on the site conditions, policy, weather and most importantly, the influence and attitudes of a number of stakeholders. Hence, it makes the construction domain susceptible to a number of potential risks that could affect the very objectives of the construction projects.
Apart from that, Serpella et al. (2014) have pointed out that the risk management is quite commonly not related to the problem pertaining to the lack of information; however, the problem is related to the lack of knowledge. Identification of all the risks associated with the project can be considered as a difficult task; however, the consideration of identifying all the associated risks can be considered quite time consuming, impractical and subsequently, could be counterproductive (Goh and Abdul-Rehman, 2013). Hence, the list of the associated risks should be kept limited only to include the critical and major risks.
Managing risks as part of the construction projects can be recognized as one of the most important management process that requires the project objectives to be accomplished in terms of cost, safety, time, quality and most importantly, environmental sustainability as highlighted by Zoe Patrick et al. (2006). A number of previous studies have focused on the analysis of the project based on a singular aspect of different project strategies regarding safety (Tam et al., 2004), cost (Chen et al., 2000), and time (Shen, 1997). However, some of the researchers have focused the risk management for the construction industry based on the particular step in project lifecycle that can include conceptual phase (Uher and Toakley, 1999), designing phase (Chapman, 2001), inception and construction (Abdou, 1996).
Based on the studies, it has been indicated that the late payment of clients, clients changing the demands, lack of flexibility in project schedule, inflation, defective design, inappropriate allocation of time, safety risks, unprofessional personnel, inaccurate schedule and most importantly, low competence of the subcontractors are some of the most prevalent risks as part of the construction industry (Omran et al., 2015; Goh and Abdul-Rehman, 2013). Another study by Iqbal et al. (2015) have highlighted defective designs, delays in payment, safety risks, inflation, inadequate work scope, subcontractors performance and most importantly, improper schedule can be considered as some of the risks associated with the construction industry. On the other hand, Baghdadi and Kishk (2015) have highlighted around 54 different risks associated with the construction industry in which the delays in payments, changes in the demands of client, and inadequate scope can be considered as the most critical risks associated with the construction industry. These very findings have also been reiterated by other researchers (Omran et al., 2015; Goh and Abdul-Rehman, 2013; Iqbal et al., 2015).
Knowledge ManagementFailures as part of the risk management suggests that the there are three core underlying causes that includes unmanaged ineffective controls, knowledge management, and most importantly, dysfunctional culture (Marshall et al., 1996). As part of the mentioned study, one of the core issues pertaining to the shortcomings in risk management includes the pattern in which the knowledge management occurs within an organization thereby indicating that the problem is not associated with the lack of the knowledge; rather, it includes the lack of knowledge interpretation. Hence, it shows that the knowledge management in the context of risk management plays quite a pivotal role that could enable the working skills of the workers and subsequently, enhancing the capacity of team to effectively share the knowledge along with the key tools associated with them (Rodriguez and Edwards, 2008). As highlighted by Alavi and Leidner (2001), knowledge can be defined as the information that is bred in the minds of different individuals that could translate into procedures, interpretations, concepts, beliefs, values and most importantly, judgments. Another study by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1999) have also pointed out that the knowledge is greatly linked to the beliefs and commitments of people that can also be linked to different human actions that can add the value to the industry (Vail, 1999; Paiva et al., 2007). Hence, the knowledge can become information once it is presented and articulated in the form of words, text, graphics or any other kind of symbolic representation (Alavi and Leidner, 2001).
Knowledge management can be considered as the organized and systematic process for improving the ability of organization to mobilize the knowledge in order to enhance the process of decision making, implement different remedial actions and subsequently, deliver results based on the business strategy. As part of different researches, construction industry can also be considered as a knowledge-driven industry (Carrillo et al., 2004; Egbu et al., 2004) that require delicate execution of different activities associated in construction that requires expertise of specialized individuals having problem solving skills (Anumba et al., 2005).

Chapter 3
Research Design and MethodologyRisk assessment in construction industry environment requires that the data has to be collected based to the industry’s different stakeholders along with their core responsibilities. It would also include the very understanding of internal and external stakeholders’ risks as part of the industry. Considering the rudimentary risk assessment approach would subsequently require underlying steps to be followed as part of the risk assessment:
Establishment of the context
Identification of possible risks
Qualitative analysis of risk and its evaluation
Risk Treatment
Monitoring and Review of Associated Risk
Establishment of ContextAs part of this step, the context of the construction industry is defined that is its business environment. It also implies that the term “context” can include the definition of internal as well as external conditions that can greatly impact the construction industry’s risk management approach (clause 3.01, ISO 9001:2015) based on its services (clause 3.48, ISO 9001:2015) and most importantly, different stakeholders as known as the interested parties (clause 3.02, ISO 9001:2015).
Depending on the framework of risk management, the construction industry needs to show its capability and willingness to provide quality based services that must be timely and most importantly, they should also be meeting the regulatory and client’s requirement thereby having the sole aim to reduce the risks associated with different stakeholders. Therefore, it is of vital importance to develop a context to the study regarding the internal and external stakeholders’ perspectives prior to the project’s designing and implementation phases. Subsequently, it would result in the development of the very rudimentary understanding of construction industry’s context (clause 4.1, ISO 9001:2015). Hence, it would also help in determining the opportunities and risks associated that are necessary to be addressed (clause 6.1, ISO 9001:2015).
The risk-based approach of thinking pertaining to the planning and subsequently, to the implementation processes require taking into account the internal and external stakeholders’ context. The external context could be provided by the very consideration of various issues stemming from market, technological, competitive, cultural, social, legal, and most importantly, the economic environments that can be international, national, regional, and local. Based on the internal context, it can include the facilitation of the core considerations pertaining to culture, performance, value, and knowledge of the contraction industry.
Risks IdentificationAfter the determination of different risk contexts, it is quite important to identify different risks and subsequently, opportunities that need to be addressed (clause 6.1, ISO 9001:2015) based on the risks associated with the construction industry. Risk identification can be considered as the first and hence, the most crucial step in the determination of the different potential actions. It is so because of the uncertainty in outcomes that can possess varying magnitude of different negative impact on the construction industry’s capability for consistently providing the services that needs to be met with applicable statutory, regulatory and stakeholders requirements. The associated risks can also reduce or undermine the client’s satisfaction level. Hence, it is of vital importance that the risk identification system for the construction project would be systematic as well as comprehensive in order to fully ensure that the risks are not ignored as part of construction project. In this regard, the process inputs can incorporate different data that can be empirical data, historical data, and most importantly, the project team leaders’ informed opinion. As part of the dissertation, the structured questionnaire for fifty professional in the field of construction project management would be utilized. Hence, it would facilitate the informed opinions pertaining to the risks associated with the construction project as provided in the Appendix A. Consent letters of the individuals are also provided in Appendix B. The risks and opportunities are documented as part of the risks and opportunity (R&O) register.
As per ISO/IEC 31010, a number of techniques for risk identification could be utilized in risk management framework. Hence, in this regard, the formulation as well as the examination of different checklists could be incorporated. It can help in the identification of the root causes that would result in the risks thereby providing effective CAPA (Corrective Active/Preventive Action) against the associated risks. On the other hand, the experience of different project managers, site engineers, reliability managers, and most importantly, civil engineers working in the construction projects monitoring and leading capacity can greatly be achieved via structured interviews with the experts, focus groups, and discussion forums. It could also include different scenario analysis, surveys, and most importantly, questionnaires for the provisioning as part of risk identification. Hence, brainstorming in this regard can facilitate to be quite effective means. The process can greatly help in facilitating the creative capacity pertaining to different industry’s experts. Hence, it would also result in reduction of the potential risks for overlooking emerging and new industrial ventures (Cooper et al., 2014). Knowledge and experience can be considered as a vital part of the data gathering process; however, the historically assessed data cannot hinder the creative risk assessment based on the future prospects of construction industry that have not arisen beforehand (Cooper et al., 2014).
Risk Evaluation and Risk AnalysisQualitative risk assessment is highly dependent on the ordinal scales for the very description of consequences and likelihood based on the associated risks. This method is quite helpful for the project managers to understand and subsequently, assess the risks associated with the construction site (Miller, 1992). Moreover, it also allows the prioritization considering the risk treatment step thereby taking into account different plans, activities, and processes that could subsequently act as a controlling and preventive measure. The risk assessment can also be useful under the circumstances in which there is an insufficiency of the accurate and reliable statistical data. Moreover, it is also quite helpful under the very circumstances involving time and cost constraints that prevent the project managers from undergoing a more resource-intensive quantitative or semi-quantitative approach for the risk identification and its subsequent risk analysis. In contrast, the quantitative approach in the risk management encompasses the utilization of numerical (ratio) scale for determination of the severity and probabilities associated with different activities and processes. The nominal scales are quite usually used in the qualitative risk assessment.
As part of the ISO/IEC 31010 context, it is quite essential to consider the risk to be qualitative in nature; however, it can also be extended to semi-quantitative and quantitative approaches depending on the time and resource availability during the definition of degree of formality and rigor that is needed for planning and subsequent controlling of different plans and processes in the construction industry.
The dissertation focuses on analysis of qualitative risk and provides the better and systematic use of the information that is available and includes the information provided and documented as the identification of risk and process of its assessment for enhanced understanding of the risks connected with the process and its further components under the same risk assessment domain. This step encircles the assessment of the potential for measuring controls that exists; persistence of the consequence of characterized risk, the probability of the consequences and subsequently, fail safe planning in case of unfortunate failure of the existing controlling measures.
According to the professionals of construction industry that includes civil engineers, structural engineers, project manager, design engineer, and site supervisor to name a few, can be appraised as the best and reliable source of data and information related to the implementation of the measuring controls for identification, calculation and subsequently, assessment of the risk in terms of connected severity or consequences and causes. Considering the situations in which organization’s context is confusing or complex and subsequently, at high risk, it is quite vital to evaluate substantial and additional statistics, data, and facts and figures to be assembled and congregated from different teams of professionals in construction industry as listed previously. Under the situations that needs evaluation and assessment of prime concern risks, the risk assessment and evaluation team can incorporate the sources that encompass process records, first-hand experience, industries own practices, reports of audits and risk assessments, and related literatures (Priede, 2012).
Statistics, data, facts, figures and other information that can be used as part of risk assessment and analysis step, can cover analysis and data (empirical), stakeholder’s concern, and most importantly, theoretical framework. It can also include informed advises and opinions of professionals and experts of the concerned field with the project team (Cooper et al., 2014).
Design Considerations in Staad ProThe risks connected to design will be analyzed by using software called Staad pro. STAAD Pro stands for Structural Analysis and Designing Program. In Civil Engineering this software is mostly being used because of its easy use. Advantages of using this software include it’s the relatively fast method of designing structure, no need for manual calculation is needed, effective for design of all material types i.e. concrete, steel, Aluminum etc. Moreover, it can give accuracy of the shear force along with bending moment diagram for every beam. Besides having advantages, it possess some limitations too that should be known before using this software.
Following is a brief account of different types of loadings that could help in translating different risks pertaining to construction industry:
Dead LoadsA constant load in a structure that does not change over time, that can include the weight of ceilings, beams, walls, and flooring. It can be assessed by the dimensions pertaining to different members involved along with their unit weights. Apart from that, unit weight of reinforced concrete and plain concrete can also be considered as 25 kN/m and 24 kN/m respectively.
Imposed LoadsIt can be considered as the part of the total load that is sustained by a structure that is applied to it after erection excluding snow, seismic activity, loads due to wind, and most importantly, loads that are imposed due to temperature gradients that would be borne by the structure.
Wind LoadsThe motion of wind is relative to the surface of the Earth and can quite commonly be considered to be blowing horizontally relative to the surface of ground at substantially high speeds. The term “wind” generally indicates horizontal flow as vertical component is small. The wind speeds are readily be assessed by the aid of anemographs or anemometers that are readily installed at different meteorological observatories at a different heights that varies from around 10 – 30 meters.
Designed Wind Speed (Vs)
The basic speed of wind (Vs) for any of the construction site can be obtained and readily modified to incorporate different effects to assess design wind velocity at any height (Vs) for any given structure:
a) Local topography
b) Terrain height, roughness, and structure sizing
c) Risk level.
It can be expressed as under:
Where:
V = Vb x k1x k2 x k3
Vb = designed speed of wind at any specific height in z direction
K1= risk coefficient (probability factor)
K2= height, terrain, and size of structure
K3= topography factor
Risk Coefficient provides basic speeds of wind for terrain. A regional basic speed of wind bearing an average return period comprising of 50 years should be incorporated as part f the designs of all building as well as structure.
Terrain must be made with the core concern pertaining to the outcomes of hurdles that makes up the roughness of ground surface. The terrain category may vary due to the wind direction that is under consideration. The location of a structure or building should be planned where there is quite a sufficient availability of meteorological information.
In topography (ks Factor), the basic speed of wind (Vb) can be considered as general level of the construction site above level of sea. Local factors like hills, valleys, cliffs, or ridges are excluded which can considerably affect wind in their area. The outcomes pertaining to topography includes wind’s speeding up near tops of cliffs or peaks of hills, and slowing down the valley’s wind or the wind that is near the base of cliff, ridges, or steep escarpments.
Pressure of Wind and Forces on Buildings/StructuresThe wind load on a building must be assessed for:
a) The whole building
b) Individual structural key elements that includes roofs and walls
c) Individual covering units including glazing and their fixings.
The pressure coefficients can be given based on a particular surface and/or a component of the building’s surface. Area of that very surface along with its portion multiplied by the coefficient of pressure along with the wind pressure design element would provide the wind load that is acting normal to the specific surface. Moreover, the wind load (F) that is acting in normal direction to each individual element or covering unit would be stated as,
F= (Cpe – Cpi) x A x Pd
Where,
Cpe = pressure coefficient (external),
Cpi = pressure coefficient (internal),
A = surface area pertaining to covering or structural unit, and
Pd = designed wind pressure of the element
Seismic Load DesignDesigned Lateral Force
First, the designed lateral force should be assessed for the complete building which will then be divided among floor levels. Thus, the designed seismic force gained based on each of the floors will subsequently be distributed among each of the repelling components of lateral load based on the diaphragm floor action.
Designed Seismic Base Shear
Along any principle direction, the total design seismic base shear (Vb) must be expressed as follows:
Vb = W x Ah
Where,
Ah = horizontal spectrum acceleration
W = total floor seismic weight
Fundamental Natural Period
The empirical fraction for estimating the fundamental natural period having vibration (T) expressed in seconds based on a frame building that is moment-resisting and is considered without brick as part of the panels, can be estimated by:
Ta=0.075 x h x 0.75 (for reinforced concrete frame building)
Ta=0.085 x h x 0.75 (for the steel frame building)
Where,
h = Height of building excluding the floors at basement.
Ta= the fundamental natural period having vibration (T) in seconds.
Expression:
T=0.09HDWhere,
h= building height
d= building base dimension at the plinth level along the lateral force direction.
Distribution of Designed Force
Base Shear Vertical Distribution towards Different Levels of Floor
The designed base shear (V) should be distributed as part of the building height and can be represented by following expression:
Qi = VbWihi2j=1n∙Wjhj2Qi=Designed force (lateral) at ith floor,
Wi =Seismic weight of the ith floor,
Hi =Height ith floor as measured from base, and
n= the levels’ number having mass concentration
Input Editor GenerationThe user communicates with the Staad pro analysis engine via an extension of .std input file which is a text file comprised of a sequence of commands performed serially via Staad Pro editor. The commands can encompass either data or instructions pertaining to the design and/or analysis of the structure. Hence, any of the text editor or Staad Pro editor can be used for editing or formulating the input file in std format. The Staad Pro editor can create the input file via an interactive menu-driven and graphics-oriented procedure. Staad Pro input file has been attached in appendix C. Based on the study, different types of structures can be utilized:
Types of StructuresAny arrangement of elements is termed as a “structure”. Almost any kind of structure can be analyzed as part of Staad Pro. It can design as well as analyze structures comprising of plate/shell, frame, and most importantly, solid elements. Space structure can be considered as the most common type of structure that is three dimensionally framed having loads that are applied in any plane. As part of plane structure, the structure is bound by globally known XY coordinate system having loads in the same plane. Truss structures comprise of different elements that can possess only the axial direction forces for the members with no bending as part of the elements. Floor structures are two and three dimensional based structure that does not have XY coordinate structure movement.
Generation of Structure
The structure can be generated by the input file as shown below:

Figure 31: G+4 Building Structure Generated from Staad ProMaterial Constants
Elasticity Modulus (E), Poisson’s ratio (POISS), weight density (DEN), Composite Damping Ratio, coefficient of thermal expansion (ALPHA), and beta angle (BETA) or coordinates pertaining to any reference point (REF) can be considered as the material constants. E value is mandatory for the analysis to be performed. Considering that the self-weight of the structure is given by the weight density (DEN) is used, calculation of shear modulus (G) requires Poisson’s ratio (POISS). The formula for shear modulus is:
G= 0.5 ×E1+POISSStaad pro will incorporate the value for this very quantity based on the respective value of E provided that the Poisson’s ratio is not provided. Considering the application of temperature loads, the coefficient of thermal expansion (ALPHA) can be used for the calculation of the expansion of members. Temperature unit for ALPHA and temperature load must have to be the same.
SupportsSupports are specified as fixed, pinned or fixed but.
LoadsJoint load, temperature load, member load, and fixed-end load are identified as loads in a structure. Generating the self-weight and utilizing it as an equally divided member load in analysis is also done by STAAD. Any part of this self-weight can be applied in the anticipated direction.
Joint loads
Both types of joint loads can be applicable to any free joint pertaining to construction. The loads perform in the global XY coordinate system, where positive force acts in the positive coordinate. A single joint can bear a number of loads, the number of loads being additive in such situation.
Member loadsThe three different types of member loads that can be readily applied to a member of a structure are:
Uniformly distributed loads that can act on partial or full length.
Concentrated loads, act on a particular point.
Linearly variable loads acting on full length.
Area/floor loadA floor that is bound by X-Z plane is, most of the times, exposed to a uniformly distributed load. However, it might a lot of work to compute the member load for each floor members. The user(s) can identify area loads for the members by incorporation of the area or floor load. Computing the tributary area and providing proper member loads is the job of the program. Area load is for one-way distribution whereas floor load is used for two-way distributions.
Fixed end member loadThese loads are readily facilitated with respect to the coordinate system but the directions are exactly opposite to that the actual applied load on the member. The six forces each member can have are:
Axial
Shear Y
Shear Z
Torsion
Moment Y
Moment Z
Load Generator –Moving load, Wind & SeismicTaking a load that is caused by wind pressure, and thereby converting it into any type of load such as joint load, is called load generation. This can be used for analysis.
Moving Load GeneratorA user can specify the moving load system(s) comprised of concentrated load at a specific distance on both planes. The number of loads identified by the user will be later created by the program and taken under consideration during analysis.
Seismic load generatorThe Staad Pro follows the very process of lateral load analysis. The lateral loads that could be exerted in X and Z direction while direction; however, the Y can be used for gravity load. Hence, Y-axis would be perpendicular to the surface of floors and point upward lying n positive Y coordinate. The user is supposed to provide seismic load coefficients, important factors, and soil attribute parameters for the load generation.
Wind load generatorThe STAAD can compute wind load on a joint from specified exposure factors and wind intensities. Wind intensities may vary from different heights in a structure while exposure factors help in structure modeling.
Section Types for Concrete Design
Cross-section of concrete members can be designed in the following types:
For T-shape and Rectangular & Square Prismatic Beams
For Rectangular, Square and Circular Prismatic Columns
Design ParametersThe program has a number of parameters programmed to perform designs as per IS 13920, and IS 456. Default parameters have been programmed for frequent use of numbers for conventional requirements of designs. The values are changeable in accordance of the design. It is necessary to mention length and force as millimeters and Newton respectively, for performing any concrete designs.
Beam DesignBeams are required for shear, flexure, axial, and torsion force should be considered for the effects. For these factors, pre-scanning of beam loadings is required to identify crucial load cases in different situations. For designing as per IS 13920, width of member shall be no more than 200mm and width-to-depth ratio of more than 0.3 is preferred.
Design for ShearIS 13920:1993 guides vertical hoops to resist shear force. For evaluation of the shear force, the hogging moments of resistance and elastic sagging at beam ends are considered whereas plastic sagging and hogging moments are considered for parameters given for PLASTIC in the input file. To resist torsional moments and shear force, shear reinforcement is assessed.
Column DesignFor axial, biaxial moments, and shear forces per IIS 456:2000, columns are designed. STAAD supports all major criteria for selection of transverse and longitudinal reinforcements as part of IS 456 for column designs to incorporate different provisions pertaining to IS 13920, following points have been satisfied:
Minimum M20 grade of concrete is preferred.
Grade Fe495 or less shall be used for steel reinforcements.
200mm is the least dimension for column members. The shortest dimension of columns should not be less than 300mm, if the columns have unsupported length more than 4m.
Preferable dimension for shortest cross-section to the perpendicular is less than 0.
Other than provided special confining reinforcements, spacing of hoops should not be more than the minimum dimension of the column.
Where flexural yielding occurs, specific confining reinforcement should be facilitated based on a length Lo towards mid span, joint face, and it can be on either part of any section. The length Lo should not be less than
a) Larger dimension (lateral) of the member section at the point in which yielding occurs,
b) 1/6 clear span pertaining to the member
c) 450mm.
¼ of minimum member dimension is high for hoop spacing used as special confining reinforcement but it should be between 75mm to 100mm.
Design OperationsA large number of facilities are programmed in STAAD for structural members designed as separate components of an assessed structure. This facility provides the user an ability to perform a vast number of different operations for design. Moreover, these facilities might design problem. Following operations are used to perform a design:
Load cases members to be considered, are specified.
Code checking or member selection must be specified if it is to be performed.
If the design parameter values differ from the default values, it must be specified.
Member selection by optimization must be specified if needed.
The repetition of operations depends upon the design requirements. Inelastic deformation in the structure is caused due to large forces induce by earthquakes. Sudden failures occur for a brittle structure, however, the earthquake effects will be stabilized with deflection greater than the yield of deflection by energy absorption, if the structure is brittle. Therefore, ductility is an important factor in a structure for its safety from intense shocks. STAAD satisfies all requirements of IS 13920 and IS 456-2000 for concrete designing, and beams and columns.
General Perspectives of IS: 800-1984Some general declarations regarding the execution of IS: 800-1984 for steel design in STAAD has been represented in this section.
Allowable stressesSTAAD has been programmed for member design and code checking for as per allowable stresses in IS 800 (1984) which is a process of proportioning structural members through design load forces, design limitations, and allowable stress for the right material under service conditions.
Post Processing Facilities
STAAD Pro GUI uses all output from the run to process it that will be further analyzed in next section.
Stability Requirements
For all members, slenderness ratios are calculated and matched with the appropriate values and the values are then summarized for different members by IS 800. Such ratios can be provided at maximum in STAAD implementation of IS 800 for individual member.
Deflection CheckThe user is allowed to consider deflection in CODE CHECK as well as MEMBER SELECTION process; however, it may be controlled by three parameters. Deflection is used as an additive strength and stability criteria and may be calculated by the latest analysis result.
Code Checking
It is based on IS 800 (1984) and its purpose is verification of the specified section of being able to satisfy the design code requirements. The specified sections are forces and moments, utilized for evaluating code checking and for specifying these sections, BEAM parameters or SECTION commands may be used. In case of no commands, forces and moments at the ends of members are used for evaluation.
Risk Assessment CriteriaRisk is the product of probability and severity of the event or it is the product of likelihood and severity of incident and can be mathematically written as
risk=Probability x Severity Assessment of Risks is a term used to narrate the procedure to notify and identify hazards and risk factors that have potency to cause injury or harm the employees and would affect different stakeholders.
Assessment of risk or simply risk assessment is means of making sure that the serious workplace risks are administer by cost effective measuring controls. Assessing risks enables to arrange and manage the actions taken to control or prevent them.
Figure 32: Risk Assessment MatrixWhen assessing risks likelihood can be ranked as low if it’s unlikely that the hazardous event will happen, medium if it’s fairly likely that the event may happen or high if it’s likely that event will happen. Evaluation of risks can be done using 5×5 risk assessment matrix which is given below:
9239255095875
Actions depend upon the calculated value of risk by using above matrix i.e. what control measures should be taken to minimize the probability or chance of potentially risky event to take place. On evaluating the risks they are divided into categories as negligible, low, minor, moderate, high, or extreme. In most cases, it is favorable to reduce likelihood but the consequences or severity remains the same. When mentioning or assigning the control measures it is (if possible) necessary to first eliminate the risk. The second step is to reduce the risk thereby substituting it with the low severity control measures.
The CDM Regulations (Construction design and management) are preconceived to guarantee that safety and health related issues are properly implemented during the full time in development of project so that the chance or likelihood of hazard to those who constructed, use and maintained structures is minimized ( Goral, 2007).
A construction project is a procedure where every phase and activity enriches risks that should be analyzed and reduced by the experts and delegated project team members. These days where building market is rapidly growing and it is prime duty to hand over the entire project to client in time in cost efficient way, every decision made in designing can have collision on other phases and have consequences not required and not valuable for the project and impose negative impact on the client.
The designing phase is an initial part of construction project where a better option is preferred over different alternatives design for the project that can enrich more or less the demands and requirements of project. Risks are interconnected with the decisions and might have effect on the end result and project’s success (Boyd and Chinyio, 2008). To reduce the obstructive severity or consequences of the resolution made during design phase to achieve merits of actions taken. Risk assessment and management should be in order from the initial stages of the construction projects. However it is ordinary practice that risk in commitment are not included by the project expertise and delegated team members thoroughly because qualities in identification of risks , assessment and management are not developed completely (Niemeyer, 2003).
In the initial phase of construction project includes design which is also categorized as conceptual design, preliminary and detailed design. The conceptual phase of design is the first step of construction project. Many effective decisions regarding planning, type and design of contract takes place initially. The brainstorming about the construction project congregates in numerous concepts (Wright, 2003). The best possible outcomes are evaluated is implemented as part of the project. This phase of design is next to building phase a main pillar of the entire project time where conceptual design plays an effective role for future development. It is important to understand that the design part of construction project has a great impact for other stages of construction and bad commitments can have negative influence on the project in near future (Van Staveren, 2006). Designing in construction projects involves different risks that cannot be only analyzed and decided theoretically but it require practical approach as well (Cooper, 2005).
Risks can be evaluated as qualitative, semi quantitative and quantitative. For risk assessment and collecting facts, figures, statistical data and other useful information experience and good knowledge considered as essential part (Cooper et al., 2014). For the civil designing professionals, it is required to consider risk assessment as qualitative in nature based on the mutual expertise in the construction domain.

Chapter 4
Analysis and DiscussionBased on the conducted risk assessment underlying the key risk indicators, a total of 48 indicators have been identified and subsequently, assigned with the corresponding risk rating values. The identified risk indicators can also severely undermine the project lifecycle during the very inception of the construction project. For better understanding of the key designing risk indicators, a G+6 storey building has also been incorporated as part of the risk management process so as to fully understand the complete spectrum of the issues pertaining to the construction industry.
Key Risk IndicatorsDelays in Obtaining PermitsBased on the study, the risk related to the delays in obtaining permits has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure 41: Risk Indicator: Obtaining Permits DelayAs per above-mentioned bar chart, it is quite evident that around 60% of the respondents have rated the risk to have rating of 12 that lies in the high risk region of the 5×5 matrix. It would imply that the delays in obtaining of the work permits from the authorities could create additional pressure on the designers and other stakeholders to complete the project in the timely manner. Moreover, it would also result in lags as part of project planning and implementation.
Delays in Project FundingBased on the study, the risks related to the delays in project funding have been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 2: Risk Indicator: Delays in Project FundingAs per above-mentioned bar chart, it is quite evident that around 54% of the respondents have rated the risk to have rating of 12 that lies in the high risk region of the 5×5 matrix. This implies that any delay in the project cash flows would result in delaying the timelines of the projects. Hence, it would severely impede the financial outlook of the overall construction project.
Changes in the Scope of WorkBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the changes in the scope of work has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 3: Risk Indicator: Changes in Scope of WorkAs evident in the above-mentioned bar chart, it is quite evident that around 56% of the responses have rated the risk failing in high risk category. It would imply that any changes in the scope of the work would cause disagreement between the stakeholders and most importantly, the contractors and sub-contractors. This would lead to delayed timelines for project completion with increased direct and indirect costs involved as part of the project.
Improper Work Scope Definition for ContractorsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the improper work scope definition for the contractors has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 4: Risk Indicator: Improper Work Scope Definition for ContractorsAs evident in above-mentioned figure, around 50% and 28% of the respondents have designated this specific risk in high and extreme risk category as part of the 5×5 risk management matrix. This aspect is quite related to the risk indicator involving frequent changes in the scope of work for the employees. Based on the project lifecycle approach, it is quite vital to note that contracts are signed before the start of work with the contractors and any changes in the scope of work would result in increased cost incurred as part of the project. It could also be impacted by the key macroeconomic aspects of the respective country thereby causing an impact on the economic aspects of the country on national scale.
Delays due to Contractor DisputesBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the improper work scope definition for the contractor has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 5: Risk Indicator: Delays caused due to Dispute with the ContractorsAs evident in above-mentioned figure, more than 50% of the respondents have designated this specific risk in high-and extreme category risk as part of the 5×5 risk management matrix.
Incorporation of Ad-hoc ConsultantsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the changes in the scope of work has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 6: Risk Indicator: Ad-hoc ConsultantsAs evident from above-mentioned figure, around 50% of the respondents have put the risk under high-risk category. Projects that are managed by ad-hoc consultants are quite unique because they require strong collaboration between the internal as well as external stakeholders. However, time taken for making the necessary communication and bridging the gaps between different layers of bureaucracy is another important aspect that needs undivided attention of the project managers. This would subsequently, lead to enhancement in internal communication and most importantly, incorporation of knowledge management perspective in the mix.
Third-Party related DelaysBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the third-party delays has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 7: Risk Indicator: Third Party DelaysThird-party delays can be considered as an important aspect pertaining to risk indicator management specifically, the key issues pertaining to the claims in contracts. Any delay caused by the contractor is subjected to cost (claims) that could degrade the viability of the firm’s business profile. Moreover, the delays caused by the third-party would have rippling effect on almost every aspect of the construction industry as the project timelines would get greatly disturbed. As part of the respondents in above-mentioned figure, more than 50% of the respondents have considered third-party delays fall under high-and extreme-category risk.
Poor Coordination with the Sub-ContractorsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the third-party delays has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 8: Risk Indicator: Poor Coordination with the SubcontractorAs evident from above-mentioned, more than 50% of the respondents have deemed the coordination with the subcontractors as the potential risk as part of a construction project. Good communication with the subcontractors can result in enhanced identification of the safety risks thereby providing safe means for reporting the incidents without any repercussions.
Poor Performance of SubcontractorsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the bad performance of the subcontractors has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 9: Risk Indicator: Poor Performance of the SubcontractorFor avoiding any issues with the subcontractors, it is quite essential to have a prequalification program for qualifying the subcontractor for a certain task and job. It could include gathering three years data pertaining to OSHA citations and different SOPs that are pertinent to involvement in avoiding any unforeseen event at the construction sites. Moreover, different aspects of safety that includes SSOW (Safe Systems of Work) and its willing participation from subcontractors needs to be ensured to reduce the risk associated with the construction project.
Lack of the Qualified PersonnelBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the lack of qualified personnel has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 10: Risk Indicator: Lack of Qualified PersonnelBased on above-mentioned figure, it is quite evident that more than 50% of the respondents have highlighted that lack of qualified and competent personnel can be considered as a high-category risk for the construction site. Moreover, it is quite necessary to note that the competence and qualification criterion needs to be met at the time of hiring and subsequent trainings pertaining to safe operations pertaining to roles and responsibilities should be done.
Labor Strikes and DisputesBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the lack of qualified personnel has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 11: Risk Indicator: Labor Strikes and DisputesBased on the responses from different respondents in above-mentioned figure, it is evident that around 50% considers the risk pertaining to labor disputes and strikes as the high-category risk. It is quite essential to note that there is significant need for the labor-firm dispute management cell that should look for potential solutions for the issues faced by the workers. Moreover, it is also worthwhile to highlight that the disputes usually result in the strikes that could cause complete halt of the construction activities at the site. Representatives from workers and company need to hold talks in accordance with the underlying signed contract so as to resolve the issue beforehand. A much better is to incorporate the abiding terms in the contract for the third party contractors to avoid any unforeseen circumstances in the future.
Team ExperienceBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the lack of qualified personnel has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 12: Risk Indicator: Safety of the workers, contractors and neighboring building residentsSafety has always been an area of concern for the construction industry as it involves a number of potential stakeholders that can visit site to monitor progress. It is also worthwhile to note that OSHA’s personnel also regulates the safety culture through surprise inspection and visits within the construction environment. To reduce the risk associated with it, it is quite essential for the construction firm management to provide safe working environment for the personnel, key stakeholders and neighboring residents. Regular safety talks and meetings can be one of the ways for enhancing the safety culture of site. However, commitment for safe working environment is quite essential pertaining to key stakeholders.
Incident/Accident Reporting and SafetyBased on the study, the risk pertaining to accident and incident related risk has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 13: Risk Indicator: Safety Related Incident/Accident at the Construction SiteSafe working environment can greatly reduce the risk that would significantly reduce the incidents and accidents at site. Moreover, the incidents related injuries can also result in the loss of productivity of labor thereby resulting in significant downtimes. As part of above-mentioned figure, it is evident that the more than 60% of the respondents have assigned the risk in high-risk category.
Bad Productivity and Competence of LaborBased on the study, the risk pertaining to competence of labor leading to bad productivity has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 14: Risk Indicator: Bad Productivity and Competence of LaborAs evident in above-mentioned figure, it is quite evident that more than 60% of the respondents have said that the bad productivity and competence of labor contributes to significant amount of risk pertaining to construction industry. In order to cater this issue, it is quite essential to have required training for developing necessary competence in labor and line workers.
Shortage of EquipmentBased on the study, the risk pertaining to shortage of equipment has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 15: Risk Indicator: Shortage of EquipmentAs evident in above-mentioned figure, around 34% and 40% of the respondents have put the risk under extreme-and high-risk category. It implies that the shortage of equipment would lead to increased cost due to delayed timelines. Moreover, the equipments also need to be in sound condition to avoid delays.
Bad Productivity of EquipmentBased on the study, the risk pertaining to bad productivity of equipments has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 16: Risk Indicator: Bad Productivity of EquipmentLow productivity of equipments and machinery is mainly due to the lack of corrective and preventive maintenance of the machines. Another important aspect is the understanding of depreciation of the equipment and machinery so that it could be changed or altered after certain period of time. In this regard, the RMS (Reliability Maintainability and Supportability) analysis should also be conducted and readily communicated to the internal stakeholders.
Delays in PaymentsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the delays in payments to different stakeholders (internal and external) has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 17: Risk Indicator: Delays in PaymentAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 45% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. It can also be implied that the delays in release of payments of contractors and reimbursement to the employees would severely hinder the progress of project. For the contractors, it would become quite difficult to maintain running finances of their firms and purchase new raw materials essential for building construction thereby leading to lagging project progress. For the employees, the site supervisors and managers would face significant resistance from the workers that are reluctant to complete the work in due time.
Robbery IncidentsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the issues of robbery incidents has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 18: Risk Indicator: Robbery Incidents of Materials at SiteAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 54% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix.
Exchange Rate InflationBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the issues of exchange risk inflation has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 19: Risk Indicator: Exchange Risk Inflation and Market FluctuationsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 60% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high and extreme risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. The issues pertaining to financial markets and macroeconomics of the country of site play a significant role in determining the incurred cost. Hence, it is quite essential to make feasibility studies for the project taking into account the inflation rate, GDP and other macroeconomic perspectives.
Improper Risk AllocationBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the improper allocation of risk as part of contract has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 20: Risk Indicator: Improper Risk Allocation as listed in ContractsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 48% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. The contracts between the contractors and company play a significant role in reducing the risk related to contracts. Hence, it is quite vital to incorporate the perspectives of hiring competent legal aid for the project that would take into account the uncertainties.
Natural DisasterBased on the study, the risk pertaining to any natural disaster has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 21: Risk Indicator: Natural Disaster RiskAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 54% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to extreme category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Natural disasters have the highest of severity considering the risk management matrix. However, during the initial design phase, the chosen site must been assessed based on seismic activities along with historical considerations of typhoon and other natural calamities.
War and Terrorist AttacksBased on the study, the risk pertaining to any natural disaster has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 22: Risk Indicator: War and Terrorist AttacksAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 54% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to moderate category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix.
Corruption of the OfficialsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to corruption of the officials has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 23: Risk Indicator: Corruption of the OfficialsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to moderate category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Corruption of the officials is one of the key factors that need to be considered prior to designing and inception phase in project lifecycle to avoid unnecessary costs as part of the corrupt officials.
Political InstabilityBased on the study, the risk pertaining to political instability has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 24: Risk Indicator: Political InstabilityAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 46% and 30% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Political instability is another factor that needs to be considered during the inception and designing phase of the project.
Adverse and Bad Weather ConditionsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to adverse and bad weather conditions has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 25: Risk Indicator: Adverse and Bad Weather ConditionsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 52% and 18% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Bad weather usually reduces the productivity by halting certain operations in construction industries. Hence, construction projects needs to be planned such that the bad weather conditions will be taken into account and prior emergency preparations are being made to cater the delays.
Differences in the Site ConditionsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to the differences in the site conditions has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 26: Risk Indicator: Differences in the Site ConditionsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 54% and 10% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Different sites have different condition that can differ from local, regional, national to international scales. Every project has its own distinguished aspects that need to be understood with necessary preparedness beforehand.
Unforeseen Conditions at SiteBased on the study, the risk pertaining to unforeseen conditions at site has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 27: Risk Indicator: Unforeseen Conditions at SiteAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Any of the unforeseen circumstances that could impact the activities should be addressed beforehand.
Inadequate Insurance CoverBased on the study, the risk pertaining to inadequate insurance cover has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 28: Risk Indicator: Inadequate Insurance CoverAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Quite commonly, workers are reluctant to work in an unsafe environment that can result in physical or mental injury. For catering that issue, the construction management as well as contractors must provide insurance cover to the workers. However, having an insurance cover for the equipment and structure is also necessary that needs to be done prior to construction at site.
Unavailability of UtilitiesBased on the study, the risk pertaining to unavailability of utilities has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 29: Risk Indicator: Unavailability of UtilitiesAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, more than 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Unavailability of utilities can severely impede in meeting timelines for different tasks and activities. Hence, it is quite necessary to ensure that the utilities are readily available and/or outsourced to avoid any project delays.
Design Risk IndicatorsFor enhanced understanding of the key construction risks pertaining to building design, a G+4 building has been analyzed for understanding the key forces and moments resulting under wind loads, seismic activities and most importantly, considering the dead and imposed loads on the structure. Following is the geometrical depiction of the building:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 30: Geometrical Overview of G+4 BuildingBased on the geometrical overview of the building, following load cases, wind and seismic conditions have been considered as part of the building design:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 31: Load Cases
Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 32: Wind ConditionsBased on the conducted analysis, the beam force, support reactions, relative and node displacement details can be found in appendix D. Staad pro can also generate the animation of the said displacement of the structure due to wind loads that can show stable structural integrity as part of the Staad pro programming for G+4 building construction. Considering the structural integrity, it is quite vital to understand the statics check as part of the structural design. The statics check can be found in appendix E as generated from Staad pro report generator. Based on the conducted analysis, it is quite vital to note that the forces, reactions and moments at each beam and/or node could be a crucial step in designing of structure of any complexity. The steps taken would be quite similar and are readily used as part of the analysis of any construction structures. However, it is also quite vital to incorporate the opinions of experts in the field of construction and provide an insight of the key risk indicators.
Defective Design RiskBased on the study, the risk pertaining to defective design has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 33: Risk Indicator: Defective DesignAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, more than 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Similarly, the Staad Pro can also provide an insight on the defect of the design and is also facilitated with animation features to ensure force and moment balancing for the whole structure. The node and beam displacement analysis can also be readily conducted to provide an insight to the structural stability.
Delays in Availability of Structural DrawingsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to delays in availability of structural drawings has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 34: Risk Indicator: Delays in Availability of DrawingsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 56% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high- risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Readily unavailability of the drawings can be a major issue as it can derail the timelines at the very inception stage.
Alteration in the Regulations and Construction Codes
Based on the study, the risk pertaining to alteration in the regulation of codes has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 35: Risk Indicator: Alteration in the Regulations and CodesAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 56% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high- risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. The construction related regulations do not change that frequently; however, the changes in regulation would be quite detrimental and affects project timelines with increased incurred costs.
Impact of Design on Local EcosystemBased on the study, the risk pertaining to impact of design on local ecosystem has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 36: Risk Indicator: Impact of Design on Local EcosystemLocal environment and ecological systems are quite prone to the construction of buildings. Hence, it is required to conduct an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) during the designing phase of project lifecycle. The building along with its construction needs to be made such that it does not impact the local ecological systems.
Integration of the Design with Supply ChainBased on the study, the risk pertaining to integration of design with the supply chain has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 37: Risk Indicator: Integration of the Design with Supply ChainAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high- risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Preparation of timelines requires the formulation of agile project planning and management. It implies that the material, labor and equipments should be readily available and any delay in this regard could severely impact the timelines and incurred costs.
Complexity of DesignBased on the study, the risk pertaining to complexity of design has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 38: Risk Indicator: Complexity of DesignAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Complexities in designing add influence of a number of forces, reactions and moments at nodes and beams. Moreover, the factors of seismic and wind loads also become quite severe with the increase in the complexity of design.
Design ErrorBased on the study, the risk pertaining to complexity of design has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 39: Risk Indicator: Design ErrorsAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Design errors can be considered as a severe risk considering the design phase of the project lifecycle. The integrity of structural and infrastructural designing can play a pivotal role and hence, the design should be verified and validated by a number of senior management personnel to avoid any issues. Moreover, different designing aids like Staad Pro and Prokon should be used for statics balancing and modeling of structure.
Seismic Load DistributionBased on the study, the risk pertaining to complexity of design has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 40: Risk Indicator: Seismic Load DistributionAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 44% and 32% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. For enhancing the seismic load distribution, different types of anchorage are being provided that can include structured walls and decks. Apart from that, the dead, roof, and live load distribution also play quite an important role in enhancing the structural stability of the building.
Wind Load DistributionBased on the study, the risk pertaining to wind load distribution has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 41: Risk Indicator: Wind Load DistributionAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, around 50% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix. Wind loads can prove to be quite prone for the building stability. Hence, it is not only required to balance the live, dead and roof loads but it also requires taking wind loads into account. This would imply that the building structure would greatly be prone to the risks with the increase in height of the buildings.
Structural/Geotechnical ErrorsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to geotechnical and structural errors has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 42: Risk Indicator: Geotechnical and Structural ErrorsDuring the designing phase of the project, it is quite necessary to take into account the basics of soil mechanics and structural mechanics. Hence, it is quite vital to evaluate different features like terrain and elevation prior to designing of the building structure. As per the risk assessment conducted by different researchers, it is quite evident that more than 50% of the respondents have assigned high-risk rating for potential errors in soil and structural mechanics. However, this could be greatly reduced by the incorporation of software like Staad Pro and Prokon as they provide force and moment balancing of the building projects through computer modeling.
Wrong Material SelectionBased on the study, the risk pertaining to wrong building material selection has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 43: Risk Indicator: Wrong Building Material SelectionMaterials used in the construction of buildings play pivotal role in determining the structural stability of the structure. It is so because different materials have different intrinsic properties that need to be selected based on the geotechnical and structural perspectives of the buildings. As part of the risk assessment, around 50% of the respondents have considered wrong material selection as the potential risk. It can be catered through computer simulation and by repeated validation by different primary stakeholders prior to building development.
Bad Quality of Material and EquipmentBased on the study, the risk pertaining to bad quality of equipment and material along with defective material received from the supplier has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 44: Risk Indicator: Defective Material Received from the SupplierAs evident from the above-mentioned bar chart, more than 60% of the respondents have assigned risk rating belonging to high-and extreme-risk category as outlined in the 5×5 risk assessment matrix.

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 45: Risk Indicator: Bad Quality of Equipment and MaterialQuality of materials and equipments can severely hinder the reliability of the project. It implies that the project would become quite prone to issues of timeline delays and increased incurred cost for the building project. As part of the risk assessment, more than 60% of the respondents have catered the bad quality material and equipment as high-and extreme-risk for the construction industries.
Lack of Technological AdvancementsBased on the study, the risk pertaining to lack of technological advancements has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 46: Risk Indicator: Lack of Technological AdvancementsWith the inclusion of technology in different domain of engineering, construction has also been incorporation with different developments. Hence, the software can provide an insight to different aspects of structural, geotechnical and environmental dynamics that can be considered vital for structural design of buildings.
Inaccurate Plan or Schedule of Plan ExecutionBased on the study, the risk pertaining to inaccurate plan or schedule of plan execution has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 47: Risk Indicator: Inaccurate Plan or Schedule of Project ExecutionTimely execution of tasks can guarantee project completion in due time. However, inaccuracy and inconsistencies in planning of the project and its execution could lead to significant issues that lead to impeding timelines and increased cost of erection. As part of the risk assessment, it is evident that around 55% of the experts have deemed improper execution of project plan as a high-category risk for the construction site. A similar aspect in the estimation of the quantity of work has also been analyzed as under:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 48: Risk Indicator: Inaccuracy in Estimation of the Quantity of WorkMaterial, Equipment and Labor AvailabilityBased on the study, the risk pertaining to material equipment and labor availability has been analyzed and following trend is observed corresponding to the risk value of the risk indicator:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 49: Risk Indicator: Material, Equipment and Labor AvailabilityThe issues pertaining to swift availability of the material, labor and equipment is quite a critical issue. Hence, it is required to align supply chain with the designing of the project pertaining to construction project.
A similar aspect can be considered pertaining to the shortage and delays in the material supply. Following trend is observed:

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4 SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 50: Risk Indicator: Delay or Shortage in the Supply of MaterialAs part of the risk assessment, more than 55% of the respondents have catered delays in supply of materials as moderate-and high-risk for the construction industries.

Chapter 5
Conclusion and RecommendationConstruction industry requires rigorous risk assessment and analysis from time to time. The determination of key risk indicators show that most of the risks result in the delays pertaining to timelines and hence, increased cost for project completion. Apart from that, the design aspects of structural engineering and infrastructure planning are a quite complex topic that needs significant development. Following key considerations have been analyzed and discussed as part of the dissertation:
With the advancement of technology and incorporation of different structural designing software, it has become quite possible to facilitate different loads and moments at the initial designing phase.
However, the software and technological advancements are also associated with a number of risks that can be catered through rigorous verification and validation from the senior management of the firm.
Social and external pressures that include political and environmental influences can also result in delays pertaining to design and development phase of the project.
Based on the analysis, a total of 48 different key indicators have been analyzed. Among those key indicators include, administrative risks, financial risks, HSE related risks, and most importantly, design related risks as part of the study.
Each of the 48 key indicators have been analyzed via 5×5 risk assessment matrix that is used for assessing risk rating pertaining to different risks. The risk are then analyzed via bar chart diagram to assess the potential risk rating of the respective risk indicator. Apart from that, the risks are also facilitated by corrective and preventive actions that cooudl reduce the risk.
The study has provided an outlook to different risk indicators that a construction industry faces; however, that could vary moderate to extreme risk rating based on geography and local political and environmental aspects.
For further studies, different statistical analysis like ANOVA or Chi-square can be used to develop significance of the results and to enhance the very understanding of individuals. It would also help determining the risk indicators as significant or not that can include risk indicators other than 48 risk indicators as mentioned in the study. Moreover, risk design can further be elaborated that includes the formation of case studies of different marvels of infrastructures like Burj al Khalifa and Singapore’s twin towers, to name a few. Incorporation of sustainable building infrastructure could also significant advancement that can incorporate a cost-benefit analysis pertaining to structural stability and addition of different dead loads. However, with the incorporation of sustainable building design, increased number of risk indicators would be incorporated as part of future studies.

ReferencesAbderisak, A., & Lindahl, G. (2015). Take a chance on me? Construction client’s perspectives on risk management. Procedia economics and finance, 21, 548-554.
Abdou, O. A. (1996). Managing construction risks. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 2(1), 3-10.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS quarterly, 107-136.
Anumba, J. C., Egbu, C. & Carrillo, P. (2005). Knowledge Management in Construction. First Edition, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Baghdadi, A., & Kishk, M. (2015). Saudi Arabian aviation construction projects: Identification of risks and their consequences. Procedia Engineering, 123, 32-40.
Baloi, D., & Price, A. D. (2003). Modelling global risk factors affecting construction cost performance. International journal of project management, 21(4), 261-269.
Boyd, D. and Chinyio, E., 2008. Understanding the construction client. John Wiley & Sons.
Carrillo, P., Robinson, H., Al-Ghassani, A., & Anumba, C. (2004). Knowledge management in UK construction: Strategies, resources and barriers. Project Management Journal, 35(1), 46-56.
Chapman, R. J. (2001). The controlling influences on effective risk identification and assessment for construction design management. International Journal of Project Management, 19(3), 147-160.
Chen, H., Guilin, H., Poon, S. W., & Ng, F. F. (2004). Cost risk management in west rail project of Hong Kong. AACE International Transactions, IN91.
Cooper, D., Bosnich, P., Grey, S., Raymond, G., Purdy, G., Walker, P., & Wood, M. (2014). Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk with ISO 31000 and IEC 62198. John Wiley & Sons.
Cooper, D.F., 2005. Project risk management guidelines: managing risk in large projects and complex procurements. John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
Egbu, C., Hayles, C, Anumba, A., Ruikar, K., & Quintas, P. (2004). Getting Started in Knowledge management: Concise Guidance for Construction Consultants and Contractors. Partners in Innovation Project (CI 39/3/709), UK.
El-Sayegh, S. M. (2008). Risk assessment and allocation in the UAE construction industry. International journal of project management, 26(4), 431-438.
Forbes, D., Smith, S., & Horner, M. (2008). Tools for selecting appropriate risk management techniques in the built environment. Construction Management and economics, 26(11), 1241-1250.
Gładysz, B., Skorupka, D., Kuchta, D., & Duchaczek, A. (2015). Project risk time management–a proposed model and a case study in the construction industry. Procedia Computer Science, 64, 24-31.
Goh, C. S., & Abdul-Rahman, H. (2013). The identification and management of major risks in the Malaysian construction industry. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 18(1), 19-32.
Goral, J., 2007. Risk management in the conceptual design phase of building projects.
Hanna, A. S., Thomas, G., & Swanson, J. R. (2013). Construction risk identification and allocation: Cooperative approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(9), 1098-1107.
Hillson, D. (2004). Effective opportunity management for projects – exploiting positive risk. New York, EE.UU: Marcel Dekker.
Hillson, D. (2011). Dealing with business uncertainty. Unloaded from: http://www. riskdoctor. com/briefings.
Iqbal, S., Choudhry, R. M., Holschemacher, K., Ali, A., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2015). Risk management in construction projects. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 21(1), 65-78.
ISO (2015). ISO 9001:2015 – Quality management systems — Requirements. [online] ISO.prg. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/62085.html [Accessed 21 Jan. 2018].
Jaskowski, P., & Sobotka, A. (2012). Using soft precedence relations for reduction of the construction project duration. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18(2), 262-279.
Kapliński, O. (2008). Usefulness and credibility of scoring methods in construction industry. Journal of civil engineering and management, 14(1), 21-28.
Kapliński, O. (2009). Information technology in the development of the Polish construction industry. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 15(3), 437-452.
Kapliński, O. (2013). The utility theory in maintenance and repair strategy. Procedia Engineering, 54, 604-614.
Ke, Y., Wang, S., & Chan, A. P. (2012). Risk management practice in China’s Public-Private Partnership projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 18(5), 675-684.
Li, H. X., Al-Hussein, M., Lei, Z., & Ajweh, Z. (2013). Risk identification and assessment of modular construction utilizing fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and simulation. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 40(12), 1184-1195.
Markmann, C., Darkow, I. L., & von der Gracht, H. (2013). A Delphi-based risk analysis—Identifying and assessing future challenges for supply chain security in a multi-stakeholder environment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(9), 1815-1833.
Marshall, C., Prusak, L., & Shpilberg, D. (1996). Financial risk and the need for superior knowledge management. California Management Review, 38(3), 77-101.
Niemeyer, S., 2003. Conceptual Design in building industry. Chalmers tekniska högsk..
Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H., & Kocka, M. H. (1999). La organización creadora de conocimiento: cómo las compañías japonesas crean la dinámica de la innovación (pp. 61-103). México DF: Oxford University Press.
Olsson, R. (2007). In search of opportunity management: Is the risk management process enough?. International journal of project management, 25(8), 745-752.
Omran, A., Shafie, M. W. M., & Kulaib, H. M. O. (2015). Identifying environmental risk in construction projects in Malaysia: stakeholder perspective. Annals of the Faculty of Engineering Hunedoara, 13(2), 89-92.
Paiva, E. L., Roth, A. V., & Fensterseifer, J. E. (2008). Organizational knowledge and the manufacturing strategy process: a resource-based view analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 26(1), 115-132.
Rodriguez, E., & Edwards, J. S. (2008). Before and after modeling: Risk knowledge management is required. The Society of Actuaries.
Schieg, M. (2006). Risk management in construction project management. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 7(2), 77-83.
Serpella, A.F., Ferrada, X., Howard, R. and Rubio, L., 2014. Risk management in construction projects: a knowledge-based approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, pp.653-662.
Shen, L. Y. (1997). Project risk management in Hong Kong. International journal of project management, 15(2), 101-105.
Shevchenko, G., Ustinovichius, L., & Andruškevičius, A. (2008). Multi‐attribute analysis of investments risk alternatives in construction. Technological and economic development of economy, 14(3), 428-443.
Skinner, D. J., Rocks, S. A., Pollard, S. J., & Drew, G. H. (2014). Identifying uncertainty in environmental risk assessments: the development of a novel typology and its implications for risk characterization. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 20(3), 607-640.
Tam, C. M., Zeng, S. X., & Deng, Z. M. (2004). Identifying elements of poor construction safety management in China. Safety Science, 42(7), 569-586.
Uher, T. E., & Toakley, A. R. (1999). Risk management in the conceptual phase of a project. International Journal of Project Management, 17(3), 161-169.
Vail, E. F. (1999). Knowledge mapping: getting started with knowledge management. Information Systems Management, 16, 10-23.
Van Staveren, M.T., 2006. Uncertainty and Ground Conditions: A Risk Management Approach: A Risk Management Approach. CRC Press.
Wang, S. Q., Dulaimi, M. F., & Aguria, M. Y. (2004). Risk management framework for construction projects in developing countries. Construction Management and Economics, 22(3), 237-252.
Wright, I., 2003. Risk and liability for the structural engineer: a legal perspective. Structural Engineer, 81(14).
Yu, Z. (2002, July). Integrated risk management under deregulation. In Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2002 IEEE (Vol. 3, pp. 1251-1255). IEEE.
Zavadskas, E. K., Vainiūnas, P., Turskis, Z., & Tamošaitienė, J. (2012). Multiple criteria decision support system for assessment of projects managers in construction. International journal of information technology & decision making, 11(02), 501-520.
Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z.; Tamošaitienė, J. 2010a. Risk assessment of construction projects, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 16(1): 33–46.
Zhao, X., Hwang, B. G., & Phng, W. (2014). Construction project risk management in Singapore: resources, effectiveness, impact, and understanding. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 18(1), 27-36.
Zou Patrick, X. W., Zang, G., & Wang, J. (2006). Identifying key risks in construction projects: life cycle and stakeholders perspectives.

AppendixAppendix A: Risk Assessment FormIt will be submitted to TA/RA separately.

Appendix B: Consent FormsIt will be submitted to TA/RA separately.

Appendix C: Staad Pro Input FileIt will be submitted to TA/RA separately.

Appendix D: Beam Force, Support Reactions, Relative and Node Displacement ResultsIt will be submitted to TA/RA separately.

Appendix E: Statics Check AnalysisIt will be submitted to TA/RA separately.