Why risk management and planning is important to operate a megaproject

Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction....................................................................................................................5
Background of the study..............................................................................................................5
The Nature of the Megaproject/Megaproject/construction Industry...........................................7
A Global Perspective for Project Owners....................................................................................8
Management in Megaproject/construction..................................................................................9
Purpose of study........................................................................................................................10
Research Objectives...................................................................................................................10
Research Questions....................................................................................................................11
Chapter 2........................................................................................................................................12
Introduction to chapter...................................................................................................................12
Risk Management and Assessment...........................................................................................12
Risks and Megaprojects.............................................................................................................14
Risk management planning in megaprojects.................................................................................15
Factors Influencing the Risk Management Process...................................................................16
Risks in Megaproject/construction............................................................................................17
Typical Risks on a Megaproject/construction Project...............................................................18
Risk and Uncertainty.................................................................................................................19
Megaproject/construction Projects’ Risk and Risk Management in various countries.............20
Theoretical Framework..............................................................................................................20
Contingency Theory and Megaproject/construction Risk Management...................................21
Chapter 3: Research Methodology................................................................................................24
Methodology..................................................................................................................................24
Research Philosophy..................................................................................................................24
Research approach.....................................................................................................................25
Data collection...........................................................................................................................26
Data analysis..............................................................................................................................26
Chapter 4 – Thematic Analysis and Discussion............................................................................28
Theme 1: Risk management in the megaproject/construction industry....................................28
Theme 2: Contractors’ inclusion in risk management in a project life cycle............................30
Practical Risk Management Process in the Megaproject/construction Sector...........................30
Suggestive Risk management actions and Strategies................................................................32
 Preventive actions......................................................................................................................32
Mitigating actions......................................................................................................................33
Chapter 5 Conclusion....................................................................................................................35
Future Recommendations..........................................................................................................36
Managerial Implication..............................................................................................................37
Chapter 6........................................................................................................................................39
Recommendations......................................................................................................................39
References......................................................................................................................................43
 Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter provides a historical insight of risk management in the megaproject/construction
industry and the nature of the industry. In addition to taking a gander at the general concept of
risk and uncertainty, the chapter also explores the concept of management in
megaproject/construction , identifying the significant risks. The megaproject/construction
industry is riskier than other sectors on account of the manysided quality in organizing different
exercises. Besides, every project is special and regularly fused with new methods and strategies.
The center component of project success, therefore, is to meet the time, cost, and quality as
focused. With a specific end goal to accomplish these targets, risks may arise from various
perspectives (Aibinu, and, Jagboro, 2002). These risks, thus, limit the projects’ success,
necessitate additional capital investments, more time, environmental harm, among a cohort of
other adverse ramifications. In this way, projects can be emphatically accomplishment by
considering the risks where it typically tends to give positive and negative impact on the
underlying project. Consequently, risk management must be utilized as one of the essential parts
in project administration. The primary reason behind risk management is to increase the value of
project conveyance, what's more, to enhance productivity amid practice. Along these lines, risk
administration can be characterized as a planned arrangement of exercises and strategies used to
control risks (Altshuler and Luberoff, 2003). Keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish the
goals of a project, an appropriate risk management system is imperative. Thus, the first in risk
management should be the identification of risk variables influencing the management process.
Moreover, in the megaproject/construction sector, contractors are the real part players in
performing megaproject/construction projects and are straightforwardly included in physical
exercises of the project. They are required to control the risks that arise amid the development
attempts to guarantee the efficient conveyance of the tasks.

Background of the study

The formal method of defining, analysing, and reacting to project risk is known as risk
management. Planning, risk assessment, qualitative risk analysis, quantitative risk analysis, risk
response planning, risk detection, and risk regulation are the six phases. According to (Irimia-
Diéguez et al, (2014), it is a developing area that has been seen in the literature to be useful not
only for loss prevention, but also for achieving greater rewards (Al-Momani¸2000). Risk is a
critical aspect to recognise since it will influence the cost-benefit analysis during the project's life
cycle, as well as demand, manufacturing costs, implementation period, and financial variables.
Despite the fact that this research is needed in any project, it is particularly crucial when
addressing megaprojects, where these problems are a reality).

There are some descriptions of megaprojects in the literature. A project with an expenditure of
over $1 billion, high complexity, potential intangible gains, and appealing long-term results can
be classified as a megaproject. Many risk factors exist in a megaproject that can trigger delays or
failures during the project life cycle. As a consequence, it's crucial to build a strategy and
framework for successfully handling these risk factors ahead of time. Furthermore, templates or
preventive steps must be adopted to minimise the chance of those risk factors triggering project
failures. When it comes to risk assessment in ventures, there is a lot of literature; but, when it
comes to megaprojects, there is a lot less (Kardes et al, 2013).

Megaprojects are wide-scale, ambitious endeavours that usually cost a billion dollars or more,
require several years to plan and construct, include various public and private partners, are
transformational, and have a large effect on millions of citizens. One of the study refers to such
ventures as "privileged particles of the creation phase," noting that they are often "trait
producing," that is, they are intended to transform the framework of society in a bold way, as
compared to smaller and more traditional projects that are "trait taking," that is, they blend into
pre-existing systems without attempting to change them. Megaprojects are also not just bigger
iterations of smaller ventures. Megaprojects are distinguished from other forms of ventures in
terms of commitment, timeliness, sophistication, and stakeholder participation. As a
consequence, they're a whole different sort of project to handle. Managers of traditional ventures,
according to a source, need the equivalent of a driver's licence to do their jobs, while managers
of megaprojects require a pilot's jumbo jet certificate (Sanchez et al, 2016). You wouldn't expect
a driver's licence holder to operate a jumbo, and you don't want typical project managers to
handle megaprojects. Miller, and Lessard, (2008) shared that Infrastructure, water and energy,
information systems, industrial processing plants, mining, distribution networks, enterprise
systems, strategic corporate initiatives and change programmes, mergers, government
administrative systems, banking, defence, and other businesses and sectors are increasingly using
megaprojects as the preferred delivery model for goods and services. High-speed rail lines,
airports, seaports, highways, hospitals, health care or pension ICT systems, national
telecommunications, the Olympics, large-scale signature infrastructure, dams, wind farms,
offshore oil and gas extraction, aluminium smelters, new aircraft growth, the largest container
and cruise ships, high-energy gravity waves, and logistics are examples of megaprojects.

Megaprojects are large-scale industrial or engineering ventures that dramatically alter

environments in highly recognisable ways. They include organised capital applications,
advanced infrastructure, meticulous preparation, and political clout. They necessitate the
involvement of a large number of contractors, mostly from different nations, and take years to
complete. Megaprojects are divided into four categories. There are several megaprojects
currently under construction across the world. In developed countries and emerging economies,
businesses have discovered a shortage of adequate facilities. As a result, in the last two decades,
the amount of large-scale schemes has exploded. Another study forecasts that between 2009 and
2012, developing market capital investment would total $2.25 trillion. For example, China is
forecast to invest the most money across emerging markets, valued at $725 billion. Furthermore,
the OECD reports that between 2007 and 2030, $53 trillion will be expended on upgrading
established infrastructure in developing countries and constructing new infrastructure in
emerging markets (Boateng et al, 2012).

Broad ventures, according to the literature, are essential to research because they offer a sterile
environment in which to examine how managers make critical structuring and funding choices in
reaction to capital market imperfections. Furthermore, there is a shortage of empirical studies in
this sector owing to the complexity of researching broad ventures. Risk assessment, as
previously said, is a multi-phased procedure. The first of these steps, risk recognition, is the
subject of this research.

The Nature of the Megaproject/Megaproject/construction Industry

Contrasted with different businesses, the megaproject/megaproject/construction industry is at or

close to the top in the yearly rate of business failures and coming about liabilities. Such failures
emanate from the fact that it is a risky business with excessively numerous vulnerabilities that
administrations need to manage. These vulnerabilities come from an assortment of external and
internal factors. Forese (1997) expressed that the business is described by having numerous
players of various disciplines who are united at different stages all through a single venture. This
element includes more multi-faceted quality to the entire development prepare which is an
accumulation of the tasking endeavors. It is a pivotal movement in any economy as it impacts,
and is affected by, the total national output (GDP) of any nation. For instance, the
megaproject/construction industry is an essential part of the U.S. economy. It accounts for
employments of approximately eight million individuals making a close to 15% cut of the
American's GDP. In the U.K., the industry specifically utilizes about 1.6 million people and
records for around 6% of the national GDP. Economically, the megaproject/construction sector
ordinarily represents up to 36% of the development market. Megaproject/construction projects
produce structures going from small retail locations to urban renovation structures, from review
schools to new colleges, clinics, business office towers, government structures, entertainment
focuses, plants and distribution centers. Megaproject/construction is likewise an essential aspect
in the developing economies as it contributes considerably in the underlying GDP and
employment (Al-Khalil¸and Alghafley, 1999).

A Global Perspective for Project Owners

Today, globalization, progressively unpredictable administrative and risk situations, competition,

and continually moving political scenes are quite recently a portion of the issues that
megaproject/construction projects through proprietors and administrators must manage.
Furthermore, these administrators must also account the off chance that, when, where and how to
assemble new offices or redesign existing ones. As a feature of a more extensive procedure to
make an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) way to deal with megaproject/construction
projects, primary risk components connected with the fundamental periods of a project lifecycle,
are exhibited on the specific project timeline. In this study, it is imperative to address various risk
management challenges that may emerge at any stage of the project lifecycle. The study
endeavors to raise familiarity with a portion of the core risk issues related with real
megaproject/construction projects. The study will explore the importance of legitimate risk
identification and utilization of proper risk evasion and transfer of risk components; proprietors
can improve the probability of their tasks being conveyed on time, on the spending plan, securely
and inside coveted execution parameters. Inside the pages of this study, it is bizarre to address in
detail the myriad risk administration difficulties and issues that can happen on a noteworthy
development extend. Thus, the study attempts to scratch the surface (Andersen, 1897).
Subsequently, it will permanently raise the level of familiarity with a couple of fundamental
issues that ought to be mulled over, facilitating the assessment of specific requirements for
significant capital change projects Furthermore, present the idea of an all-encompassing, ERM
way to deal with project lifecycle risk management.

Management in Megaproject/construction

Adequate control is required for any project to exhibit a success. For any type of
megaproject/construction, the plan should It is perceived that most of the
megaproject/construction contractors present inefficiency when it comes to delegating their
duties. One of the significant areas that are affected by poor management is the “design-build.”
The process begins with a contractor establishing a plan such that a substantive and sequential
plan is developed. However, the process is mostly affected by miscommunication or rather poor
delivery of information. Poor communication results in disorganization in regards to cost and the
timing set aside to achieve certain goals. Furthermore, the most devastating occurrence is the
development of a gap in the scope such that damages might be experienced in the quality and
costs and increase the possibility if occurrence of plenty of risks (Turner, and Muller, 2005).
Also, the usual process of pricing in every phase by the contractors tend to result in activities that
cut costs on the owner’s section. It becomes necessary to have control of the budgets and the
associated costs in addition to frequent monitoring of the baselines. Another significant aspect
that the contractor should consider is the occurrence of the scope of craftiness in the
environment. It essential to ensure the scope such that any risk takes place, it is handled without
any interference in the initial plan. All forms, both external and internal risks have to be put into
perspective such adequate measures are put to prevent or control them. Another factor that
influences the management process is the presence of an unstable scope. Beginning a project
with a weak range threatens the entire operation in regards to cost, quality of production, time, in
addition to the procurement process. In other words, the extent of a project should be clear such
that no further elaboration is required. It is worth noting that there are significant reasons that
explain the inadequacies in management. One of the reasons is that various unique skills are
employed in megaproject/construction projects such that they can be distinguished. The other
reason is that megaproject/construction projects tend to be peculiar in nature and hence difficult
to generalize certain aspects. Another reason is that weather conditions that may be beyond the
control of the contractor may hinder the progress of a megaproject/construction project (Arditi et
al, 1985). Also, most of the megaproject/construction firms are small and hence decisions made
by one or two people which may leave out various aspects in regards to inadequate
brainstorming. Furthermore, the plans must look beyond fifty years from now and hence make
the megaproject/construction projects risky ventures in addition to the fact that the future is
unpredictable. When it comes to the team structure about management, two significant factors
rise. They include virtual teams and organizational interfaces. It is worth noting that for any
megaproject/construction project, it is important to factor in ideas and elements from other parts
of the world. The fact that most project teams require members to the actual site and also teams
from other parts of the world makes it important to consider the virtual teams. The limiting factor
is that it may be challenging to control or monitor teams that are in different locations when
compared to the teams on site. Organizational interfaces may include reporting associations that
can be either formal or informal in addition to reliance and obstacles that are linked to funding.
To mitigate these issues associated with organizational interfaces, the project manager has to
employ a formal type of communication with a view to obtain success. Core competencies in the
communication process, problem-solving and intervention are relevant in the
megaproject/construction projects; in particular among the leaders who are expected to manage
their subjects adequately (Assaf et al, 1995). The field of megaproject/construction tends to have
individuals who are independent thinkers such that their views have to be taken into
consideration. It, is, therefore, the call for managers to ensure that there is cooperation among
workers to achieve the targeted goals.

Purpose of study

Risk management is a complex but yet a significant approach required in the success of a
development project. It is the approach used to systematically control uncertainty such that the
chances for achieving the objectives of a project are increased. It is worth noting that
megaproject/construction projects tend to be risky ventures and hence adequate care should be
taken in order for a project to be successful. The purpose of the study is to identify what risk
management entails, the associated variables in addition to strategies that may employed in
controlling risks by contractors and other involved individuals.

Research Objectives

The objectives of the research are;

 to understand the planning of risk management in megaproject

 to analyse several literatures and their experience about risk management plan
 to identify what kind of risk management plan is required when planning for megaproject

Research Questions

 Why risk management and planning are important to operate a megaproject?

 Chapter 2

Introduction to chapter
This chapter outlines a broad survey of global risk assessment and management in
megaproject/construction projects. Past extensive research and scholarly works in this domain
point out that megaproject/construction ventures are primarily subject to a larger number of risks
than different business activities (Sanderson et al, 2012). Also, this chapter explores the current
literature and scholarly works applicable to risk management in megaproject/construction
projects. The research surveys blend the accessible proof on risk evaluation and alleviation in
fast track projects globally which help to mirror the global perspective. It deliberately looks at
the consideration that risk management has gotten in megaproject/construction literature through
the recent decades. This section starts by characterizing risk and clarifies the procedure for risk
management. It examines the theoretical foundation of risk administration and its ideas, and also
the impacts of risk administration on project execution. While the significance of risk
management encompasses a contentious debate, it is by and large acknowledged that best risk
management, in the mix with solid venture firms, enhances project quality, lessens expenses, and
accelerates plans.

Risk Management and Assessment

The subject of risk management and its discussion dates back to the evolution of mankind. In
Covello and Mumpower's (1985) article, which echoed Grier (1981) the first indications of risk
management date back as far as 3200 BC in the Tigris-Euphrates valley with a gathering of
individuals called the Asipu. One of their capacities was to go about as risk experts. Their
methodology is distinguished by the essential measurements of the problem, proposition of
elective activities, and gathering information on the imaginable results. Their data sources,
however, were signs from the divine beings. Every option choice would be interpreted from the
divine beings, and a short sign would come about, whether the thought was favorable one or not.
At that point, the best activity would be chosen from the pool of positive reactions and answered
to the customer. Risk management essentially involves a procedure in which the risks of a
predefined operation are measured and demonstrated (Blaxter, 2006).
According to Atkinson (1999), risk management is the procedure connected to manage the
likelihood of specific events which can influence the destinations, cost, time, quality and extent
of a project. Risk management is a huge constituent in any basic leadership technique, be it in
private domains, business, industry or distinctive levels of the business cycle, since it gives
managers the subjective and quantitative information they have to settle on educated options.
Risk management includes the methodical investigation of a scope of important elements. As a
result, the likelihood of issues emerging can be assessed, the nature and likely outcomes of these
issues can be distinguished, and thought can be given to how these results can be maintained a
strategic distance from or possibly alleviated. The manager is then in a position to pick the best
elective from the accessible alternatives. Risk management for megaproject/construction
ventures can be led by coordinating the project’s capital needs to the mechanical setting and
running development framework reproductions. Recreations highlight possibly complicated
circumstances and impediments in the megaproject/construction environment. Where data is
non-existent or hard to find, the risk is portrayed in subjective terms. Where data is accessible
and easily accessible, the risk can be measured in quantitative terms. Conceivable deviations
from the development situation are then demonstrated to distinguish their reasonable positive or
negative effects on the project’s cost.

As per one of the study by Blaxter (2006), the risk factors were assembled into three
fundamental gatherings: Internal, Project-particular; and External factors. The research inspected
the best moderating measures embraced by megaproject/construction professionals in dealing
with these risks for their development extends in East Asia. Based on a universal overview of
contractual workers, it became apparent that the most basic risk elements exist in the monetary
parts of joint ventures, government strategies, economic conditions, and venture relationship.
When venturing into an outside megaproject/construction represents in the form of a joint
venture, a remote megaproject/construction organization could lessen its risks on the off chance
that it would carefully select its nearby accomplice, guarantee that a decent joint venture deed is
drafted, pick the right employees and subcontractors, set up great venture connections, and
secure a fair megaproject/construction contract with its customer.

Chan (2004) in his review grouped all risk particular to comprehensive megaproject/construction
situation into three expansive levels; nation, market, and project levels. Macroeconomic
solidness is somewhat connected to the position of financial and money related arrangement, and
to a nation's helplessness to monetary issues. Megaproject/construction showcase level risks for a
foreign firm, incorporate mechanical favorable position over neighborhood contenders,
accessibility of development assets, unpredictability of administrative procedures, and state of
mind of nearby and foreign governments towards the development business while extend level
risks are specific to development destinations and incorporate strategic limitations, inappropriate
outline, site safety, disgraceful quality control and ecological security.

Risks and Megaprojects

The word megaproject was invented in the year of 1970s to define the scope and expense of
large-scale energy production programmes being performed around the world, and it is still used
to characterize very large infrastructure improvements costing millions of dollars. There is no
single description of what defines a megaproject in the literature (Sanderson et al, 2012).
According to van Marrewijk et al. (2008), a megaproject is a multibillion-dollar development
initiative that is normally delivered by private companies on behalf of a government and is a
highly political venture requiring volatility, and a broad variety of stakeholders. A project that
invests more than $1 billion, has high volatility, future intangible gains, and favourable long-
term results can be categorised as a megaproject.

A megaproject's impacts are important, and it can have a highly noticeable positive or negative
affect towards construction indsutry . These consequences, in addition to the inherent complexity
of megaprojects, create a broad variety of threats that must be considered during the
megaproject's life cycle (Sanderson et al, 2012). Many of the root causes of project-related risks
in largely complex ventures, according to research reports, can be attributed to the operational
complexities and multidisciplinary nature of market environment, particularly in the case of
technology-based advances. The presence of systems, technology, and various players adds to
the degree of complexity and disperses risk through the company and its partners. Any unknown
incident that may fail to satisfy the interests of stakeholders as specified in the project plan is
referred to as risk. To put it another way, a risk is "an unknown circumstance or situation that,
whether it happens, has a positive or negative impact on the project's goals" (Harvett, 2013). Any
risk has a trigger as well as a possible positive or negative outcome. Risk is an important
consideration to consider since it may influence both the cost–benefit analysis and the market,
manufacturing costs, implementation time, and financial factors within a project (Flyvbjerg,
2013). Despite the fact that a study is required for any project, megaprojects are particularly
important due to their greater complexity (Locatelli, and Mancini, 2010). According to Harvett
(2013)'s literature review, several projects continue to fail; project complexity increases over
time; and there are questions about whether existing industry risk management standards are
successful in handling ambiguity and risk, especially in dynamic construction projects.
Furthermore, risk assessment is not done the same manner with all ventures and threats do not
affect all projects in the same way.

The effect of a risk incident is calculated not just by the risk event itself, but also by how
management treats the occurrence and its pacing. This, in particular, has an effect on the
significance of the event's challenges and their consequences for the project's organization
(Zhang, 2011). A megaproject has several risk factors that may trigger delays or defects over the
project life cycle, which ensures that specific strategic steps, such as the introduction of plans or
mitigating strategies, must be implemented to minimise the possibility of these risk factors
causing the megaproject to collapse. Regardless of the project's complexity, the risk assessment
approach helps to define and quantify threats so that they can be clearly defined and efficiently
handled. This entails determining risk-reduction techniques, as well as the forms in which risks
are exchanged among the parties concerned and the risks that can be passed (Flyvbjerg, 2014).

Risk management is often defined as a risk management system which include (risk
identification, risk analysis, and risk response), but recent research has broken it down into six
steps: planning, vulnerability analysis, qualitative risk analysis, risk response planning, and risk
monitoring. Risk identification is essential for successful risk management, particularly in the
early stages of a project, until the design is finalized (Harvet, 2013). Nonetheless, it must be
stressed that uncertainties exist in a megaproject from the start, including in the early stages of
preparation. These threats are evaluated in the phases that follow, and judgments are taken on
what steps are required to minimise or reduce their possible effects.

Risk management planning in megaprojects

There are several studies on risk assessment in megaprojects. Literature reviews have been found
to contextualise the circumstance of research into risk management in megaprojects to some
degree; nevertheless, the aims of these reviews vary from those of this paper. Zhang (2011)
looked at papers written in the International Journal of Project Management and the Project
Management Journal® between 1999 and 2009 that had the term "risk" in the cover, abstract, or
keywords. As a result, this quest is limited to ventures in general (not on megaprojects). The
Zhang (2011), discusses the contexts in which risk is considered in each of the 171 sources and
frames papers: risk as an empirical reality or risk as a subjective construction (Priemus et al,
2008). The core concepts of risk embraced by both of these, as well as their basic conclusions,
views, and tendencies, as well as their methods of study and management policies that are
compatible with these conceptions of risk, are determined by a content analysis of the
publications. Zhang (2011), assumes that risk is generally viewed objectively (over 90% of the
articles); therefore, Zhang's research does not conduct bibliometric review or draw precise
conclusions about megaprojects. Rezakhani (2012) performs a comprehensive review of risk
modelling and simulation approaches in the building industry, with a focus on fuzzy risk
evaluation. He concludes that ‘considering the imprecision, vagueness, and fuzziness of the risk
factors in a building project to properly cope with a contractor's project risks by utilising Fuzzy
Set Theory (FST) is a standard guideline in the literature.' Unfortunately, there is little
information about the methods used, the database used, or the publications examined. The paper
was relevant with megaprojects.

Lehtiranta (2014) looked at 105 papers written in the International Journal of Project
Management, the Project Management Journal®, the Journal of Building Engineering and
Management, and IEEE Transactions on Information Engineering to see if there were any
differences in risk analysis and risk management methods in temporary multi-organizations
(TMOs). In contrast to prior risk management literature, her analysis of the body of information
in risk perception and risk management methods in transient multi-organizations recognises four
key distinctions. First, the author noticed that the literature still mentions the risk's challenge, not
the potential that is still there. Second, prior analysis has concentrated on expected risks; thus,
prospective research can further examine the broad spectrum of risk types and assess their
nature, relative balance, and importance in various project forms. Third, by including the
member organisations in the risk management phase, Lehtiranta inferred that temporary multi-
organizations may be useful for collective risk management. Finally, in temporary multi-
organization programmes, collaborative responses to project threats that are shared among
multiple partners are superior to vulnerability being delegated to a sole individual.

Factors Influencing the Risk Management Process

Risk management revolved around the process of people’s process of settling on choices as
indicated by the project details and its surroundings and subsequently data is required to make a
suitable choice. At the initial stages of a megaproject/construction project, expansive amounts of
information may exist from comparative past ventures. Past experience and chronicled records
and in instinctive judgment are fundamental for settling on choices on an obscure future (Harvet,
2013). If there should be an occurrence of deficient recorded information or inaccessibility of
data, expert’s subjective judgment ought to be utilized for recognizing risks encompassed by a
project and proposing reactions for them (Chin, 2003). Consequently, experience working as a
database can be thought to be the most grounded source accessible to the project managers and
other stakeholders. People construe from the past into the present and afterward into the future
(Flanagan & Norman). In this manner, individuals and specialists in a project ought to embrace a
consistent learning approach and pick up involvement from past occasions and past undertakings
which are genuine situations. Information and past encounters accomplished from the past might
place them in a decent position where they can recognize the plausible risks that may be
confronted in another project early and take suitable administration systems.

Moreover, Hayes et al. (1986) trust that no two megaproject/construction tasks are the same, and
this obviously makes it critical to distinguish risks for each and every project. It cannot be
normal that the choices made exclusively in the past, where data exist, estimate a dubious future.
In this way, gathered information on past comparative activities to the one being attempted ought
to be utilized, however for a new venture, the genuine risk distinguishing proof and
administration would be founded on particular data of the new project. Project risk management
depends intensely on master judgment and information. In any case, due to the way of the
megaproject/construction risks, it is far-fetched that one individual can have sufficient
experience of the considerable number of risks, permitting them to propose a legitimate risk
identity and management.

Risks in Megaproject/construction
Risks are bound to occur in any project and may result in significant damages if adequate care is
not taken. Projects concerning megaproject/construction are exposed to risks from the time they
begin to be operated on. It, therefore, becomes imperative to critically analyze each phase for
risks and look at possible measures to counter them. In the assessment, risks, conceivable hazard
costs, control systems and costs of the control systems must be highly considered such that
adequate systems are put in place to mitigate the issues that may occur. It is important for a
contractor to establish a formal and well-organized plan that focuses on managing risks (Cleland,
1996). For large projects, sub-plans have required that focus on the various phases involved in
the megaproject/construction process; with an example being in the preparation of a site
(Cleland, 1986).

Risks in Megaproject/construction Risks are bound to occur in any project and may result in
significant damages if adequate care is not taken. Projects concerning megaproject/construction
are exposed to risks from the time they begin to be operated on. It, therefore, becomes imperative
to critically analyze each phase of risks and look at possible measures to counter them. In the
assessment, risks, conceivable hazard costs, control systems and costs of the control systems
must be highly considered such that adequate systems are put in place to mitigate the issues that
may occur. It is important for a contractor to establish a formal and well-organized plan that
focuses on managing risks (Dikmen et al, 2007). For large projects, sub-plans have required that
focus on the various phases involved in the megaproject/construction process; with an example
being in the preparation of a site. It is important for a contractor to conduct the analysis of
potential risks, risks identification in addition to making plans for responding to the risks
throughout the whole project to prevent any substantive damages even before the project
commences.

Typical Risks on a Megaproject/construction Project

Megaproject/construction projects tend to differ in terms of planning, the course of advancement,

and an organization in addition to their operations. It is worth noting that in spite of their diverse
nature, repetitive procedures of these stages can serve as a foundation for the acknowledgment of
risks to put under consideration for the purpose of identifying specific risks that are affiliated
with a particular project and risks that are already known (El-Gohary et al, 2006). In the past,
damages were reported in regards to the prerequisite that a problem had taken place. However,
these days’ assessments are carried out to check on the potential risks before they occur. In other
words, contractors today have become enlightened in regards to risk management to prevent
losses. It is also important to note that the reparations in regards to costs and other related
financial biases have been on the rise. Examples of these issues include; miscalculations in
analyzing invoices, mistakes in awarding contracts and inefficient policies when it comes to
penalties affiliated to the contracts (El-Gohary et al, 2006). The risks found in
megaproject/construction projects can be grouped in terms of quality, personnel, costs, timing,
and strategic decisions in addition to external risks. When it comes to quality, the associated
risks include problems in provisional results, the absence of solicitation in the methods involved
in the projects and the presence of few tests in the monitoring processes. For the personnel risks,
the involved issues include the presence of inadequate skills and frequent conflicts among the
teams (Dikmen et al, 2007).

Risk and Uncertainty

When it comes to parameters affiliated in the implementation of megaproject/construction

projects, uncertainty tends to be a significant problem. It is important to apply both optimistic
and pessimistic perspectives when developing solutions and identifying methods of preventing
the issues from occurring. As stated earlier, the management of risks in megaproject/construction
projects is significant to achieve the laid out objectives. Risk management puts into consideration
fundamental aspects such as costs, safety, and quality care addition to maintaining environmental
safety (Flyvbjberg et al, 2003). In synopsis, risk management entails the critical identification of
risks such that adequate strategies are put up to mitigate them. In regards to
megaproject/construction projects, the association of uncertainty and the management of change
can be described as the combination of both value and risk management strategies when handling
megaproject/construction projects. From a theoretical perspective, uncertainty can be defined as
the absence of inevitability about ambiguity while risk management entails the control of
potential risks and the implications associated with the risks (Flyvbjberg et al, 2003). The risk
management also includes the control of the sources that bring about the uncertainty giving rise
to damaging opportunities and threats. Situations that occupied by uncertainties tend to lack
details on reasonable probabilities in addition to a presence of uncertain restrictions.
It is important to note that various sources bring about uncertainty such that various parties are
involved. It is worth noting that conflicts are bound to occur when the involved parties to
mitigate risks in their respective departments. Negative outcomes may be experienced if the
individual responsible for overseeing the work does not consider this perspective. In a more
general perspective, risk management is the approach used to systematically control uncertainty
such that the chances for achieving the objectives of a project are increased.

Megaproject/construction Projects’ Risk and Risk Management in various countries.

Succinctly, this thesis focused on particular research endeavors that focused on specific nations.
By analyzing these research explorations, it was possible to draw plausible conclusions about
risk management in megaproject/construction from a comprehensive perspective. Thus, for the
motivations behind this study, the applicable research in which critical risks and their
management systems have been proposed. Cruz et al. (2006) directed an exploration in Spain
about drawback risks in megaproject/construction projects. The discoveries exhibit absence of
venture administration and project risk administration development in Spain and political issues
have been set apart as the primary hindrances keeping a higher development level.

Tang et al. (2007), looked at criticality of the risks and assessed the techniques and risks
reactions utilized by project parties in Chinese megaproject/construction industry. They
positioned the five most imperative risks as poor nature of work, the disappointment of the
facility, safety, inadequate or inaccurate design, and financial risk. They trust that the current risk
management frameworks are not adequate for overseeing risks and the key boundary to
legitimate risk administration is the absence of joint administration system. The researchers then
proposed a need to present a data administration plot and the collaborating standards to risk
management handle, empowering the open correspondence among members keeping in mind the
end goal to deal with the project risks mutually and cooperatively.

Theoretical Framework

Theories are viewpoints with which individuals comprehend their reality encounters (Stoner et
al.). A theory as characterized by Williamson (1985), can be expected as related ideas and
standards to be deliberately gathered for giving a system to a critical zone of learning. A
hypothetical system of the review can be characterized as a structure that can hold or bolster a
hypothesis of the examination work. It shows the hypothesis which clarifies why the issue under
review exists and serves as a reason for directing examination. As every review requires a
hypothetical system to be based upon, different hypotheses were assessed for this study with a
specific end goal to pick a proper hypothesis developing the idea of this thesis which is risk
management. Management hypotheses have a tendency to decipher the quickly changing nature
of today’s hierarchical situations. Scientific administration school which is the primary
administration hypothesis supplanted the management by rule of thumb with the one best
rehearse. Taylor additionally proposed four primary standards of administration as building up
an exploration of work, deductively selecting the laborers, bringing these two together, and
separating the obligation similarly amongst administration and specialists. Recommendation of
the one best hone for administration in this hypothesis is unrealistic for overseeing risk as a
flighty occasion that should be dealt with contrastingly relying upon its sort and nature. A sub-
classification of the traditional authoritative hypothesis is Henri Fayol’s regulatory hypothesis
concentrating on individual obligations of administration. Five guideline parts have been
proposed for administration; to arrange, to sort out, to summon, to co-ordinate, and to control
(Pugh). Despite the fact that these parts are still effectively rehearsed today for administration, by
and large, every part of the project still should be overseen more particularly, and risk can be
considered as one of those viewpoints requiring its definite administration.

Contingency Theory and Megaproject/construction Risk Management

Every project is interesting and, in this way, ought to be overseen as indicated by its particular
attributes and environment in the specific timeframe. The concentration of this theory is
overseeing risk of development tasks and affirming that because of coincidental nature of the
ventures there is nobody most ideal approach to overseeing them. In this way, picking
Contingency hypothesis can be considered as a proper hypothetical structure for this postulation
because the primary idea of this hypothesis is in a similar manner as the center of this
proposition; the hypothesis rejects there is one most ideal route for management. The way that
administration circumstances are not comparative illuminates the motivation behind why
particular administration rehearses work at times however not in others (Yu et al, 2005).
Diverse classifications for these factors have been expressed before in this part, and the focal
characterization is given in this thesis. This proposition researches the impacts of these risks and
the collaboration between them on megaproject/construction ventures. Any of these risks may
have an impact on a project, and thus contingency hypothesis can be reasonable to be utilized for
covering these impacts relying upon the circumstance of nations like Iran. Adjustment in
contingency hypothesis occurs through hierarchical realizing which can be characterized as any
adjustment of an organization’s learning happening therefore of its related knowledge be it
effective or unsuccessful. Madsen and Desai trust that hierarchical learning is not static; it is
made, refined, changed, and disposed of as association individuals encounter reality and
endeavor to upgrade their individual and shared understandings of it to mirror the lessons they
draw from their experience. This postulation too makes utilization of experience of individuals
required in development extends as a key device for dealing with the risks.
 Chapter 3: Research Methodology

Methodology
To accomplish the targets, a comprehensive literature analysis of risk assessment in
megaprojects was undertaken. There are two kinds of literature reviews in the literature: standard
or narrative reviews and comprehensive literature reviews. A comprehensive literature review
varies from a traditional review in that it is peer-reviewed, and the results may be repeated, as
Rhodes (2011) demonstrate.

A systematic analysis is a method for ‘synthesising studies in a systematic, transparent, and

repeatable way with the twin goals of improving the information base and guiding policymaking
and practise' (Rhoades, 2011). The systematic analysis has achieved broad recognition in a
number of research areas, including social sciences.

The analysis meets a five-step procedure:

1. determining the area of investigation and the time frame to be investigated;

2. selecting knowledge sources;
3. searching;
4. managing and debugging search results; and
5. analysing the findings.

The present study will focus on risk management in megaprojects, with publications written
between 2000 and 2018 being considered, as contemporary risk management has advanced
significantly in the last decade. The transition from risky physical labour to knowledge-intensive
work; the growing value of initiatives, such as the structure for preparing and conducting work in
enterprises; the critical position of technology and its uncertainty; ever-changing competitive
pressures; and the increasing legislation under which organisations must adhere have all
contributed to this change in risk management relate the development over the last decade to a
significant rise in the number of megaprojects performed, and a growing number of megaprojects
have emerged since 2000 (Komba and Lowoga, 2020).

Research Philosophy
According to Crossan (2003) in his paper Research Philosophy: Towards and Understanding,'
researchers can accept several reasons for philosophical concerns before embarking on a
particular field. Easterby-Smith, et al. (2002) discusses three factors for the importance of
learning philosophies to studies. According to the author, the first interpretation is that
experience of philosophy of science makes it simpler for researchers to clarify and justify their
methodology to analysis and to enable them collect facts in response to questions from their
studies. Second, knowing the methodology of analysis will allow researchers to support different
types of methodology while avoiding needless and meaningless work. Finally, awareness of the
basic meaning and the advantages of science theory encourages researchers, in their study
processes, to be more imaginative and exploratory. Every scientific theory of researchers
expresses critical views of how the world is interpreted according to Saunders, et. al. (2009). In
addition, their convictions and assumptions will strongly affect the analysis techniques and
methods of researchers. There can be described and rated various levels of research
methodology. Saunders et al. (2009) have claimed that the research methodology thresholds a
research should use reflect its paradigm. Both views help the researcher clearly decide which
method for study to be used in his strategy (Saunders, et al., 2009). This respective paper will
focus towards the interpretivism philosophy of research methods.

Research approach

According to Saunders (2007), the deductive and inductive logic were two main approaches. The
researchers feel, given the fact that the induction is not very important, is most due to
interpretivism and a deductive approach to positivism. The inductive method is generally a
downward approach, while the deductive approach is the other way around. The inductive
approach starts with estimation, then data interpretation and the creation of a result hypothesis. In
experimental research, the deductive approach is most frequently used, where proof has already
been obtained, where a hypothesis has been developed and whether or not to accept or reject it,
and where information and statistics will finally be found (Burns and Burns, 2008). "It takes a
purely assessed hypothesis and then attempts are made to test the updated theory by referring to
the first step and completing the loop" (Saunders et al, 2007). For its stringent method, deductive
theory has been ridiculed that denies alternative theories.

This particular research will focus towards qualitative approach and interpretative philosophy.
One of the major reasons while selecting this method is that the research needs evaluation and
analysis by the help of theoretical support. The theories on risk management and planning can be
very helpful to explain the concept of planning and managing the risk management while
operating mega-projects. Therefore, qualitative research approach can help a lot to define and
explain the research objectives. Thus, the study follow inductive approach.

Data collection

A successful study project must be built on a high-quality thought and research framework
focusing on logical flows and enough conclusions that can survive the strictest review (Saunders
et al, 2007). The data will be collected by the help of secondary study and collecting articles
from prior literature that would be helpful to understand and explain the importance of research
planning and importance for risk management megaprojects.

Data analysis

The research process is organised and evaluated correctly on the basis of qualitative evidence to
represent the inductive process. According to Robson, (2002), also quoted by Saunders et al,
2007, the qualitative data was characterised by its wealth and fullness, based on the extent to
which the topic is discovered, whereas the researcher concentrated on qualitative data, which is
still the key element for data analysis review. The researcher have used the exploratory method
to test the results of the several methods. Interpretivist, semi-structured and inductive is included
in qualitative study. The study will use the content and thematic analysis. With the help of prior
literature theoretical framework was analysed. The research question and objectives will be meet
by the help of developing themes and objectives. The thematic analysis was done by the help of
identifying keywords, results, statements that helped to create a particular theme and content.
With the help of literature review, statements from different authors helped to analyse their
findings in the context of themes development.
 Chapter 4 – Thematic Analysis and Discussion
The primary objective of the research endeavor was to expand the comprehension of risk
management from a global perspective. To achieve this goal, the study outline various research
questions that the research endeavor sought to answer.

 How are risks and the concept of risk management perceived in the
megaproject/construction industry?
 In what routes and to what degree are the contractors involved in risk management
through the diverse periods of the megaproject/construction project?
 What is the practical process of risk management?
 What are the most significant factors that bolster risk management in the
megaproject/construction sector?

Theme 1: Risk management in the megaproject/construction industry

The concept of risk management has been clarified as an organized method for overseeing risks
in daily megaproject/construction activities (Dikmen et al, 2007). This comprehension is
immensely valuable in the megaproject/construction industry where undertakings are frequently
attributed to instabilities and risks. From the findings presented above, taking after all means of
the risk management encourages making progress with a project. Shockingly, some these
stakeholders like project manager in various capacities of megaproject/construction projects are
most certainly not indeed, even acquainted with the concept of risk (Baldry, 1998). Findings
outlined above illustrated that risk was more comprehended as an undesired occasion, issue or
risk that makes it hard to accomplish project objectives. Similar outcomes were mirrored by the
extensive researchers and scholars in the sector who comprehensively reports that
megaproject/construction project stakeholders consider risk as a negative idea. However as
inferred by the extensive research, risks can be both positive and negative in its impact, which
repudiates the stakeholders’ supposition that risk can have just negative outcomes. In any case,
many organizations in the megaproject/construction sector have a tendency to adjust risk
management to just some degree. Associations can have diverse methodologies in regards to how
and to what degree risks are accounted for. Those principle ideas were risk-averse, risk-regular,
and risk explorer (Baker et al, 1988). Once more, associations in the megaproject/construction
sector business fail to work with risk management in such an organized way, which implies that
there are some different methods for overseeing risks when it happens. This demonstrates and
explains the risky nature of megaproject/construction industry and contrasts it with the research
and findings by, who similarly observed this way to deal with the most widely recognized inside
the segment.

Another point is that most stakeholders seem to drift away from is the concept of risk
management and the strategies that the process that risk management encompasses (Belassi et al,
1996). Comparable outcomes can be traced who argued that for a considerable lot of
stakeholders in the megaproject/construction sector, risk procedures and hypothetical models
were completely obscure. Be that as it may, a portion of the stakeholders in this study was
utilizing methods from the range of risk management. Referring to some ordinary practices
clarified by the select projects explored by the thesis, activities taken against potential issues
could be delegated risk management techniques, despite the fact that the many stakeholders like
project managers, risk managers were not familiar with the idea.

For instance, some contractors discuss assessing risks from the prudent point of view, with a
specific end goal to pick the correct way. This is the same as a decision tree examination where a
few risks are broken down to guarantee that the correct method for working has been chosen is
adopted. Another case utilized was the method of taking care of risks inside some
megaproject/construction constructs in various associations. In that circumstance, basic risks
were chosen, examined, dispensed with lesser risks, and concentrated on the most debilitating
ones (Blaxter, 2006). This is a regular way of dissecting risks along the lines of the subjective
technique called risk urgency analysis. Those cases demonstrate that on-screen stakeholders in
the megaproject/construction sector handle risks in their regular operation, yet are most certainly
not mindful that it is the risk management system.

What's more, all stakeholders including risk managers, contractors and project managers
depicted that they could begin executing strategies, if just they had more knowledge about them
and a sequential guidance to utilize them. This realization is steady with research done by who
highlighted the absence of information as the second greatest obstruction forestalling execution
of risk management. In their research, the most concerning issue recognized was absence of time
which was likewise mirrored by a section of this study’s findings. However, another finding
from the study demonstrates a separation between how risks are overseen by people and in a
group. People and their associations regularly utilize agendas and different manuals while groups
utilize examination as the most well-known strategy to recognize risks and issues.

Theme 2: Contractors’ inclusion in risk management in a project life cycle.

It is difficult to study the risk administration without comprehension the impression of project
on-screen characters about risk and the risk administration. The greater part of the contractors
considers risk to be a negative occasion that can influence the project and cause issues. From the
backdrop above, only a small part of the findings point to a negative side of risk. These results
affirm the aftereffects of a review by (El-Gohary et al, 2006), which indicate negative impression
of risk among industry experts. In reaction to the subject of what sorts of risks the respondents
managed in the project, the taking after risks were manifested; financial, specialized,
environmental, natural, quality, and time. This demonstrates the risks associated with a plan
what's more; generation was liable to risk administration. Most contractors have what may be
portrayed as a reasonable comprehension or information of risk administration. Nevertheless,
broad familiarity with the risk administration handle, executing such administration efficiently in
the megaproject/construction projects is still restricted (Flyvbjerg, 2014). The study uncovered
that formal risk evaluation is not performed in the projects. Experience, sentiments, and instinct
are the most regularly utilized devices for risk appraisal. Risk reaction is a less habitually utilized
component because not each recognized and surveyed risk is liable to administration. These
findings are fundamentally the same as a few overviews led among the megaproject/construction
business specialists in the UK, Australia, Sweden and China.

Practical Risk Management Process in the Megaproject/construction Sector

A succinct illustration of the practical risk management necessitates a breakdown of the

comprehensive process of risk management into various encompassing sections. First, the
primary aspect of risk management is risk identification. The study identified that a section of
owners and contractors in the megaproject/construction industry are already using some risk
management techniques even without their knowledge. This comprehension is synonymous to
various research findings outlined the theoretical framework section. Most remarkably,
Rezakhani (2012), illustrated conceptualizing and case-based approach as the most well-known
tool of risk identification. Also, it became apparent that most megaproject/construction projects
do not account for risk identification in their lifecycle frameworks as most risks are tackled as
they occur. All together contractors and owners in the megaproject/construction sector fail to
distinguish risks. These stakeholders often trust that their time is utilized all the more
productively when they take a gander at the project as opposed to identifying risks and potential
challenges. In so doing, these players could bolster the projects’ success, minimize costs, and
boost productivity. To some extent, risks encompassed in megaproject/construction projects can
be distinguished by involvement (Lehtiranta, 2014). Also, various risks which are a trademark
for many megaproject/construction projects can be accumulated as an agenda and be utilized as a
part of future projects. Another key realization was that the most widely recognized method of
risk identification is dialog. This instrument, alongside conceptualizing and utilizing past
involvement, was utilized by various project groups (esp construction).

Upon identification of a risk, the next logical step should be risk assessment. In risk assessment,
the best contrasts can be found between the hypothesis and how the megaproject/construction
sector functions. The study identified owners and contractors who were not acquainted with any
technique used to break down potential risks. From a general perspective, very few experts in the
megaproject/construction sector utilize these organized strategies. Chapman (1997), argued that
instinct, judgment, and experience are the devices frequently utilized as a part of risk assessment
while organized strategies like Monte Carlo or risk affect appraisal are employed just to some
little degree.

Coordinated strategies can be followed to avoid risk and challenges. Coordinated strategies is
constrained financial plans by these projects. Taking a gander at some of the select projects, it
became apparent that most megaproject/construction projects have restricted overall revenues.
As a result, there is limited significant changes or room of new solutions. In addition, the general
need of information inside the zone of risk management can come about because of restricted
assets. This comprehension is synonymous to the cited theoretical frameworks which
demonstrate the absence of time as the variable which keeps associations from actualizing risk
management. Moreover, the industry is not willing to change (Turner, and Muller, 2005).
Consequently, a portion of the organizations will execute the process of risk management in their
operation if just a substantial result will be conceded. Finally, the other significant aspect in the
practical adoption of risk management in megaproject/construction projects is a response. Here,
it becomes imperative to outline the significant moves to be made against potential distinguished
risks. Contractors and owners in megaproject/construction projects often lack the information
about any response (Wideman, 1998).

From the backdrop above, it is apparent that only a section of these stakeholders comprehends
and can formulate the best risk response. Be that as it may, dialog and agendas are the primary
apparatuses to bolster the activities. In other words, there is additionally absence of information
inside this territory (Zeng, and Smith, 2007). What's more, in light of the outcomes from the
contextual investigation where risks are recognized by the on-screen characters, moderation is
the activity picked regularly (Dikmen et al, 2007). A large number of the stakeholders concur
that all risks are sensible and along these lines, lessening is the best option.

Suggestive Risk management actions and Strategies

By employing risk management methodologies in megaproject/construction , it becomes easier

to achieve the scope of a project in addition to experiencing substantive savings on time, costs
and other resources. Risk management entails having control of risks such that the goals of a
project are achieved as expected. The common approaches used in the control of risks include
maintenance, allocation, and extenuation in addition to the deterrence of risks. It is worth noting
that two basic approaches are used in the management of risks. They include mitigating and
preventive approaches (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002).

For the preventive approach, the approach is used to evade and decrease the risks present in the
early phase of the megaproject/construction project. However, the mitigating approach entails
corrective measures used to reduce the impact of risks (Locatelli, and Macini, 2010). The
questionnaire put into perspective the mitigating measures that were obtained or rather
highlighted in the literature review process.

Preventive actions

Projects concerning megaproject/construction are exposed too risks from the time they begin to
be operated on. Also, the preventive approach is used to evade and decrease the risks present in
the early phase of the megaproject/construction project. They assist in decreasing the
possibilities of risks occurring but at the same time increasing the bid of a
megaproject/construction project (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002). The reliance on subjective
ruling to establish an adequate program, having alternative methods present just in case of risks
and analyzing the operations of previous projects when setting up a new program are the
elements of the preventive methods outlined in the questionnaire as per the findings from the
works of various scholars.

Mitigating actions

The mitigating approach entails corrective measures used to reduce the impact of risks. It is quite
common for the delay to take place even after the prevention of risks in the first phase of a
project. It becomes imperative to employ the use of mitigating measures such that projects are
completed on time, with adequate management of costs in addition to the achievement of the
desired objectives. When the risks occur, the contractors can put up mitigating strategies to
decrease the delays. Similarly to the preventive approaches, the mitigating approaches used in
the study were obtained from the analysis of the scholarly articles in the literature review
process. Increase of time, improving the skills of the workforce and bringing in advanced
equipment are the elements of the mitigating methods outlined in the questionnaire as per the
findings from the works of various scholars (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002).

The study suggest a classification that takes into consideration the numerous hazards that must
be addressed in megaproject management, based on the concept of establishing homogenous risk
categories. This is based on Lehtiranta (2014) Alfonso's comprehensive reviews of forms of risk
in infrastructure, as well as the megaproject literature study produced. Other categories are
restricted owing to the omission of specific hazards, while the suggested category includes all
kinds of risks examined in prior research. There are nine major hazards that have been identified:

 Design risks are those that arise during the megaproject's planning phase, including such
delivery method, contract formulation, and scope management.
 Changes in the controlling policy of the nation where the megaproject is created, such as
authorization requirements, political players, altering government laws, and the
revocation of a concession, pose legal and/or political risks.
  Legal risks include those arising from contract renegotiation, such as a mid-project scope
change, as well as problems arising from contract imprecision and ambiguity.
 Megaproject/construction hazards are typically the most serious throughout the
megaproject's life cycle, not only during the megaproject/construction period. This area
includes cost overruns (or cost escalation), project timeline, coordination issues, and
improper design or disaster during the megaproject/construction.

Operation and maintenance hazards include problems with economic feasibility, excessively
high operations expenses, poor megaproject/construction quality, or operator incompetence, all
of which may impact operation cost, capacity, or quality.
 Chapter 5 Conclusion
This study successfully identified the risk factors in the megaproject/construction industry, their
significance, and their distribution. Also, risk management activities, risk examination strategies,
and their adequacy and utilization were settled on like how risk mitigation can be done. The
above subjects were inspected from contractors and owners’ viewpoints. The risk mitigation
goals were outlined drawing plausible conclusions and a few activities that may enhance risk
administration practices suggested. The megaproject/construction sector has attributes that
distinctively recognize it from different areas of the economy. It is essentially due to this one of a
kind qualities considered a risky business.

In this review, recognizing the risk elements confronted by megaproject/construction industry

depends on gathering data about development risks, their results, and remedial activities that
might be done to counteract or moderate the risky impacts. Risk examination strategies that helps
to mitigate risk in projects and mega projects were explored as well. Be that as it may, assurance
of seriousness and allotment of these risk variables was the primary aftereffect of this
examination.

Finally, the dominant global perspective is that risk is a negative aspect. Be that as it may, this
study plausibly depicts that risk can result to both negative and positive effects. Experts in the
megaproject/construction industry are progressively utilizing various strategies with the end goal
of risk management, but there still exists a knowledge gap in the sector. What’s more, some of
these stakeholders are not conversant with the fundamentals of risk management. Along these
lines, risks are managed consistently in the sector but not in such an organized path as the study
depicts. Also, the information on risk management and the process of risk management is not
symmetrical despite the fact that the concept of risk administration is turning out to be more
prevalent in the megaproject/construction sector. Risk management is a strategy that ought to be
connected inside an industry to accomplish the objectives in that sector. Thus, it is important to
increase awareness and make enthusiasm among key stakeholders to utilize risk management
systems in megaproject/construction projects.

First of all, the management of projects and risk are two distinct issues that must be studied and
explored in many aspects. It is important to note that the combination of such issues, referred to
as "project risk management," has its own set of sub-dimensions that must be investigated, and
that the topic is a live topic in the literature. Further study might provide useful results for
reducing the risks associated with any kind of project, and it is exciting to watch the next
advances and additions to the literature in the coming years. In this research, the megaprojects
were the primary emphasis, and it was a single discussion for a particular project that is now
being carried out in the country. As a result, various megaprojects from different industries
would provide a variety of diverse results. On the other side, by including more projects in the
research, the study would have a larger number of participants, allowing the content analysis to
provide healthier findings for the same risk factors than it would otherwise have. This research
has limitations in terms of the number and kind of possible risk variables since the items on the
questionnaire were developed based on the results from literature and brainstorming sessions
with the primary project team. While there may be many risk factors for the megaproject in real-
world applications, it is possible that certain occupational blindness and biases were present
throughout the survey question development process. Therefore, researchers and practitioners
may decide to perform a bigger study for a variety of risk variables in future studies. It is just
necessary to perform a stakeholder analysis with in research by separating the respondents in two
distinct groups: the core project team and additional stakeholders of the project, which is simple.
Although they are not questioned about their previous experiences, the questionnaire asks the
respondents about their gender and educational backgrounds as well as their job titles, industries,
and job functions. Stakeholders may be classified into various categories based on their views,
which may include gender, educational background, job title, and other factors. As a result, the
perceptions of risk of the various groups would be given in a more complete research. Finally,
this research is carried out for megaprojects that include governmental primary contractors as
prime contractors. Most of the world's megaprojects are produced from public-private
partnerships and various risk factors may arise due to this "mixing" of contractors and certain
risk variables in this research are overlooked or are not taken into consideration owing to the
flexibility of private sector members. In order to better evaluate the risks associated with
megaprojects across the globe, more study may be conducted on various kinds of partnerships.

Future Recommendations
It is important to rehash this exploration at regular intervals by an approved foundation to study
the new risk variables and their allotment and distribute the outcomes for owners and
contractors.

 In future similar, research endeavors should be conducted with the end goal of mulling
over directing statistics to gather information from the greater part of the
megaproject/construction organizations across the world.
 Since the megaproject/construction industry encounters comparable sorts of risks, the
risks administration speculations and ideas examined in this study will have risen to
importance somewhere else. The megaproject/construction sector is significantly affected
by patterns such as globalization and innovation sharing; henceforth, the ideas learned
here, and somewhere else can be shared through cross-sectional reviews.
 Future research ought to concentrate on testing cutting edge ideas of risk management
and how adequately they are connected, in actuality, situations. A concentration
gatheringwas valuable for this review, yet it is fascinating to see if the contextual analysis
strategy, where the emphasis is on one association at once, yields comparative outcomes.

Managerial Implication

Managers or the decision makers for such megaprojects should be aware of all potential risk
factors that would affect the performance of a megaproject from the beginning to the end. That is
why, it is expected that they would have the necessary knowledge about each and every stages of
a huge project. For instance, the initial design of the project, project team and the qualifications
of the members, partners, stakeholders, suppliers, financial conditions and budget, the location,
infrastructure etc. All these parameters should be planned carefully and meticulously by the
decision makers of the project. In order to be able to plan these parameters, the steps of risk
assessment process should be applied precisely from the beginning. General risk management
plan of a project is usually underestimated or ignored by the decision makers or it is transferred
to the lower level personnel in the organizations who are not well-qualified about the project risk
management. Experienced people about the projects should make their evaluations by
considering all the possible risk factors and take actions accordingly. As it is stated before,
governmental and economic risk factors play crucial role for the successful projects both in
practice and in the literature. Although these risk factors are not totally dependent to the
managers and may vary from country to country, prevention methods for these risk factors
should be applied since the early beginning and the projects should be managed with frequent
controls about these parameters. Moreover, as the project members revealed during their
interview sessions, some factors are quite hard to control, but also some of them may be solved
easily with the “devoted efforts of the stakeholders and the main contractors”. On the other hand,
successful applications all around the world should be examined and adapted by the experienced
project managers and the group members.

This paper has implications for both academics and practitioners. The study focus is on the first
step in the risk management process, that is, the risk identification. An exhaustive literature
review and qualitative analysis on risk management in megaprojects have been carried out. From
the bibliometric analysis point of view, it can be pointed out that the number of papers in this
field has been increasing in recent years; consistent with the importance that this topic has
assumed. Numerous theoretical/conceptual papers (almost 30% of the total under study) have
been identified. The most common type of empirical studies is that of case studies, whereby, in
general, just one single case is presented. More research, in general, and more detailed case
studies and survey studies, in particular, are required in order to improve megaproject
management and risk process management. No agreement in risk categorization in megaprojects
can be observed in previous papers. Several classifications can be found in the literature, with
major differences between them. Our categorization encompasses all types of risks studied in
previous literature, whilst other classifications are limited due to the exclusion of certain risks. A
total of nine main risks have been identified and defined. This systematization of the risks helps
managers towards their identification within the megaproject and to embark on the subsequent
steps in the risk management process: qualitative risk analysis, quantitative risk analysis, risk
response planning, and risk monitoring and control. For the practitioners it is suggested to use
some strategies that are outline below;
 Chapter 6

Recommendations

It is important to analyse risk and uncertainty estimates within the context of decision-making
processes. There are a variety of views on how to use regarding risk assessments for decision-
making, as well as different approaches to doing so. The strict adherence to cost–benefit
analysis, anticipated utility theory, and other related ideas would result in unmistakable
recommendations on the most effective feasible action to take. The majority of risk analysts and
researchers, on the other hand, may consider risk and uncertainty assessments to be decision
support tools, based on the assumption that the assessments provide advice to decision makers.
The decision-making process is risk-informed rather than risk-based. Risk analysis and risk
management are well-established as scientific disciplines that have significant implications for
decision-making in practise. Under conditions of ambiguity and danger, project managers must
make decisions and act in order to complete their tasks. There is considerable evidence that these
conflicts are proving to be difficult to resolve, often resulting in large cost overruns, delays in
project completion, and failing to implement upon the objectives that were cited to justify the
initiatives.

For decision-makers, risk management is primarily concerned with strategy as well as strategic
analysis, among other things. Typically, a strategy is described as a concept or plan for managing
choices and achieving desired outcomes, and this phrase is used to refer to multinational
businesses, governments, private sector organisations and organizations, as well as individuals.
Risks are often defined by a large number of experts, participants, and decision-makers, each of
whom may have drastically different views about the likelihood of future unknown events. It is
possible that a probabilistic study will be greeted with resistance in situations when there are
many stakeholders who disagree with the probabilities and outcomes given by chosen experts.
Some study has shown that experts themselves may be hesitant to assign subjective options that
may be incorrect or unreliable in their assessments. Generally speaking, it has been agreed that
risk assessment, particularly in cases of extreme uncertainty, should be carried out within a
defined framework evaluation and managerial decision-making, and also that decisions regarding
the risk in question must be reflected as “risk-informed” rather than “risk-based”. It is thus
beneficial to examine how each method contributes to increasing understanding into risks in a
manner that may aid and illuminate decision-making in a way that is useful. In contrast, the
current level of knowledge of the solutions to uncertainties in identifying risks that are utilised in
practical decision-making contexts in connection to high-value technologies, such as
transportation, nuclear, petroleum and natural gas, and so forth.. As a starting point, it is
important to recognise that, while different perspectives exist on the use of risk assessment as
well as uncertainty research for decision making, a common and shared perception exists in the
field that these tools provide convenient decision making in the sense that their implications
inform decision makers insofar as they are relevant to the innovation risk side of the issue in
question. 

It comes from an integrated procedure that combines an analytical assessment of the condition
(for example risk assessment) with severe reproducible approaches, which are evaluated by the
agreed protocols of a specialised community, and which are peer-examined, to authenticate the
hypotheses that sustain the analysis. When it comes to making decisions on projects, Aven
(2016) argues that the decision-makers should go beyond the risk assessment and should bring
together the risk information they have gathered from other sources and subjects. It is essential to
be able to recognise signs and forerunners of catastrophic events in order to prevent them from
occurring. Aven and Zio (2011) assert that the characterization of the knowledge available as
feedback to the risk analysis in assistance of decision-making should be accurate as well as
obvious: the techniques as well as models used should not add information which does not occur,
nor ignore information that does exist, according to the authors. Furthermore, according to Aziz
et al. (2018), the “analysing” step of managing risk, which is defined as gathering information
for decision-making with each and every risk, analysing its effect, time frame, and possibility, as
well as categorising and prioritising risks, has become increasingly important for decision-
makers.

By employing risk management methodologies in megaproject/construction , it becomes easier

to achieve the scope of a project in addition to experiencing substantive savings on time, costs
and other resources. Risk management entails having control of risks such that the goals of a
project are achieved as expected. The common approaches used in the control of risks include
maintenance, allocation, and extenuation in addition to the deterrence of risks. It is worth noting
that two basic approaches are used in the management of risks. They include mitigating and
preventive approaches (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002).

Projects concerning megaproject/construction are exposed too risks from the time they begin to
be operated on. Also, the preventive approach is used to evade and decrease the risks present in
the early phase of the megaproject/construction project. They assist in decreasing the
possibilities of risks occurring but at the same time increasing the bid of a
megaproject/construction project (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002). The reliance on subjective
ruling to establish an adequate program, having alternative methods present just in case of risks
and analyzing the operations of previous projects when setting up a new program are the
elements of the preventive methods outlined in the questionnaire as per the findings from the
works of various scholars.

The mitigating approach entails corrective measures used to reduce the impact of risks. It is quite
common for the delay to take place even after the prevention of risks in the first phase of a
project. It becomes imperative to employ the use of mitigating measures such that projects are
completed on time, with adequate management of costs in addition to the achievement of the
desired objectives. When the risks occur, the contractors can put up mitigating strategies to
decrease the delays. Similarly to the preventive approaches, the mitigating approaches used in
the study were obtained from the analysis of the scholarly articles in the literature review
process. Increase of time, improving the skills of the workforce and bringing in advanced
equipment are the elements of the mitigating methods outlined in the questionnaire as per the
findings from the works of various scholars (Elkington, and Smallman, 2002).

Contracting organizations ought to figure and consider risks by adding a risk premium to their
quotes and time estimation. This pattern must be bolstered by relevant associations such as
government regulatory bodies.

 Contractors ought to endeavor to anticipate budgetary disappointment by rehearsing a

stern income administration and minimizing the reliance on bank advances.
 They should figure out how to share and move distinctive risks by procuring particular
staff and sub-contractors.
  Contracting firms ought to use automated methodologies utilized for risk investigation
and assessment. An example of such a computerized approach is the infamous @Risk
package which coordinates with generally utilized projects like Microsoft Project and
Microsoft Excel.

Possible risks ought to be dispensed authoritatively and unmistakably on every gathering, a

practice that could be done by characterizing the potential risk considers and designate them on
the gathering which is in the best place to deal with these risks.

 Both contractors and owners must be more mindful about security measures. An
agreeable level of interchanges between gatherings ought to be kept up to pass on
required information underscoring documentation.
 Specialized megaproject/construction mediators are expected to help in settling clashes
and question in a way that amalgamates lawful and development needs.

The study suggest a classification that takes into consideration the numerous hazards that must
be addressed in megaproject management, based on the concept of establishing homogenous risk
categories. This is based on Lehtiranta (2014) Alfonso's comprehensive reviews of forms of risk
in infrastructure, as well as the megaproject literature study produced. Other categories are
restricted owing to the omission of specific hazards, while the suggested category includes all
kinds of risks examined in prior research. There are nine major hazards that have been identified:

 Design risks are those that arise during the megaproject's planning phase, including such
delivery method, contract formulation, and scope management.
 Changes in the controlling policy of the nation where the megaproject is created, such as
authorization requirements, political players, altering government laws, and the
revocation of a concession, pose legal and/or political risks.
 Legal risks include those arising from contract renegotiation, such as a mid-project scope
change, as well as problems arising from contract imprecision and ambiguity.
 Megaproject/construction hazards are typically the most serious throughout the
megaproject's life cycle, not only during the megaproject/construction period. This area
includes cost overruns (or cost escalation), project timeline, coordination issues, and
improper design or disaster during the megaproject/construction.
Operation and maintenance hazards include problems with economic feasibility, excessively
high operations expenses, poor megaproject/construction quality, or operator incompetence, all
of which may impact operation cost, capacity, or quality.

References
Aibinu, A.A., and Jagboro, G.O. (2002), “The effects of construction delays on project delivery
in Nigerian construction industry”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol.
20(8), p593–599.

Akintoye, A.S. and MacLeod, M.J., 1997. Risk analysis and management in
construction. International journal of project management, 15(1), pp.31-38.

Al-Momani, A.H. (2000), “Construction delay: a quantitative analysis”, International Journal of

Project Management, Vol. 18(1), p51–59.

Altshuler A. and Luberoff D. (2003), Mega-Projects: The Changing Politics of Urban Public
Investment, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Andersen, E.S., Grude, K.V., Haug, T., and Turner, J.R. (1987), Goal directed project
management IN

Assaf, S.A., Al-Khalil, M., Al-Hazmi, M. (1995), “Causes of delay in large building construction
projects”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 11(2), p45–50.

Atkinson R. (1999) ‘Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a
phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria’, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 17(6), p337-342.

Baker B.N., Murphy D.C. and Fisher D. (1988) ‘Factors affecting project success’ in Cleland
D.I. and King W.R. (1988) Project management handbook p902-919. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.

Baker, G.P., Jensen, M.C. and Murphy, K.J., 1988. Compensation and incentives: Practice vs.
theory. The journal of Finance, 43(3), pp.593-616.
Baldry, D. (1998), “The evaluation of risk management in public sector capital projects”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 16(1), p35-41.

Belassi, W. and Tukel, O.I. (1996), “A new framework for determining critical success/failure
factors in projects”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14(3), p141-151

Blaxter, L. et al (2006), How to research (3rd edition), Open University Press, UK. British
Standard in Project Management 6079, ISBN 0580255948.

Boateng, P., Chen, Z., Ogunlana, S. and Ikediashi, D., (2012). A system dynamics approach to
risks description in megaprojects development. Organization, technology and
management in construction: an international journal, 4(Special Issue), pp.0-0.

Burns, R.P. and Burns, R., 2008. Business research methods and statistics using SPSS. Sage.

Chan APC. (2004) ‘Key performance indicators for measuring construction success’,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 11(2), p203-221.

Chapman, C. (1997), “Project risk analysis and management - PRAM the generic process”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 15(5), p273-281.

Chin, G. (2003), Agile Project Management : How to Succeed in the Face of Changing Project
Requirements, Saranac Lake, NY, USA: AMACOM.

Cleland, D.I. (1986), “Project Stakeholder Management”, Project Management Journal, Vol.
17(4), p36–44.

Crossan, F., 2003. Research philosophy: towards an understanding. Nurse Researcher (through

2013), 11(1), p.46.

Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T. and Han, S., 2007. Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun
risk in international construction projects. International journal of project
management, 25(5), pp.494-505.

Dlakwa, M. M. and Culpin, M. F. (1990), “Reasons for overruns in public sector construction
projects in Nigeria”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 8(4).

Easterby-Smith, M.T. and Thorpe, R., 2002. R. and Lowe, A.(2002). Management research: An
introduction, 2, p.342.
El-Gohary, N.M., Osman, H. and El-Diraby, T. E. (2006), “Stakeholder management for public
private partnerships”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24.

Elkington, P. and Smallman, C. (2002), “Managing project risks: A case study from the utilities
sector”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 20(1), p49–57.

Flyvbjberg,B., Bruzelius, N. and Rothengatter, W.(2003), Megaprojects and Risk, Cambridge

University Press, UK Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. and Buhl, S. (2002), “Underestimating
Costs in Public Works Projects”, Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol.
68(3).

Flyvbjerg, B., (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An
overview. Project management journal, 45(2), pp.6-19.

Harvett, C.M., 2013. A study of uncertainty and risk management practice relative to perceived
project complexity. Bond University, Australia.

Irimia-Diéguez, A.I., Sanchez-Cazorla, A. and Alfalla-Luque, R., (2014). Risk management in

megaprojects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, pp.407-416.

Kardes, I., Ozturk, A., Cavusgil, S.T. and Cavusgil, E., (2013). Managing global megaprojects:
Complexity and risk management. International Business Review, 22(6), pp.905-917.

Komba, M.M. and Lwoga, E.T., 2020. Systematic Review as a Research Method in Library and
Information Science. Handbook of Research on Connecting Research Methods for
Information Science Research, pp.80-94.

Lehtiranta, L., (2014). Risk perceptions and approaches in multi-organizations: A research

review 2000–2012. International Journal of Project Management, 32(4), pp.640-653.

Locatelli, G. and Mancini, M., (2010). Risk management in a mega-project: the Universal EXPO
2015 case. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, 2(3), pp.236-
253.

Melero, MA, 2001. Contracts as a tool to mitigate risk in project finance. Journal of banking and
securities law , 20 (81), pp.105-127.
Miller, R. and Lessard, D.R., (2008). Evolving strategy: risk management and the shaping of
mega-projects (pp. 145-172). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Rezakhani, P., 2012. Classifying key risk factors in construction projects. Buletinul Institutului
Politehnic din lasi. Sectia Constructii, Arhitectura, 58(2), p.27.

Rhoades, E.A., 2011. Literature reviews. The Volta Review, 111(3), p.353.

Sanderson, J., (2012). Risk, uncertainty and governance in megaprojects: A critical discussion of
alternative explanations. International journal of project management, 30(4), pp.432-443.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A., (2003_. Research methods forbusiness
students. Essex: Prentice Hall: Financial Times.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A., (2009). Research methods for business students (5th
edn).

Saunders, M., Lewis, P.H.I.L.I.P. and Thornhill, A.D.R.I.A.N., (2007). Research

methods. Business Students 4th edition Pearson Education Limited, England.

Turner, J.R. and Müller, R. (2005), “The project manager’s leadership style as a success factor
on projects: a literature review”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 36(1), p49-61.

Whittaker, B. (1999), “What went wrong? Unsuccessful information technology projects”,

Information Management and Computer Security, Vol. 7(1), p23–29.

Wideman, M. (1998), “A Project Management Knowledge Structure for the 21st Century”
[online], accessed at 2007-11-09 from:
http://www.maxwideman.com/papers/knowledge/appendixa.htm

Yu, A.G., Flett, P.D. and Bowers, J.A. (2005) ‘Developing a value-centered proposal for
assessing project success’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23(6),
p428-436.

Zainal, Z., 2007. Case study as a research method. Jurnal kemanusiaan, 5(1).

Zeng, J., An, M. and Smith, N.J., 2007. Application of a fuzzy based decision making
methodology to construction project risk assessment. International journal of project
management, 25(6), pp.589-600.