Transportation Infrastructure Development in the UAE

7/26/2019 Transportation Infrastructure Development in the UAE

1/24

Transportation infrastructuredevelopment in the UAE

Stakeholder perspectives onmanagement practice

Moza T. Al Nahyan and Amrik S. SohalDepartment of Management, Monash University, Caulfield East, Australia

Brian N. FildesAccident Research Centre, Monash University, Clayton, Australia, and

Yaser E. HawasFaculty of Engineering, UAE University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the major management issues that impact onmega transportation infrastructure projects in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and identify thefactors that cause unsuccessful project completions. The paper further seeks to identify the changesthat can be made to improve project success.

Design/methodology/approach This is a qualitative study that involved face-to-face interviewswith 20 key experienced transportation construction stakeholders who had been involved in a numberof different projects in the UAE. This was followed by a focus group discussion involving ten keystakeholders who had been involved in the construction of a mega project the Dubai FujairahHighway. Analysis of the interview data was conducted using NVivo.

Findings The findings highlight the complexity involved in managing mega transportationinfrastructure projects in the UAE. Multiple stakeholders (government agencies, sponsors/clients,management firms, consultants and contractors) influence the various stages of projects. The need foreffective communication, coordination, knowledge sharing and decision making amongst thestakeholders, especially during the planning and design stages, is highlighted as critical.

Research limitations/implications The main limitation is the small numbers interviewed foreach stakeholder group. Nevertheless, the sample of interviews provides a good representation of thetransport infrastructure construction industry in the UAE.

Practical implications Threemajor practicalimplications relate to: improvingcommunication andcoordination amongst government departments and key stakeholdersto streamlineeffectiveknowledgesharing and decision making, leading to successful project outcomes; improving the skills andcompetencies of professional staffat all levels and subsequentlydelegating authorityto lowerlevels; andthe adoption of global international standards to improve planning, design and construction activities.

Originality/value The paper describes the first study of its kind conducted in the UAE thatprovides valuable insights with respect to transportation infrastructure project management.

KeywordsUnited Arab Emirates, Construction management, Project management,Construction engineering works, Roads, Transportation infrastructure construction, Stakeholders

Paper typeResearch paper

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1471-4175.htm

The authors are grateful to the interviewees taking part in Phase I and Phase II of the studyreported. They also thank the three referees who provided many valuable comments that helpedin improving this paper.

CI12,4

492

Construction InnovationVol. 12 No. 4, 2012pp. 492-514q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1471-4175DOI 10.1108/14714171211272234


2/24

IntroductionLarge scale infrastructure projects with increasing complexity are being constructedin many countries around the world and at an increasing rate, in a number of developingcountries. In this respect, project management is also becoming increasing complex not

only because the projects are becoming larger (referred to as mega projects wheninvestments amount to $1 billion or more), but also because of the large number ofstakeholders involved. Since mega projects can take many years to complete, respondingto the changing interests and demands of stakeholders over the life of a project can makeproject management a challenging task (Friedman and Miles, 2002). This paperexamines a number of transportation infrastructure project management issues in thecontext of a rapidly developing country, the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The UAE is a federation of seven emirates (Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah,Ajman, Umm al-Quwain, Ras al-Khaimah and Fujairah) that has developed rapidlyover the past three decades, in terms of economic, business and social activities. Alongwith this, there has been massive activity in the construction industry, especially indeveloping the necessary transportation infrastructure (seaports, airports,highways and light rail). Many of these projects have met with serious challengesand problems (Ahmed, 2007; Ditcham, 2006, 2007; Kazimi, 2005; Zaneldin, 2005).Delays were relatively common in many UAE construction projects, which locals notedanecdotally to include a lack of coordination, slow decision-making, design errors,utility relocation, sudden changes in governmental requirements, poor quality, and alack of coherence and compatibility between key stakeholders. In addition, norigorous scientific studies of UAE projects were found that addressed these issues,suggesting that additional research was clearly warranted for greater knowledge andintervention.

The aim of this paper is to identify the major management issues that affect megatransport infrastructure projects (TIPs) in the UAE, to identify the factors that cause

unsuccessful project completions and to identify what changes can be made toimprove project success. The conceptual model and the details of the researchquestions are presented in subsequent parts of the paper.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Next, relevant review of theliterature is presented which identifies the four management aspects important forproject management and introduces stakeholder theory. This is followed by anoverview of the research project and the methodology used for data collection andanalysis. The results are then presented followed by the discussion and conclusions.

Review of the literatureWestney (2000) defined project management as the application of knowledge, skills, tools,and techniques to project activities in order to meet or exceed stockholders need and

expectations from the project. It has evolved from a management philosophy restricted toa few functional areas and regarded as something nice to have, to now an enterpriseproject management system affecting every functional unit (Kerzner, 2006). The projectmanagement maturity model which comprises of six major stages (namely planning,design, scoping, tendering, scheduling and ending with implementation which alsoincludes benchmarking and continuous improvement) noted the degree of interactionbetween strategic management and planning and successful implementation of project(Gabor, 1990).

Transportatioinfrastructur

in the UAE

49


3/24

Previous research on construction project managementThe literature on management of construction projects is diverse, tackling severalissues including the management of stakeholders relationships and expectations(Macharis, 2005; Newcombe, 2003; Eliaset al., 2000, 2002, 2004), the strategic design

and implementation of projects (project management) (Cleland, 1995), contractmanagement and theory of organisations (Turner and Simister, 2001), measures ofsuccess related to the project type (Ernzenet al., 2004), and the root causes and effectsof delay in infrastructure projects (Ellis and Thomas, 2003).

Other important aspects include methods to achieve accurate and effective projectscheduling (Mattila et al., 2003), the development of cost estimation tools (Kyte et al.,2004), innovative project planning (Hegazy, 2004), best practices (Kingsleyet al., 2004),and the role of IT and technologies for project management (Nono and Tarnoff, 2004).The project stakeholders (the main participants of the construction project) have beentraditionally reported in the literature as the client, the architect and the contractor(Macharis, 2005; Newcombe, 2003; Eliaset al., 2000, 2002, 2004). The interactions and

interrelationships between these participants largely determined the overallperformance of a construction project. The performance of these participants is alsointerdependent. Hence, in order to perform effectively, a reciprocal requirement exists,whereby each participant requires the other participants to perform their dutieseffectively and in harmony with each other. The performance of individual participantsremains important because overall project performance is a function of the performanceof each participant. The degree of effective coordination and communication betweenstakeholders has been recognised as a key issue in successful transportationinfrastructure projects in particular (Timmermans and Beroggi, 2000; Zwikael et al.,2005; Zouet al., 2007). A conceptual model of a management structure for a successfulconstruction project is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.Conceptual model for themanagement of atransportationconstruction project

PLANNING

SCOPING

DESIGN

SCHEDULING

TENDERING

CONSTRUCTION

LEVEL I: CONSTRUCTION STAGES

COST OVERRUN

TIME OVERRUN

TECHNICAL

PERFORMANCE

STAKEHOLDERSATISFACTION

PROJECT

SUCCESS

INDICATORS

LOW MEDIUM HIGH

LEVEL II: STAKEHOLDER IMPORTANCE

COORDINATION

COMMUNICATIONS

KNOWLEDGE SHARING

DECISION MAKING

LEVEL III: MANAGEMENT ISSUES

CI12,4

494


4/24

Key management aspectsThe literature review identified four key management aspects important insuccessful project management, namely communication, coordination,knowledge-sharing, and decision-making. Effective communication practices need to

ensure that all major players are kept fully informed of any problems or difficulties andhave procedures for intervening and managing these immediately should they occurand not allow them to disrupt the project (Kerzner, 2006). Zwikael et al. (2005)examined project management practices and concluded that various types ofmanagement styles, scope and time management can impact on the technicalperformance of projects; while communication and cost management will affect theoverall success of a project.

Soetanto and Proverbs (2002) suggested the need for communication effectivenessmodels to predict satisfaction performance by contractors and clients at the earliestpossible stage in the project life cycle. To minimise defective designs, and thesubsequent overrun of cost and schedules, Zouet al.(2007) argued that the design team

must establish an efficient communication scheme among key stakeholders. Stewart(2007) stressed that implementation is essential of innovative information andcommunication technologies for the long-term survival of construction firms. The lackof communication among parties was reported among the ten most important causes ofproject delay by Sambasivan and Soon (2007).

Coordination is also recognised as a key issue in successful transportationinfrastructure projects. Timmermans and Beroggi (2000) stressed the importance ofeffective coordination between organisations that have diverse objectives. The conceptof strong international coordination for successful transportation infrastructureprojects was addressed by Short and Kopp (2005) while Chen and Partington (2006)emphasised the necessity for project managers to closely coordinate their activities onsite. Lack of coordination among project participants was also identified as a key riskfactor in Australian projects (Zouet al., 2007).

Jackson and Klobas (2007) and Kovacs and Paganelli (2003) further argued thatdata and knowledge interchange is urgently needed to improve efficiency andstandardise operations of complex distributed organisations. The necessity of afeed-back loop to gain insights on decision-making in various projects is emphasisedby Short and Kopp (2005), suggesting that in order to improve planning processesand decision-making, it is necessary to look back at the decisions taken and extract andshare valuable knowledge and lessons learned from both good and bad decisions inthe past.

Finally, sound decision-making has been shown to be significantly tied to successfulproject management and project completion. Decentralised communication channels

are known to facilitate better information flow and decision-making when problemsarise. Clients who have decentralised communication channels ease communicationand facilitate faster and more effective decisions (Soetanto and Proverbs, 2002).In assessing project performance measures, project managers need to understand whatfactors in a construction project result in time overrun or cost overrun. Thus, whenthese factors become clear, management can proactively take steps to avoid or addresssuch situations. Sambasivan and Soon (2007) identified slow decision-making byclients as a principle factor in time and cost overrun.


in the UAE

49


5/24

Stakeholder theoryFreeman (1984) described stakeholder theory as:

. the understanding of stakeholders relationships;

.

the processes for dealing with these stakeholders; and. the transactions required to achieve the project deliverables with satisfactory

stakeholders.

A detailed description of stakeholder theory was provided by Elias et al. (2000). Intransport policy, Banvilleet al.(1998) also defined stakeholders as those with a vestedinterest in a project by influencing or being affected by it, and introduced a frameworkfor the introduction of the concept of stakeholders for application in evaluatingtransport related strategic decisions.

Construction management particularly focuses on planning the complex array ofactivities required to deliver a successful construction project, such as a road or abuilding (Morris, 1997). Vinten (2000) argued that a crucial skill for managers of

construction projects is being able to manage construction stakeholders expectationswhere failures have resulted in withdrawal of project funds (Bourne and Walker, 2005;Lim and Lee, 2005). Successful completion of construction projects is dependent onmeeting the expectation of stakeholders (Cleland, 1995). In construction projects, theinterests of stakeholders can vary over the life of a project (Friedman and Miles, 2002),and the reasons for these changes include learning, changing values, and specificexperiences (Elias et al., 2004). Zwikael et al. (2005) suggested the use of cost andschedule overrun, technical performance and stakeholder satisfaction as the primaryperformance indicators of projects.

Fassin (2008) discussed the notion of heterogeneity within stakeholders andpressure groups. Fassin (2008) noted that members within a category are not allhomogeneous, often quite the contrary, and to date, stakeholder theory has largely

ignored intra-stakeholder heterogeneity. Stakeholder groups and subgroups may alsohave multiple interests and multiple roles. They are all bundled in one group as theyhave common stake, but they do not necessarily share a common objective.

The research reported in this paper is part of a multi-phased study examiningtransportation infrastructure projects in the UAE. Specifically, the study examined thecritical management processes to ensure a successful transportation constructionproject. The discussion presented above highlights that issues relating tocommunication, co-ordination, knowledge-sharing, and decision-making are notconsidered as important factors among key stakeholders for a projects success. Thedegree to which these factors receive due consideration in UAE mega transportationconstruction projects is unknown and this study is designed to address this importantgap in the literature. The results of the study reported in this paper provides important

insights that will benefit the multiple stakeholders involved and the overall outcomesrelating to mega transportation projects in the UAE.

Research methodologyIn adopting the research methodology for this study, it was important to adoptscientific well-known and proven research methodologies. Quantitative andqualitative approaches represent two legitimate ways to investigate research problems.Qualitative approaches are typically used for exploratory purposes, whilst quantitative

CI12,4

496


6/24

approaches are used to test hypotheses, where content validity, reliability and precisemethods of measurement areconsidered more important. Given the nature of the researchquestions, a qualitative approach was selected for this investigation. Qualitative researchis a method of inquiry used in many different academic and applied disciplines.

Researchers using qualitative methods gather an in-depth understanding of natural andhuman behaviour and the reasons that govern such phenomena. Techniques commonlyused include interviews (structured or unstructured), focus group discussions, literatureand material reviews and observation techniques.

A qualitative research approach was considered appropriate and legitimate for thisstudy. According to Manson (2005), qualitative research is characteristicallyexploratory, fluid and flexible, data-driven and context-sensitive and aims to producerounded and contextual understandings on the basis of rich nuanced and detailed data(p. 3). It has the advantage of being easily implemented and comprehended by decisionmakers and is amenable to various project sizes and management forms. The unit ofanalysis in this study is the stakeholders involved in transportation constructionprojects completed in the UAE. As previously mentioned in the introduction to this

paper, many projects experienced delays (e.g. lack of coordination amongst variousstakeholders involved, slow decision-making, design errors, utility relocation, suddenchanges in governmental requirements, poor quality, and a lack of coherence andcompatibility between key stakeholders). All of these issues had been highlighted in thelocal media (Ahmed, 2007; Ditcham, 2006, 2007; Kazimi, 2005; Zaneldin, 2005), butneeded to be confirmed and then thoroughly examined. Preliminary discussions withofficials in the UAE Ministry of Public Works provided confirmation that these issuesdid indeed exist.The ministry was not able to provide sufficiently detailed answers to thequestions that were being raised by the research team and hence this study was initiated.

Broadly, the research questions (see specific questions below) focused onidentifying the major management issues that affect transportation infrastructureprojects, the factors that cause unsuccessful completion of projects and the changesthat can be made to improve project success. Interviews were conducted with keystakeholders involved in these projects, including one specific mega project namely theDubai-Fujairah highway completed recently.

A conceptual model of a management structure for a successful transportationconstruction project is shown in Figure 1, followed by a series of six research questions.

Research questionsA number of research questions were outlined from the literature review for thisproject. Of particular interest for this paper were the following six questions:

RQ1. What influence do the key stakeholders have on transportation infrastructureprojects?

The importance of stakeholders was discussed in the literature to this paper. Cleland(1995) argued that successful completion of construction projects is dependent onmeeting the expectation of stakeholders. Friedman and Miles (2002) indicated that theinterests of stakeholders can vary over the life of a project. Hence, the aim of thisquestion was to identify who the important stakeholders are and their influence on theproject:

RQ2. What are the most critical stages in these projects?


in the UAE

49


7/24

Each stage of a construction project involves unique activities. Previous researchexamined specific stages of a project. For example, planning by Hegazy (2004) andscheduling by Mattila et al. (2003). This question aimed at identifying the projectstages considered critical by each stakeholder group as well as identifying the most

critical stages overall:

RQ3. How is project success and failure defined and measured?

Although the literature refers to various measures of success (see for exampleZwikael et al. (2005) who suggested the use of cost and schedule overrun, technicalperformance of the project and stakeholder satisfaction as the primary performanceindicators). This study was interested in identifying the success and failure measuresunique to the UAE:

RQ4. What are the factors behind unsuccessful projects?

The literature reviewed referred to a number of factors causing unsuccessful projects,especially issues relating to interactions and interrelationships between keystakeholders. Further, Zwikael et al. (2005) highlighted the impact of various typesof management styles, scope and time management on projects. The aim of thisquestion was to identify the unique factors relevant to the UAE:

RQ5. How does management practice influence project success?

Issues relatingto communication, co-ordination,decision-makingand knowledge-sharingwere raised by many authors, as discussed in the literature. For example, effectivecoordination and communication between stakeholders was recognised as a key issue insuccessful transportation infrastructure projects by Timmermans and Beroggi (2000),Zwikael et al. (2005) and Zou et al. (2007), knowledge-sharing has been referred to by

Jackson and Klobas (2007), Kovacs and Paganelli (2003), Short and Kopp (2005), Soetanto

and Proverbs (2002) and Sambasivan and Soon (2007) highlighted the importance ofdecision-making:

RQ6. What are the critical management issues for a successful project?

The discussion presented earlier highlights the need to improve transportationconstruction project success. Overall, managing construction stakeholdersexpectations has been identified as crucial by Vinten (2000) and Cleland (1995).Hence, identifying and addressing the critical management issues that influencestakeholders is important in this study.

The two phases of the research addressing the above questions are described below.

Phase I research interviews

The first phase of the project was completed in 2010 and involved conducting anomnibus interview with 20 key stakeholders engaged in various transportationinfrastructure projects and identified in consultation with the Ministry of Public Works.The five key stakeholder groups comprised sponsors and/or clients, governmentagencies, management firms, consultants, and contractors (see Table I for profile ofthe interviewees). A snowballing approach was adopted in this research to ensure therandomness in recruiting interview participants. Individuals who agreed to participatein the study were initially contacted by telephone and were briefed on the

CI12,4

498


8/24

research project. An interview was then set up at a specific time and place. Allinterviewees held senior positions within their organisations and played a significant

role in transportation infrastructure projects. Most had been involved in mega/fast-trackprojects identified by the Ministry of Public Works.The interview questionnaire comprised of ten parts with a total of 58 specific

questions, intended to explore the interviewees opinion on a range of key researchquestions. A typical interview lasted for approximately 90 minutes which wassufficient to achieve the targeted depth to each of the detailed research questions.

Phase II research case study (focus group)The second phase of the research involved a detailed study of a suitable megatransportation infrastructure project in the UAE. According to Davies et al. (2009), megaprojects involve investments of more than US$1 billion. They noted that mega projectscontinue to have poor performance records and more likely to have problematic

management experiences, thus of particular interest to this research program.The Dubai-Fujairah highway was considered to be a unique mega project in the

UAE with estimated budget of AED 1.43 billion (estimated July 2009). The project wasintended to link the Emirates of Dubai and Sharjah with the Eastern Coast areas torelief the traffic congestion on existing highways. The Dubai-Fujairah highway wasexpected to reduce the travel time between the destinations and minimise the rate ofroad accidents. It has a history of management and construction changes, withextensive delays and construction problems.

This phase of the research involved a number of site visits, in-depth interviews, anddiscussions with major stakeholders, as well as a focus group session with ten seniormanagement personnel representing the five stakeholder groups to examine reasonsfor the difficulties experienced in its completion. The results of the focus group

discussion are particularly relevant here, given that many of the issues raised in theomnibus survey were discussed in-depth by this group. The ten interviewees were keyplayers in the Dubai-Fujairah highway project. They included the followings: threesponsors/clients (director of road department, head of project planning department andexecutive director of work affairs), three management firms representatives (head ofroad department, senior planning engineer, and liaison engineer), one consultant(director: transport division), one contractor (project manager), and two representinggovernmental agencies (executive director of electricity and director). These individuals

Organisation PositionsNumber

interviewedAverage years

experience Fields of specialisation

Sponsors/clients Exec. mgr to

technical advisor

5 16 Mgmt, planning and

designGovernment agents Exec. director,

strategy and policy3 5 Business development

and constructionManagement firms Senior and project

mgrs2 20 Road and engineering

constructionConsultants Vice president to

senior consultant5 15 Management and road

constructionContractors Manager and project

director5 20 Management,

construction and quality

TableDetails of the 2

interviewees in Phaseresearc


in the UAE

499


9/24

exhibited a clear understanding of the research work, and were cooperative, willingand happy to participate in the research from their own personal experience. The focusgroup was facilitated by the research team and detailed records of the discussion wereanalysed.

Analysis of the dataNVivo software was used to analyse this data. The unit of analysis in this study wasthe stakeholder involved in transportation construction projects. NVivo is aproprietary software package for the organisation and analysis of complexnon-numerical unstructured qualitative data. It is primarily used by qualitativeresearchers working with very rich text-based and/or multimedia information,where deep levels of analysis on small or large volumes of data are required. Thesoftware allows users to classify, sort and arrange thousands of pieces of information;examine complex relationships in the data; and combine subtle analysis with linking,shaping, searching and modelling.

Study resultsThe results reported here focus on the six research questions presented above. Therelevant findings from Phases I and II (focus group discussions) are combined here toprovide a comprehensive account of these key issues.

Influence of the key stakeholdersFigure 2 shows the results from the Phase I interviews for the relative importance ofeach of the key stakeholder groups in a successful TIP. It shows that federalgovernment and their agents were the stakeholder group that most respondentsbelieved to have the greatest ability to affect the success of the project. Almost one-halfbelieved that the client also had strong influence and one-third thought the sponsor and

state government also could have a strong effect on the success of transportationinfrastructure projects. Six out of the 20 interviewees also identified State GovernmentDepartments and Financial Institutes as key stakeholders. Consultants and contractorswere judged the least important stakeholders affecting the project success.

There waslittleagreementthoughamongst the20 interviewees on howthestakeholdersinfluencedprojects.Thehighest reasonofferedforthis (35 percent in total)wastheability to

Figure 2.Interviewees judgments ofrelative importance of keystakeholder groups

Note: Percentage of respondents, n= 20

CI12,4

500


10/24

affect project execution and flow of activities. Moreover, the ability to affect budget, toconduct andinfluence planning anddesign, thelevel of involvement in a project andtherolea stakeholder plays in a given project were also equally noted as important aspects.

These findings were further confirmed by the focus group attendees in Phase II in

discussions of the Dubai-Fujairah highway project. With regard to the earlyexperiences with the project, the Ministry claimed that:

[. . .] knowledge and experience of the client is very important because at the end of the daythey make the decisions. Sometimes the decision makers, the higher-ups, are not engineers,they need feedback from their people and they filter the information coming from thedesigner, the people who are under them. It depends on them.

Critical stages of mega TIP projectsDuring Phase I research, almost all (85 percent) of the interviewees identified goodplanning as the most critical stage of transportationinfrastructure projects while close toone-half of theintervieweesalso identified design as anothervery critical stage (TableII).

It is interesting to note that only one interviewee (a contractor) identifiedtendering as the most critical stage. Scoping, construction and scheduling wereonly considered critical stages by just a few of the interviewees.

The importance of the initial design phase and the government-client relationshipwas stressed during the focus group discussions in Phase II. The member from theMinistry noted that design was a major problem with the Dubai-Fujairah highwayproject that involved several design changes throughout its duration:

The initial design did not include site supervision. Some of the criteria have been changed[subsequently] [. . .] engineering problems with the design [. . .] mountainous road with certaincriteria [. . .] if money is limited or the budget is limited, you can only design the road based onthe budget, but if the money is there and the budget can be increased, so you can enhance andrevise the design criteria.

It was also noted that decision-making, also, was important. Designers usually givea number of alternative designs, so the client must decide quickly which design toadopt so that the other stakeholders are not unnecessarily delayed in the process.

Defining and measuring project successTable III shows that interviewees in Phase I used a number of different indicators todefine project success with some interviewees defining project success in more

Sponsor/client(n 5)

Governmentalagency(n 3)

Management firm(n 2)

Consultants(n 5)

Contractors(n 5)

Total(n 20)

Planning 4 3 1 4 5 17Scoping 0 0 0 0 3 3Design 2 0 2 2 3 9Scheduling 0 1 0 0 3 4Tendering 0 0 0 0 1 1Construction 0 0 0 0 3 3

Note:The numbers in the body of the table are the number responding from each stakeholder group

Table IAssessments of criticstages for a successftransportation proje


in the UAE

50


11/24

than one way. Overall, minimum time overrun was mentioned by 65 percent of theinterviewees and minimum cost overrun was mentioned by 50 percent of theinterviewees. Achieving project objectives, achieving stakeholders expectations andexcellent quality was also noted as significant.

Three specific questions focused on measuring project success.(i) Department/organisation project success measures. Interviewees indicated that

their department/organisation made use of a range of different project successmeasures. Overall, they identified excellent quality and minimum time overrun as thetwo most common project success measures each identified by 11 out of the20 interviewees. Minimum cost overrun (identified by eight interviewees) andachieving stakeholders expectations (six interviewees) were also identified as popular

project success factors. Other measures, such as adequate financial liquidity, excellentmanagement, experienced staff, having no project claims and safety were onlyidentified once by the interviewees.

(ii) Interviewees opinions on most important measure of project success . Overall,excellent quality was identified by 12 out of the 20 interviewees as the most importantmeasure, followed by minimum time overrun and achieving stakeholders expectations(each identified by eight interviewees). Availability of finance and environmentallysafe projects were identified by only one interviewee as the most important projectsuccess measures.

(iii) Reasons for selecting the most important measure of project success . Overall, themost important reason identified relates to stakeholder satisfaction (increasestakeholders level of satisfaction identified by 11 out of the 20 interviewed) followed

by reasons relating to time and budget overruns identified by six interviewees. Fewinterviewees identified reasons relating to quality and project uniqueness.

Members of the Phase II focus group agreed that the Dubai-Fujairah highwayproject had not been a very good example of a successful Mega project. Costs hadsky-rocketed during its ten year history, a number of redesigns had been employed,new contracts had to be made with new contractors mid-stream, and there had been atleast three changes in the senior client representatives since the project commenced.The Ministry representative noted that:

Reasons

Sponsorclient

(n 5)

Governmentagency(n 3)

Managementfirm

(n 2)Consultants

(n 5)Contractors

(n 5)Total

(n 20)

Minimum time overrun 2 2 2 4 3 13Minimum cost overrun 1 1 2 3 3 10Achieving projectobjectives 4 2 1 1 0 8Achieving stakeholderexpectations/satisfaction 1 1 0 1 2 5Excellent quality 1 0 1 1 2 5Othera 1 2 0 1 1 5

Notes: aAll other reasons scored only 1 response from any participant; a number of intervieweesprovided multiple responses; the numbers in the body of the table are the number responding fromeach stakeholder group

Table III.Participants definition ofa successful project

CI12,4

502


12/24

Our Director General was not involved from the start [ . . .] [now] has the knowledge and ispersonally involved in the project [. . .] visiting the project [site] regularly and attending someof the meetings so he makes decisions directly.

The focus group totally agreed that the knowledge and experience of the senior clientrepresentative canhavea major influence on the project success.Failures occur whenthoseat the top lack the knowledge and what is critically required in pursuing a mega project.

Interviewees in Phase I were also asked to indicate what proportion of projects theybelieved had been completed successfully in the UAE (only one of the five intervieweesfrom the contractors group could answer this question). Of them, the majority(12 interviewees out of the 16 who answered this question) claimed that over 70 percentof the projects had been completed successfully in terms of cost and timeoverrun and poor quality, although they did not produce any evidence to support thisfigure.

Defining and measuring unsuccessful projectsTwo specific interview questions addressed issues relating to unsuccessful projects.First, how the specific department/organisation defined unsuccessful projects, andsecond, how failed projects were measured by the department or organisation.Generally, the majority of the interviewees indicated that they agreed with the projectfailure measures used by their organisation, with only a few indicating that they onlyagreed to some extent.

Department/organisation definition of unsuccessful (failed) project. Unsuccessful orfailed projects were defined in a number of different ways. Overall, intervieweesidentified cost overrun (identified by eight interviewees), time overrun (seveninterviewees) and poor quality (six interviewees) as the most common definitions usedfor unsuccessful projects. Only one interviewee identified not achieving stakeholdersexpectations and commuters dissatisfaction as definitions for unsuccessful projects.

Project failure measures used by departments/organisations. The responses showa variety of measures used to describe failed projects. Overall, interviewees identifiedpoor quality (seven interviewees), cost overrun (six interviewees) and time overrun(six interviewees) as the most common measures used. Referring to the earlierdiscussion on measures of project success, both success and failure are measuredprimarily in terms of quality, time and cost.

Many of these issues were also raised by members of the Phase II focus group intrying to describe why the Dubai-Fujairah highway was not successful. One responsefrom the meeting sums up the lack of coordination issue:

The original designer designed the project, gave alternatives and we chose some of hisalternatives and he finished the design. Later on, which is one of these mistakes [. . .] there wasnot thesupervision.Theyresigned and someone else camein, so the supervision engineer, which

is when [company name] came in and one of their task was to review the original design as aprofessional consultant. They came and said that this [design] was sub-standard in someareas and they proposed some revisions to the design which were sent back to the originaldesigner.

Factors causing unsuccessful completion of projectsInterviewees provided a variety of responses with regard to the factors that causeunsuccessful completion of projects, as shown in Table IV.


in the UAE

50


13/24

The most common interview responses related to unqualified or bad contractors, baddesign and price increments. There were a number of other reasons raised in otherquestionnaire items and in the Phase II focus group discussions of the case study thataddressed this issue as well. These included unqualified consultants and unqualifiedengineers as major factors. Poor co-ordination with local governments, governmentalprocesses, unavailability of resources, and lack of material procurement were alsomentioned a number of times.

In examining more closely the reasons for project time overrun and cost overrun,interviewees gave a wide range of responses. For time overrun, these includedvariation in design and schedules (often un-reviewed), improper planning and scopingor poor cost estimates. For cost overruns, they included unexpected material costincreases and inflation. Human resource issues included lack of availability and/orreliability of staff, insufficient work labour skills, coming from a different culturalbackground, and no experience or skills.

Management practice in the UAETwo questions were asked with respect to management practice in the UAE. The firstquestion asked interviewees in Phase I to rank management practice as excellent, verygood, good, or fair. The second question asked for a reason for the response given to

the first question. The results for the first question are shown in Table V.One-half of the interviewees regard management practice in the UAE as good and

another one-quarter noted they were excellent or very good generally. A range ofreasons in the second question was given for the above responses to the ranking ofmanagement practice. These cluster around the following three major reasons:

(1) Poor human resources mentioned five times (responses included unqualifiedmanagers still learning, engaging best qualifications hiring appropriatelyqualified staff, workforce variations and availability of resources).

Reasons

Sponsor/client

(n 5)

Governmentalagency(n 3)

Managementfirm

(n 2)Consultants

(n 5)Contractors

(n 5)Total

(n 20)

Unqualified-badcontractors 2 2 1 1 0 6Bad design 0 0 1 2 1 4Price increments 0 1 0 0 3 4Availability ofresources 0 0 0 0 3 3Improper planning andscooping 1 1 0 1 0 3Lack of coordinationwith local government 2 0 1 0 0 3Material procurements 0 0 0 0 3 3Inadequate budgetassigned 1 0 0 0 1 2

Poor coordination withutility firms 1 0 0 0 1 2


Table IV.

Factors causingunsuccessful projectcompletions

CI12,4

504


14/24

(2) Lack of use of international design andquality standards mentioned four times.

(3) Lack of a continuous improvement culture mentioned three times.

Two interviewees clarified that the double track mega projects that are currently

taking place in the UAE is overloading all entities and hence affecting negatively onthe ranking of management practice in the UAE. Poor human resources were alsoidentified above as a key management concern in the implementation of infrastructureprojects in the UAE.

The responses from the Phase II focus group discussions however revealedadditional information on some of the management problems associated with theconstruction of the Dubai-Fujairah highway, typified by the following quotation by oneof the engineering design consultants:

Not all the agencies were separate. For instance there was Federal Agency for Water [ . . .]they have branches in each emirate. So this is something that needs coordination interms of water allocation services. But for other agencies like the Ministry of Communication,

the police department, the municipalities, those are completely separate entities, soeach emirate has its own agencies and there is no major federal agency that organised theprocess.

The interviewee further elaborated on the complexity of the project, saying:

This project is one of the mega projects and is the most complicated projects, probably, inthe UAE, probably in the GCC, because it is in mountainous regions [ . . .] you need anexperienced designer, an experienced reviewer, and you need an experienced contractor toachieve it. I think there was a lack of experience. I think this road was designed as a normalroad, and it is not a normal road. And the lack of experience in this area from all partscontributed too much. Lack of experience in design, lack of experience in making decisions,changes in management during the middle of construction, a big mistake [ . . .] everythingstopped, and the costs went up.

The importance of communication among stakeholdersA series of questions in the Phase I interviews focused on communication: how criticalgood communication is for the success of projects, the methods used and theeffectiveness of communication within and across the stakeholders.

In terms of its criticalness, practically all those interviewed agree that goodcommunication is very critical for the success of the project. They noted that the most

Sponsor/client

(n 5)

Governmental

agency

(n 3)

Management firm

(n 2)

Consultants

(n 5)

Contractors

(n 5)

Total

(n 20)

Excellent 2 0 0 1 0 3

Very good 0 0 1 0 1 2

Good 3 3 0 2 2 10

Fair 1 0 1 0 1 3

No clear answer 0 0 0 1 1 2


Table VRanking of manageme

practices in the UA


in the UAE

50


15/24

commonly used methods of communication included meetings with minutes andwritten documents. E-mail was also used frequently, although the use of e-meetingswas only mentioned once. Other methods included the telephone and site visits. It wasstressed that good communication needs to be fast and efficient, decisions made must

be documented, and meetings should involve all key stakeholders that allow personalinteraction and the flow of ideas.

In terms of current effectiveness, there was general sense among the 20 intervieweesthat communication within their organisation was effective, although others felt that itwas not always as effective as it should have been or often failed to provide clearanswers. There was also less agreement amongst the interviewees on the effectivenessof communication across the different stakeholder groups. A number of suggestionswere made on how to improve communication, namely by establishing communicationcommittees that meet regularly, having a chair to avoid wasting time, makingelectronic communication official, and creating a manual or system procedure forcommunication.

Claims were made that communication had not been very effective in theDubai-Fujairah highway project by the participants in the Phase II focus group. Asnoted by the construction manager:

At the first design stage of it, there was a high level committee created by the ministryofficials headed by the undersecretary. By creating this committee it was a centralcommunication. I say that one of the issues that negatively affected the progress of the projectwas that this committee didnt carry on to the end of it. In my opinion if we havethis committee till the end to the construction that would facilitate the construction. If there isno communication, everybody is doing their own thing and there is no collaboration.

Through the central committee, progress meetings were quite successful in minimisingcommunication efforts through letters and correspondences, as noted by the Ministry

representative:We had such meetings in the ministry in order to bring all the parties [together] and toovercome all the issues and [tried to] avoid all the correspondence [. . .] we had to exchange alot of letters, and finally we decided to have these meeting to solve problems, we give targets,finish.

These meetings were also a means of resolving disputes and problems as noted by thesenior design consultant:

For example, if the contractor raised a flag and said Ill be facing some delay that is affectingmy program and I have to get this information within this time. So, we try to solve thisproblem. Some of them are minor problems and some of them would affect progress, becauseit is a critical activity which they should do now.

The interviewee also noted that opinions were against discontinuing this centralcommittee.

There is a strong belief that such a committee could have even assisted in theconstruction phases. Explicit statements were made that the progress of the projectwas negatively affected by discontinuing the committee:

By creating this committee it was a central communication. I say that one of the issues thatnegatively affected the progress of the project was that this committee didnt carry on to the

CI12,4

506


16/24

end of it. In my opinion if we have this committee till the end to the construction that wouldfacilitate even the construction.

Coordination among stakeholders

Timmermans and Beroggi (2000) noted that good coordination among stakeholdersis recognised as a key issue in transportation infrastructure projects. Two questions inthe Phase I interviews focused on the effectiveness of co-ordination amongststakeholders in UAE mega TIP projects and ways that it could be improved.

One-half of the interviewees indicated that coordination amongst thestakeholders in the UAE was generally effective while another seven thought that itwas effective to some extent. The remaining three interviewees indicated thatcoordination amongst the stakeholders was generally not effective in most UAEprojects. This data showed the need to create effective communication procedures, tohave regular meetings and distribute official communications among stakeholders andto lower organisation levels of the project. These were all considered appropriate andnecessary methods of communication to ensure success. These findings were againconfirmed from the discussions held in the Phase II focus group. Many of theparticipants expressed the lack of effective coordination among stakeholders in severalways.

Part of its role (the early management committee) was to arrange and coordinate theservices issues between all the relevant agencies across the emirates:

It really helped lots and we remember it was on a monthly meeting basis. A higher committeefor that purpose and its role was to facilitate NOCs [No Objection Certificates] and get thedepartments or the relevant agencies to work together.

Interviewees in Phase I provided many suggestions with respects to improvingcoordination amongst stakeholders in a follow-up unrestricted question. The majority

of those responses fell into four broad categories. These involved:(1) the introduction of coordination regulations or models (30 percent);

(2) to introduce new technology (20 percent including develop a GIS-basedmaster plan with federal and local governments involved);

(3) the early involvement of stakeholders (20 percent including clarify projectrequirements from the beginning); and

(4) to introduce legislated coordination committees including the introduction ofdocumented procedures (15 percent).

Other suggestions raised by both Phases I and II respondents included informationexchange amongst agencies, increasing the level of trust and professional capabilities,

enhancing problem understanding, and enhancing decision-making and giving greaterauthority at lower levels.

Knowledge-sharing in project managementThree of the interviewees did not provide an answer; however, the 17 who answeredindicated full agreement on the importance of knowledge-sharing amongst thestakeholders. Interviewees were also asked to indicate whether appropriate mechanismsexisted within their organisation/department for sharing knowledge internally.


in the UAE

50


17/24

12 said yes, four said to some extent and three said no. A number of suggestions wereoffered for improving knowledge-sharing. These included:

. Through presentations, continuous meetings and talking mentioned 12 times.

.

Development of a system mentioned eight times.. Establishing of a club or a knowledge centre mentioned twice.

Decision-making in project managementInterviewees were asked for their opinion on the quality and speed of decision-makingin project management and ways to improve this decision-making. In general, theirresponses were quite positive. Good quality of decisions (mentioned 15 times) and highspeed (mentioned nine times) were predominant, although eight responses did note lowspeed (long delays) in these decisions.

Interviewees made a number of suggestions to improve decision-making. One-halfof the interviewees referred to increasing authority to lower level of the organisationand seven responses referred to having competent staff. Other suggestions included

having the right information (mentioned three times), introducing a manual (mentionedthree times) and introducing a system for document control (mentioned once).

Improving project success indicatorsFinally, interviewees in Phase I were asked to make suggestions as to how the variousproject success indicators (project quality, time overrun, cost overrun, and increasingstakeholders satisfaction level) could be improved. Their responses are summarisedbelow.

Improving quality of projects. From the responses given, four ways of improvingquality of projects are identified. First, by using competent staff/stakeholders mentioned seven times (responses included more qualified staff, qualified contractors,

better consultants and contractors. and training staff). Second, by adoption ofstandards mentioned four times, including adopt international standards and adoptoptimal standards to suit environment. Third, by improving coordination mentionedthree times, including better coordination amongst stakeholders and good coordinationin planning stage). Fourth, by improved design which was mentioned twice.

Reducing project time overrun. Two major suggestions identified from the range ofresponses given by the interviewees are:

(1) proper planning and monitoring, and proper design mentioned eight times;and

(2) qualified staff/stakeholders mentioned five times (responses included morequalified staff, staff training, and qualified contractors).

Reducing project cost overrun. From the responses given, the following three ways ofreducing project cost overrun are identified. First, by using qualified staff/equipment mentioned seven times (responses included proper equipment and staff, more qualifiedstaff, and staff training); second, by improved project management mentioned fivetimes (responses included meeting time schedules, minimise interruptions, and properproject management); and third, increased control over materials mentioned fourtimes (control material cost, looking for different material options and designs, andsecure materials ahead of time).

CI12,4

508


18/24

Interestingly, use of value engineering and new construction technologies was eachmentioned only once.

Increasing stakeholder satisfaction. A large number of suggestions were made bythe interviewees. From these responses, three major ways for increasing stakeholder

satisfaction are identified:(1) Improved communication, coordination, support and involvement of

stakeholders mentioned six times, (responses including having bettercommunication and coordination, better stakeholder involvement in planningand scoping, getting governments to talk more, improved support fromhigher levels (the Cabinet) and better coordination between clients andmunicipality).

(2) Meeting project objectives (budget, quality and time) mentioned four times.

(3) Good design mentioned three times.

Interestingly, addressing safety and environmental issues, and minimising claims was

each mentioned only once by the interviewees.

DiscussionThe results presented above highlight the complexity involved in managing megatransportation infrastructure projects in the UAE. Having multiple stakeholders(government agencies, sponsors/clients, management firms, consultants andcontractors) influencing various stages of projects from planning to implementation,the need for effective communication, coordination, knowledge-sharing anddecision-making amongst the stakeholders, especially during the planning and designstages is critical. The need for effective project management is paramount to ensure thatprojects can be executed without major delays.

The results from Phase I of the study showed that among the 20 key stakeholdersinterviewed, the predominant response focused on government agencies, clients andthus sponsors, as the most important. According to Mitchells topology (Mitchell et al.,1997), this can be explained in terms of their power (and possibly legitimacy) in thedecision-making process. It is also consistent with the works of Macharis (2005),Newcombe (2003) and Elias et al. (2000, 2002, 2004) where they argued that thesegroups are considered the traditional main participants in a construction project, and tothis end, a major transportation construction project as well.

There was some agreement amongst those interviewed that the majority of theprojects were completed successfully, although this may have been influenced to somedegree by their positions and the survey itself (no evidence was provided to confirm thisview). In cases where projects were considered unsuccessful, the common factors

identified related to lack of resources, poor project design and planning and overall poorproject management, among other issues. Reasons for poor project managementexpressed by the respondents included unavailability of well qualified professionalmanagers, engineers and other employees as well as having to deal with localgovernment authorities. There was agreement amongst the interviewees that projectmanagement in the UAE is generally good, but there is considerable room forimprovement in terms of communication, co-ordination, knowledge-sharing anddecision-making amongst the key stakeholders.


in the UAE

509


19/24

CommunicationViews on the importance of communication was equivocal (there was no clear answerin the responses), especially in the light of previous research by Zwikael et al. (2005);who reported the critical nature of good communication for improving the overall

success of projects and Stewarts (2007) contention that communication is vital for thelong-term survival of construction firms. This is something worthy of follow uppossibly using more discrete sampling techniques and possibly a range of other (lowerlevel) stakeholders and workers to test this finding more rigorously.

Co-ordinationOverall, around half of those interviewed indicated that co-ordination amongst thestakeholders on transportation construction projects in the UAE was generallyeffective, or effective to some extent. Only three of those interviewed claimed that thelevel of co-ordination was not effective, the majority being clients and sponsors. Asnoted by Timmermans and Beroggi (2000), the role of coordination among keystakeholders is vital for the success of such projects. Given the claim thattransportation construction projects in this region lack coherence and compatibilitydue to lack of federal and state government efforts (Kazimi, 2005; Ditcham, 2006, 2007;Ahmed, 2007; Nazzal, 2005), this requires further, deeper investigation.

Knowledge-sharingKnowledge-sharing among the stakeholders in this project was acknowledged to be animportant aspect of transportation construction projects. More than 90 percent of thosewho responded agreed that it was important or important to some extent. Therespondents acknowledged that there was scope for improvement in knowledge-sharingby more discussions and meetings, and developing systems for regular sharing ofknowledge electronically from a well-maintained database.

The interactions and interrelationships between participants can help determine theoverall performance of a construction project. Sharing of knowledge needs to be openand transparent and is recognised as a key issue in successful transportationinfrastructure projects (Timmermans and Beroggi, 2000; Zwikaelet al., 2005; Zouet al.,2007). If knowledge is seen to be withheld or only available to a few, then resentmentcan occur by those adversely affected which can impede the success of a project.

Decision-makingThe study was particularly interested in determining how effective decision-makingwas in transportation construction projects in the UAE and whether this was a keyissue in the success or failure of projects in the region. The results overwhelminglyshowed that this was considered to be a key issue by most of the stakeholders, yet

could be improved in many of these projects in the UAE. A number of suggestionswere offered of ways in which the quality, satisfaction, cost and timing could generallybe improved in the region.

In outlining stakeholder theory, Mitchell et al. (1997) argued that the need foreffective decisions to achieve the project objectives. They claimed in this topology thatthe degree of legitimacy, power and urgency by key stakeholders will affect theinfluence they have in effective decision-making and ultimately, the success of theproject. This is consistent with the results reported here.

CI12,4

510


20/24

The Dubai-Fujairah highway was chosen for a more in-depth case investigation tofollow up many of these issues. It was a clear example of a less successful mega TIP,based on its size, a history of management and construction changes, with extensivedelays, cost overruns, and multiple construction problems. Many of the factors

identified during the earlier interviews were seen to exist in this case study, andhighlighted during the focus group discussions. In particular, project management andmany stakeholders changed three times during the project hence there was a lack ofconsistency among the key management team. In addition, the project design wasmodified several times as the municipalities revised their expectations. Subsequently,there was poor co-ordination and communication among the key stakeholders leadingto major budget and time overruns (the budget increased six fold during the ten yearsor more time taken to complete the project). This was not helped by poor design anddecision-making and inadequate awareness of the engineering requirements andtechnical difficulties experienced during excavation.

ConclusionThis aim of the research reported in this paper was to examine the major managementissues that affect mega transportation infrastructure projects in the UAE and identifythe factors that cause unsuccessful project completions. One objective was to identifythe changes that can be made to improve project success. Supported by the literature,six research questions were developed for this study.

A qualitative research approach was adopted due to the exploratory nature of thestudy and the fact that no previous research on this topic had been previouslyconducted in the UAE. The discussion above summarised the key findings relating tothese questions, and where applicable, these findings were linked to previous research.The most significant finding was that communication, co-ordination, decision-makingand knowledge-sharing are not conducted adequately amongst the stakeholders,

leading to poor project outcomes. The results of the study reported in this paperprovided important insights that will benefit the multiple stakeholders involved andthe overall outcomes relating to mega transportation projects in the UAE. Based on theresearch findings, three key recommendations for making improvement inmanagement practice are evident.

First, federal government, through its various ministries, departments and agencies,clearly has a major role to play in improving project management practice in the UAE.Communication and coordination amongst government departments and keystakeholders needs to be streamlined in a number of ways so that effectiveknowledge-sharing and decision-making can take place, leading to successful projectoutcomes. This is particularly the case during the planning and design stages whichcan subsequently reduce the number of changes (redesigns and variations) that are

introduced in later stages of these mega construction projects. Second, there is anurgent need to improve the skills and competencies of professional staff at all levelsand subsequently delegating authority to lower levels. Unqualified staff was seen as amajor reason by the interviewees and the focus group participants for many of theissues faced by the transportation construction industry. Improved human resourcestrategies that emphasise recruitment, training and development of personnel needs tobe developed and implemented immediately. Third, organisations need to adoptglobal international standards to improve their planning, design and construction


in the UAE

51


21/24

activities in these mega construction projects. There is much to be gained at theindividual, organisational and national levels from the adoption of such standards.

These three areas clearly need further investigation. The adoption of therecommendations proffered may lead to substantial cost and time savings for all

stakeholders involved in transportation construction projects in the UAE, and perhapsalso apply equally to other construction projects. The current global financial crisis hasput enormous pressure on the UAE federal government in terms of allocatingappropriate funding to complete current projects as well as approve future projects.The results of this study and the recommendations presented above will be helpful tothe UAE federal government and the major stakeholders involved as they considerfuture projects.

The next phase of the research program will explore these issues further throughgreater examination of the in-depth case study and associated research material. Theultimate aim of the program is to develop a risk-based decision model to address thethree-stage conceptual model outlined earlier involving construction stages,management issues, and stakeholder importance. This risk-model is expected to beuseful for ensuring greater success in future mega TIPs in the UAE.

The study is the first comprehensive study conducted of management practices inmega transportation construction projects in the UAE. The study is vital, given thegrowing number of these large projects being undertaken in the UAE, and the need forgreater effectiveness and efficiencies. It was advantaged by the use of well-proven,qualitative research methods and access and input from very senior stakeholders in themanagement and conduct of transportation construction projects in the region.

There were several limitations that should be acknowledged. While the interviewswere conducted individually, the participants answers were influenced to some degreeby their role and level of experience in these projects. The respondents were carefullychosen for their position and experience but a larger population of key stakeholders

would have provided a much wider cross-section of participants. In addition, a generalinterview is good for highlighting issues and hypotheses; however, they need to befollowed up in more specific case studies to judge their true influence in project success.This will be undertaken in subsequent research in the construction of transportationprojects in the UAE.

References

Ahmed, A. (2007), Al Ittihad interchange work is delayed, admits contractor, Gulf News,24 November, available at: http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/05/06/09/168413.html

Banville, C., Landry, M., Marte, J.-M. and Boulaire, C. (1998), A stakeholder approach to MCDA,System Research, Vol. 15, pp. 15-32.

Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005), Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence,Management Decision, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 649-60.

Chen, P. and Partington, D. (2006), Three conceptual levels of construction project managementwork, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, pp. 412-21.

Cleland, D. (1995), Project Management Strategic Design and Implementation, McGraw-Hill,Singapore.

Davies, A., Gann, D. and Douglas, T. (2009), Innovation in megaprojects: systems integration atLondon Heathrow Terminal 5,California Management Review, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 101-26.

CI12,4

512


22/24

Ditcham, R. (2006), Nakheel unfazed by project delay, Gulf News, 26 October, available at:http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/10/25/10077316.html

Ditcham, R. (2007), Burj Dubai hits snags, Gulf News, 2 January, available at: http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/02/01/10101017.html

Elias, A.A., Cavana, R.Y. and Jackson, L.S. (2000), Linking stakeholder literature and systemdynamics: opportunities for research, Proceedings of the International Conference onSystems Thinking in Management, Geelong, Australia, pp. 174-9.

Elias, A.A., Cavana, R.Y. and Jackson, L.S. (2002), Stakeholder analysis for R&D projectmanagement,R&D Management, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 301-10.

Elias, A.A., Jackson, L.S. and Cavana, R.Y. (2004), Changing positions and interests ofstakeholders in environmental conflict: a New Zealand transport infrastructure case,

Asia Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 87-104.

Ellis, R.D. and Thomas, H.R. (2003), The root causes of delays in highway construction,paper presented at TRB 82nd Annual Meeting.

Ernzen, J., Williams, R. and Brisk, D. (2004), Design build vs. design-bid-build: comparing costand schedule, paper presented at TRB 83rd Annual Meeting.

Fassin, Y. (2008), Imperfections and shortcomings of the stakeholder models graphicalrepresentation,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 80, pp. 879-88.

Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Publishing,Boston, MA.

Friedman, A.L. and Miles, S. (2002), Developing stakeholder theory, Journal of ManagementStudies, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 1-21.

Gabor, A. (1990), The Man Who Discovered Quality, Random House, New York, NY.

Hegazy, T. (2004), Execution Planning: A New Innovative Dimension of InfrastructureManagement System, paper presented at TRB 83rd Annual Meeting.

Jackson, P. and Klobas, J. (2007), Building knowledge in projects: a practical application of socialconstructivism to information system development, International Journal for Project

Management(in press).

Kazimi, A. (2005), Compensation claims ride the boom in construction projects, Gulf News,24 November, available at: http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/05/05/10/164180.html

Kerzner, H. (2006), Project Management: A System Approach to Planning, Scheduling andControlling, 9th ed., Wiley, New York, NY.

Kingsley, G., Cochran, J.A., Wolfe, P. and Crocker, J. (2004), Best practice in consultantmanagement at state departments of transportation, paper presented at TRB 83rdAnnual Meeting.

Kovacs, G.L. andPaganelli, P. (2003), A planning andmanagementinfrastructurefor large,complex,distributed projects beyond ERP and SCM,Computers in Industry, Vol. 51, pp. 165-83.

Kyte, C.A., Perfater, M.A., Haynes, S. and Lee, H.W. (2004), Developing and validating a highway

construction project cost estimation tools, paper presented at TRB 83rd Annual Meeting.Lim, G.H. and Lee, H. (2005), Formulating strategies for stakeholder management: a case based

reasoning approach, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 28, pp. 831-40.

Macharis, C. (2005), The importance of stakeholder analysis in freight transport, EuropeanTransport, Vol. 25, pp. 114-26.

Manson, J. (2005), Qualitative Researching, 2nd ed., Sage, London.

Mattila, K.G., Gronevelt, R.A. and Bowman, M.R. (2003), Project scheduling accuracy,paper presented at TRB 82nd Annual Meeting.


in the UAE

51


23/24

Mitchell, R.K., Agle, R.R. and Wood, D.J. (1997), Toward a theory of stakeholder identificationand salience: defining the principle of how and what really counts, Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853-86.

Morris, R. (1997), Early Warning Indicators of Corporate Failure: A Critical Review of Previous

Research and Further Empirical Evidence, Ashgate, Aldershot.Nazzal, N. (2005), RAK pavement work delayed, Gulf News, 5 December, available at:

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/01/11/12/32271.html

Newcombe, R. (2003), From a client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach,Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 841-8.

Nono, P.K. and Tarnoff, P.J. (2004), Improved software cost and schedule estimation duringearly project definition and proposal phases with use case modelling and function pointanalysis, paper presented at TRB 83rd Annual Meeting.

Sambasivan, M. and Soon, Y.W. (2007), Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian constructionindustry, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25, pp. 517-26.

Short, J. and Kopp, A. (2005), Transport infrastructure: investment and planning policy andresearch aspects, Transport Policy, Vol. 12, pp. 360-7.

Soetanto, R. and Proverbs, D.G. (2002), Modelling the satisfaction of contractors: the impact ofclient performance, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 9Nos 5/6, pp. 453-65.

Stewart, R.A. (2007), IT enhanced project management in construction: pathways to improvedperformance and strategic competitiveness, Automation in Construction, Vol. 16,pp. 511-17.

Timmermans, J.S. and Beroggi, G.E.G. (2000), Conflict resolution in sustainable infrastructuremanagement,Safety Science, Vol. 35, pp. 175-92.

Turner, R. and Simister, S.J. (2001), Project contract management and a theory of organisation,International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 19, pp. 457-64.

Vinten, G. (2000), The stakeholder manager, Management Decision, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 377-87.

Westney, R. (2000),The Strategic Project Planner: A Profit-Driven Project Management Processfor Planning Projects to Meet Business Goals, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.

Zaneldin, E. (2005), Construction claims in the United Arab Emirates: causes, severity andfrequency, paper presentedat the6th AnnualResearchConference, UAEUniversity, AL Ain.

Zou, P.X.W., Zhang, G. and Wang, J. (2007), Understanding the key risks in constructionprojects in China, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25, pp. 601-14.

Zwikael, O., Shimizu, K. and Globerson, S. (2005), Cultural differences in project managementcapabilities: a field study,International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23, pp. 454-62.

Corresponding authorAmrik S. Sohal can be contacted at: [email protected]

CI12,4

514

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints


24/24

Reproducedwithpermissionof thecopyrightowner. Further reproductionprohibitedwithoutpermission.

Transportation Infrastructure Development in the UAE

Documents

Transcript of Transportation Infrastructure Development in the UAE