Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management

Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

An Investigation of Factors Causing Schedule Overrun in

Telecommunication Projects in Zambia

Erastus Mishengu Mwanaumo

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering, University of
Zambia, Great East Road, Lusaka, Zambia
[Link]@[Link]

Mwewa Mambwe
Department of Construction Management and Quantity Surveying, Faculty of Engineering and
the Built Environment, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Bupe Getrude Mwanza

Graduate School of Business, University of Zambia, Great East Road, Lusaka, Zambia
[Link]-mwanza@[Link]

Epheso Sibalwa
Nokia Zambia Limited, Lusaka Zambia
empheso09@[Link]

Abstract

The aim of this research was to investigate the causes of time overrun in telecommunication projects in Zambia. To
achieve this goal a multi-mode descriptive study was adopted by using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
A detailed literature review was undertaken in which 34 factors that cause delay in telecommunication projects were
identified and verified through interviews. These factors were then categorised into five generic elements using a
fishbone diagram framework. A questionnaire containing 34 identified factors was distributed to the rest of the
professionals involved in telecommunication projects including network operators, equipment vendors, contractors,
telecommunication infrastructure support companies. The results gave a response rate of 78%. Findings showed that
eight highest ranked factors were identified with the highest frequency of occurrence and impact on the schedule.
Most of the interviewed experts pointed to poor planning as the main cause of project schedule overrun, which affects
subsequent project phases. Based on the fishbone framework, it was also found that process-related factors were the
major contributors to project delays. These results highlight the need to adopt the Project Talent Triangle to enhance
project time performance for telecommunication projects that improves time management processes and is considered
and the emerging trend.

Keywords
Root Cause Analysis, Schedule Overrun, Telecommunication Projects, Time Management, Zambia

1. Introduction
Time is one of the major considerations throughout a project management life cycle and can be regarded as one of the
most important parameters of a project and a driving force to project success. Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) projects, like other infrastructure projects, experience frequent time overruns or schedule slippages.
With the telecommunication industry having reached maturity stage in its cycle, bringing better products to markets
faster has become more critical not only for revenue but competitive advantage. The ICT industry is one of the fastest
evolving sectors influenced by constant technological changes, diverse and constantly changing customer

© IEOM Society International 1359

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

requirements and shorter product life cycles. Consequently, mobile network operators are placing more emphasis on
efficiency throughout the life cycle of the projects.

Despite abundance of knowledge and tools to manage projects effectively, time overrun remains a common phenomenon
in infrastructure development projects globally (Tendedziso, et al., 2019; Le-Hoai et al, 2013). Akinsiku and Akinsulire
(2012) also observed that project delay is a persistent phenomenon in construction project delivery, and it is branded as the
most common, costly and risky problem encountered in infrastructure development projects with a debilitating effect on
the parties to the contract. The findings of the study carried out by Azis et al. (2012) revealed that 92% of construction
projects were overrun and only 8% of projects achieved completion within contract duration. In the study carried out by
Budzier and Flyvbjerg (2011) in the UK, large ICT projects were found to be twenty times more likely to ‘run out of
control’ than other large infrastructure projects and one in six projects reported an average cost overrun of 200% and a
time overrun of almost 70%. These studies highlight the extent of the time overrun problem in projects across industries
and globally.

Most of available literature concentrate either on the construction industry or in developed countries. There has been little
documentation on ICT industry in Zambia, despite the time overrun still being experienced and acknowledged by
professionals in telecommunication industry in Zambia. The rationale of this research was therefore to provide informative
evidence-based results on the causes of time overrun, so as to assist project managers and policy makers identify root
causes of time overruns in the implementation of telecommunication projects in Zambia. The study sought to ascertain the
key factors adversely impacting delays in the telecommunication industry, and to establish the relationship by breaking the
identified factors into three levels using the fishbone diagram. The study aims to contribute to literature on time overrun
by analyzing the delay causal factors in telecommunication projects in Zambia.

The research aim of the study was to investigate factors causing schedule overrun in mobile telecommunication projects
in Zambia. To achieve this aim, the following objectives were devised: establish factors that lead to schedule slippage in
mobile telecommunication projects; categorise delay factors in mobile telecommunication projects; and evaluate the
impact of the delay factors and rank them according to their importance as perceived by the stakeholders.

Due to inadequate available documentation, a holistic approach was adopted using a descriptive multi-mode research
methodology after identifying the existing gap on the root cause of project time overrun. By using both qualitative and
quantitative methods, a better and deeper understanding of the root causes of delays was obtained. Primary data collection
was done using interviews as the tool for qualitative data collection, while a questionnaire survey was used for quantitative
data. Purposive and stratified sampling were used for qualitative and quantitative methods respectively, targeting
professionals from ICT players that are involved in projects. The data was analysed using Microsoft Excel and Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).

2. Literature Review
2.1 Project Time Management Processes
Time performance is one of the most important indicators of project success. A successful project is one which has
accomplished its technical performance, maintained its schedule, and remained within budgetary costs (Olawale &
Sun, 2010, Mambwe et al., 2020). To ensure efficient management of time, the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (PMBOK) Guide prescribes processes that govern the planning and control of time during the project life
cycle (Project Management Institute (PMI), 2008). There are seven consecutive processes in the Project Time
Management Knowledge Area, six of which belong to Planning Process Group and include Plan Schedule
Management, Define Activities, Sequence Activities, Estimate Activity Resources, Estimate Activity Durations,
Develop Schedule, while Control Schedule belongs to the Monitoring and Controlling Process Group.

2.2 Project Schedule Overrun

Schedule overrun or slippage refers to situations where the actual project duration exceeds the originally planned and
agreed completion period. Azis et al. (2012) defined time overrun as late completion of works as compared to the
planned schedule or contract schedule. Various studies have been conducted to identify the causes of delays in projects.
Financial difficulties rank among the leading causes of project delays (Remon, 2013; Akinsiku & Akinsulire, 2012;
El-Rasas & Marzouk, 2014; Memon, 2014; Antwi & Danso, 2012; Acai et. al, 2014; and Kaliba et. al, 2009). Remon

© IEOM Society International 1360

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

(2013), in his study to rank delay factors in construction projects in Egypt mentioned cites delay in progress payments,
as the leading cause of the delays. Akinsiku and Akinsulire (2012), in their research in Nigeria, concluded that in
addition to cash flow difficulties experienced by contractors and public agencies, failure by clients to pay for
completed works contribute to delays in proceeding with the remainders of the project. Frequent specification/scope
changes have been highlighted to equally affect the project schedules (Mambwe et al., 2020; Akinsiku & Akinsulire,
2012; Marzouk & El-Rasas, 2014; Memon, 2014; Danso & Antwi, 2012; Acai [Link], 2014; Kaliba et. al, 2009). Design
errors and scope modifications or changes during execution have equally had adverse impact on schedule performance.
Other delay factors include slow decision making when changes are required. Marzouk and El-Rasas (2014) cited late
revision and approval of design documents by owners, while Acai et al (2014) pointed that delays in assessing changes
in the scope of work by the consultant are contributing factors to delay. Other delay factors include, lack of skilled
manpower across all phases on the project (Acai et al, 2014; and KPMG India, 2013). The study carried out by KPMG
India in conjunction with PMI India (2013) concluded that majority of projects are delayed by factors which can be
controlled at the project level through proper planning and project management.

Some researchers have attempted to identify underlying reasons for delays by adopting the root cause analysis (RCA)
method, a structured team process that assists in identifying underlying causes of an adverse event. The National
Centre for Patient Safety (2011) defines root cause analysis as a process for identifying the basic or contributing causal
factors that underlie variations in performance associated with adverse events. Flyybjerg (2011) stated that “the root
cause of underperformance is the fact that project planners tend to systematically underestimate or even ignore risks
of complexity and scope changes, during project development and decision-making”. He concluded that at the most
basic level, the underlying causes of project underperformance may be grouped into three categories: (1) bad luck or
error; (2) optimism bias by project managers (psychological); and (3) strategic misrepresentation (political) by project
owners or clients. Mambwe et al. (2020) in their study on construction delays, reclassified causes as structural,
institutional and cultural. They stated that “through the classification of structural, institutional and cultural delay, the
construction delay can be treated systematically through organisation structural system, government institutional
procedures and construction players' cultural behaviour”. This was also affirmed by Aminah and Chai (2013).

Project Time Performance

With the evolved business models in today’s competitive global economy, network operators need to invest in key
skill sets that look beyond technical skills and adopt competencies that support and sustain long-range strategic
objectives. This also improves the business linkages within the organisation and with organisations. To address the
identified factors, the PMI Talent Triangle (PMI, 2017) has been recommended to be adopted by the companies to
enhance project time performance.

Figure 1. Project Talent Triangle Source: PMI (2017)

Figure 1 shows the talent triangle in which leadership, technical project management and strategic and business
management are vital management processes that can be adopted in light of improving performance when it comes to
project time. By embedding the talent triangle principles into the organisational culture, employees develop broader
perspective of the business resulting in goal congruence across the organisation.

© IEOM Society International 1361

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

3. Research Methodology
A multi-mode descriptive research approach was adopted by using both qualitative and quantitative in order to gain
multiple perspectives through triangulation. A multi-mode approach was adopted as “it provides a trade-off between
breadth and depth, and between generalizability and targeting to specific (sometimes very limited) populations and
can increase both the validity and the reliability of the data” (National Science Foundation, 2010). The main benefit
of using triangulation as described by many researchers is the validation of qualitative results by quantitative studies
(Hussein, 2009). For completeness purposes, Hussein (2009) further states that researchers use triangulation to
increase their in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under investigation by combing methods and theories. A
survey design approach of gathering primary research evidence was chosen to ensure independent and unbiased
results. Data from different sources were critically analysed and correlated to the research problem, and then used to
draw up conclusions and recommendations.

The obtained results from interviews were used as input into the fishbone diagram framework, by identifying the
causal factors and the underlying reason for the delay. Using this framework, the delay factors were categorized into
five broad classes:

i. Process – how work is performed, policies, procedures, rules or work instructions;

ii. People – Role of people involved and their impact on the project deployment cycle;
iii. Management – The co-ordination, organizing and controlling functions during the project life cycle and how
they affect the schedule;
iv. Equipment – Consideration of all equipment, raw materials and final products that could have a role in non-
conformity to project timelines; and
v. Environment – Factors affecting the project boundary, and their impact of the project schedule.

3.1 Data Collection

Interviews with project managers and subject matter experts were done to obtain expert judgement and experiences on
the causes of project delays. Interviews with experts were carried out first due to insufficient information on
telecommunication projects delays in Zambia. The interview results also enhanced the quality and content of the
questionnaire survey. From the literature and interviews, secondary and tertiary causes were identified and categorized
as shown in Table 1. A three-tier approach was adopted in which the specific activities leading to delays were mapped
to the contributory factors through follow up questions during interviews. These were finally mapped to the five
generic root causes of delays according to the fishbone diagram framework in Figure 2. The fishbone diagram
framework, a structured brainstorming format focusing on the underlying causes rather than the effect of problem,
was used because it is a better tool for management decision-making as it streamlines the problem factors into
identifiable control areas.

© IEOM Society International 1362

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

Figure 2. Fishbone Diagram – Identified delay causes

The thirty-four identified delay factors were mapped and categorised into five dimensions of root causes, as shown in
Table 1.

Table 1: Mapping of Identified Delay Factors

# Dimension Construct Variable

(Root Cause) (Contributory) (Specific Activity)
1. Scope Management a) Unclear project scope and deliverables at initiation
2. b) Scope/Specification changes during implementation
3. Organisation a) Organisational chart and responsibility matrix
4. b) Centralized decision making
5. Stakeholder Management a) Poor stakeholder identification and engagement
Management
6. b) Poor communication among team
7. c) Stakeholder expectation management
8. Monitoring and Control a) Poor project tracking to check progress
9. b) Lack of performance monitoring/controlling tools
10. c) Lack of scheduling tools and PM software
11. Schedule Development a) Poor activity identification and sequencing
12. b) Under-estimation of activity duration
13. c) Over optimistic estimates
14. Process Design a) Lack of project surveys or feasibility studies
15. b) Lack of or incomplete design document
16. Project Planning a) Poor resource planning
17. b) Poor risk management plan
18. c) Lack of e2e integration plan
19. a) Competence of project team

© IEOM Society International 1363

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

20. b) Lack of dedicated project team

21. People Project Team c) Cultural and language challenges in project team
22. d) Information sharing challenges among vendors
23. Integration Challenges a) Multi-vendor equipment compatibility challenges
24. b) Access to network/site during integration
25. c) Rigid processes and procedures
26. Equipment a) Procurement approval process
27. Procurement b) Late delivery of project materials by suppliers
28. c) Customs clearing processes
29. Functionality UAT a) Acceptance failure - failure to meet requirements
30. b) Delay in acceptances testing and sign off
31. Weather a) Adverse weather conditions
32. Regulatory a) Statutory approvals and permits
Environment
33. Ready for Integration (RFI) a) Space acquisition and preparation
34. b) Support infrastructure availability e.g. power

Further, a questionnaire was developed based on the above thirty-four factors. For each factor, respondents were asked
to rate the frequency of occurrence and the impact on the schedule, on a Likert scale of 1 to 5. Table 2 shows the
ratings. A combination of an online (using google forms) and self-administered questionnaire methods was adopted.

Table 2: Frequency - Severity Matrix

Frequency Weighting Severity Weighting

Scale Frequency Weight Severity Weight
1. Never 1 None 1
2. Rarely 2 Low 2
3. Sometimes 3 Moderate 3
4. Frequently 4 High 4
5. Always 5 Very High 5

3.2 Sampling Method

Purposive sampling was used for interviews, as respondents were selected to conform to this criterion – experience,
position of influence or both. The respondents were obtained from the mobile network operators, equipment vendors,
contractors, telecommunication infrastructure companies, and the ICT regulatory body (ZICTA). Sixteen
professionals with the desired qualities were interviewed. Stratified sampling was used to obtain the quantitative data
from the rest of the professionals from the same organisations. Professionals from design, operations and project
deployment were sampled. Equation 1 was used to approximate the sample size for questionnaires, as it was not
possible to determine the number of telecommunication engineers in Zambia. At confidence level 90%, margin of
error of ±10% and standard deviation of 0.5, sample size of 68 professionals was computed. Equation 1 indicates the
Sample size by Scott (2013):
𝒏𝒏=(𝒁𝒁𝒁𝒁/𝑬𝑬)𝟐𝟐 Equation 1
Where: n is the sample size; Z is the z-score i.e. 1.645; σ is the standard deviation; and E is the margin of error. Source:
Scott (2013)

3.3 Data Processing and Analysis

Qualitative data collected using interviews was organised and mapped according to the identified cause, as shown in
Table 1. Data collected from the survey was analysed using descriptive statistical techniques by using Statistical

© IEOM Society International 1364

𝟐𝟐
Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

Package for Social Science (SPSS) and MS Excel. To sort and rank the quantitative data, the factor importance index
(FII) technique, as used by Megha and Rajiv (2013), was adopted as it combines frequency and impact of the causative
factors on the project schedule. The twenty-five possible outcomes of the combinations are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Factor Importance Index

Factor Importance Index Frequency

0.2 (1) 0.4 (2) 0.6 (3) 0.8 (4) 1 (5)
0.2 (1) 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.2
0.4 (2) 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 0.4
Severity

0.6 (3) 0.12 0.24 0.36 0.48 0.6

0.8 (4) 0.16 0.32 0.48 0.64 0.8
1 (5) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

4. Results
4.1 Interview Results
Of the sixteen interviewed respondents, six were from the mobile network operators (MNO), four from equipment
vendors, three from infrastructure support companies, two from contractors and one from the regulatory authority.
In terms of roles, there were six (37.5%) from project deployment, six (37.5%) from operations and four (25%) from
design. In terms of experience eighty-one (81%) had over eight years of experience in the telecommunication sector
and were in middle to top management.

The identified delay factors were ranked based on the number of times the factor was mentioned, without attaching
any weighting, as shown in Figure 3. From the interview results, the top four identified causes of schedule slippages
in telecommunication projects in Zambia were:

• Procurement – Long approval processes, late delivery of equipment by vendors and customs clearing
processes;
• Project planning – Poor resource planning, lack of risk management plan and a lack of end-to-end project
integration plan;
• Organisation – Lack of proper organisation chart with clear escalation and responsibility matrices, as well as
centralized decision-making due to the managed services operational model used by these telecommunication
companies; and
• Stakeholder management – Poor identification and involvement of stakeholder at an early stage of the project,
poor communication among project teams and poor stakeholder expectation management by the project
manager, especially top management.

© IEOM Society International 1365

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

Figure 3. Ranking of schedule overrun causal factors – Interviews

4.2 Questionnaire Results

The average frequency (FI) and severity (SI) scores for the thirty-four causal factors were used to compute the factor
importance indices (FII).

Ranking causes of delay

The results on causes of delay indicated that there are eight highest ranked factors, with relative factor importance
index of 64%. These have both high frequency of occurrence and impact on the schedule, and they are: (1) Unclear
project scope and deliverables at initiation; (2) Poor stakeholder identification and involvement; (3) Under-estimation
of activity duration; (4) Over-optimistic estimates; (5) Lack of project surveys or feasibility studies; (6) Lack of
dedicated project teams; (7) Procurement approval process; and (8) Late delivery of project materials by suppliers.

The ranking of secondary delay factors is as shown in Figure 4. The highest ranked secondary factor is schedule
development process, followed by scope management, design and procurement.

Figure 4. Ranking of delay factors (Secondary)

Primary (root) causes were ranked and the results are as shown in Figure 5 and results showed that “Process” was
highest ranked, followed by “Management”, “People”, “Equipment” while “Environment” was ranked lowest.

© IEOM Society International 1366

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

Figure 5. Ranking of delay factors

The tertiary causes were analysed with respect to PMBOK processes in order to identify the cause of failure and
possible remedy. Table 4 shows the mapping of the delay factors to the process groups, knowledge areas and the
identified process failures. Even though there is strong linkage among the factors, it can be seen from the results that
planning accounts for five out of the eight (62.5%) top ranked factors, while initiation, execution and monitoring and
control account one each (12.5%).

Table 4. Mapping delay factors to process groups

# Delay Factor Identified Failed Process Knowledge Area Process Group

1. Unclear project scope and Plan Scope Management Project Scope Management Planning
deliverables at initiation
2. Poor stakeholder identification Identify Stakeholders Project Stakeholder Management Initiation
and involvement
3. Under-estimation of activity Estimate Activity Project Time Management Planning
duration at planning stage Duration

4. Over optimistic estimates Estimate Activity Project Time Management Planning

Duration
5. Lack of project surveys or Collect Requirements Project Scope Management Planning
feasibility studies
6. Lack of dedicated project team Acquire Project Team Project Human Resource Execution
Management
7. Procurement approval process Plan Procurement Project Procurement Planning
Management Management
8. Late delivery of project Control Procurement Project Procurement Monitoring and
materials by suppliers Management Control

5. Discussion
The study aims to contribute to literature on time overrun by analyzing the delay causal factors in telecommunication
projects in Zambia. However, due to inadequate availability of documentation, a holistic approach was adopted using
a descriptive multi-mode research methodology after identifying the existing gaps on the root cause of project time
overrun. From the results, management related delay factors can be directly attributed to the failure by the project
manager to effectively superintend over the project. Poor stakeholder identification and involvement and unclear
project scope were the highest ranked management related delay causes. The interviewees pointed to a poor

© IEOM Society International 1367

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

stakeholder engagement, especially at an early stage as the cause for poorly developed schedules. According the
PMBOK Guide (PMI, 2008), stakeholder identification is the first step of the stakeholder management knowledge
area done during project initiation phase. The effect of stakeholder involvement cannot be over-emphasised. Involving
the customers and other stakeholders during initiation improves the probability of shared ownership, deliverable
acceptance, and, customers and other stakeholder satisfaction (PMI, 2008). There should also be incentives for
procurements and works done ahead of schedule, as well as penalties for delays at any project phase.

For process related delays, the results show that a flawed schedule development process and poor information
gathering before timelines are decided are the main contributors. Under-estimation of activity duration and over-
optimistic estimates both highlight the tendency by project managers and sponsors to overestimate benefits and
underestimate negatives. This was pointed out by Flyvbjerg (2011) in his study of root causes of overruns in major
projects. Under-estimation of activity duration is a consequence of what he termed “optimism bias”, a tendency by
managers to make decisions based on “delusional optimism rather than on a rational weighting of gains, losses, and
probabilities”. Over-optimistic estimates are “principal-agent problems”, where top management push for project
completion as quickly as possible (Flyvbjerg, 2011). However, the uncontrolled pressure risks the quality of the work,
resulting in reworks and failure at closeout (acceptance) stage.

The standout contributor is the lack of dedicated project teams for most of the telecom projects. Aminah and Chai
(2013), categorised these as structural causative factors where teams can either be appended, stand-alone or partnership
structure. Operations teams are involved in project activities, resulting in, the project manager has no complete control
over the team, and relies on the functional managers for availability of the resources; it results in conflicting/competing
priorities between operational and project activities. Operations teams tend to rank operational activities higher, as
this is their main key performance measure; and the added workload over-stretches the operational teams, resulting in
inefficiency of both operational and project activities.

Concerning equipment related factors, late delivery of project materials and a long procurement approval process were
cited as the main contributors under equipment related delays. This points to the failure in the “Conduct Procurement”
and “Control Procurement” during the project execution and monitoring and control respectively, as guided by
PMBOK® Guide (PMI, 2008). Interview results showed that there is usually a disconnect between the project team
and the supply chain management (procurement) team, and the two may not attach the same priority to the project.
Late delivery of materials was attributed to logistical challenges in shipment of materials, warehousing processes and
inefficiencies in the equipment suppliers.

Environment related delay factors

With regards to environmental related delay factors, the results obtained show that environment related factors affect
the project schedule the least. This is highlighted in Table 4 where the highest ranked factors are support infrastructure
availability and space acquisition and preparation, with score of nine. The low score of environmental factors shows
the differences between construction and telecommunication projects, as highlighted by Sherif (2006) and Taylor
(2004).

6. Conclusion and Recommendation

Delays are inevitable; however, they can be avoided or minimized when their causes are effectively identified and
analysed. This research has identified and, based on the quantified factor importance indices, determined the influence
ranks of thirty-four (34) factors causing delays in telecommunication projects in Zambia. The stakeholder perception,
through the questionnaire survey, revealed the top eight ranked factors as: (1) Unclear project scope and deliverables
at initiation; (2) Poor stakeholder identification and involvement; (3) Under-estimation of activity duration; (4) Over-
optimistic estimates; (5) Lack of project surveys or feasibility studies; (6) Lack of dedicated project teams; (7)
Procurement approval process; and (8) Late delivery of project materials by suppliers. From the five categories of
Management, Process, People, Equipment and Environment, it was concluded that process related factors are
responsible for most of the delays experienced in Zambia. From the results, it was identified that either the project
managers (PM) do not have the required experience or power to control the activities of the project.

© IEOM Society International 1368

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

In order to address the project schedule slippages experienced in the telecommunication industry in Zambia, the study
recommends that there is need to improve project planning by adopting the bottom-up approach through brainstorming
sessions and use of knowledge management practices. Most of the telecommunication projects are similar in nature
and learnings from previous projects can be used as valuable input into the planning process. The study also
recommends that project activity coordination be improved for competence and experience of project managers, to
attain success. The project managers should have enough control to ensure over and under-estimates do not occur
during schedule development. Finally, the study implores the adoption of modern approaches such as the Talent
Triangle to enhance project time performance.

References
Acai, J., Muhwezi, L., & Otim, G. (2014). An Assessment of the Factors Causing Delays on Building
Construction Projects in Uganda. International Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 13-
23.
Akinsiku, E. O., & Akinsulire, A. (2012). Stakeholders' Perception of the Causes and Effects of Cinstruction Delays
on Project Delivery. KICEM Journal of Construction Engineering and Project Management, 25-30.
Aminah, Y. M., & Chai, C. S. (2013). Reclassifying Housing Delivery Delay Classification. International Journal
of Business and Management, 107-117.
Antwi, J. K., & Danso, H. (2012). Evaluation of the Factors Influencing Time and Cost Overruns in Telecom Tower
Construction in Ghana. Civil and Environmental Research, 15-24.
Azis, A. A., Memon, H. A., & Rahman, I. A. (2012). Time and Cost Perfomance in Costruction Projects in Southern
and Cenrtal Regions of Penisular Malaysia. International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences, 45-52.
El-Rasas, T. I., & Marzouk, M. M. (2014). Analyzing delay causes in Egyptian construction projects. Journal of
Advanced Research, 49-55.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Over budget, Over Time, Over and Over Again - Managing Major Projects. In P. W. Morris,
J. K. Pinto, & J. Soderund, The Oxford Handbook of Project Management (pp. 321-344). New York, United
States: Oxford University Press Inc.
Kaliba, C., Muya, M., & Mumba, K. (2009). Cost Escalation and Schedule Delays in Road Construction Projects in
Zambia. International Journal of Project Management, 522-531.
Le-Hoai, L., Lee, Y. D., & Nguyen, T. A. (2013). Estimating time performance for building construction projects
in Vietnam. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 1-8.
Mambwe, M., Mwanaumo, E. M., Phiri, F. & Chabota, K., 2020. Construction subsubcontracting policy framework
for developing local contractors capacities in Zambia. Journal of Construction Business and Management,
4(1), pp. 60-70.
Memon, A. H. (2014). Contractor Perspective on Time Overrun Factors in Malaysian Construction Projects.
International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 1184–1192.
Olawale, Y. A., & Sun, M. (2010). Cost and time control of construction projects: Inhibiting factors and mitigating
measures in practice. Construction Management and Economics, 509 – 526.
Project Management Institute. (2008). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)
(Fourth ed.). Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute, Inc.
Remon, A. F. (2013). Ranking of delay factors in construction projects after Egyptian revolution. Alexandria
Engineering Journal, 387–406.
Tendedziso, L. et al., 2019. Determinants of the Petroleum Fuel Supply Chain Performance in Zimbabwe: A Case
of the National Oil Infrastructure Company. In: C. Aigbavboa & W. D. Thwala, eds. Positioning
construction industry in the fourth industrial revolution. Johannesburg: 11th Construction Industry
Development Board (CIBD) Postgraduate Conference, 28-20 July 2019.

Biographies
Erastus Mishengu Mwanaumo completed his Post-Doctoral Fellowship and a PhD in Engineering from university
of Johannesburg in South Africa. He is Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Building in UK, a Professional Registered
Construction Project Management, a Registered Engineer and a Professional Member of Engineering Institute of
Zambia. He has Supervised over 50 Master of Engineering and Science Students to completion and 6 PhD candidates
that have completed. He a Managing Director of the Zambia Flying Labs - Zambian Drones and robotics knowledge
hub at University of Zambia and consults for the World Bank in research, European union, African Development Bank
and DFID of UK. He serves on the three Journal Editorial Boards and is a reviewer of the CRC Press/Taylor and
Francis Book publishers, Springer Nature, De gruyter, and seven other Scientific Journals. International Conferences

© IEOM Society International 1369

Proceedings of the 2nd African International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Harare, Zimbabwe, December 7-10, 2020

Peer Review panels include the Built Environment Conference, International Conference on Infrastructure
Development in Africa (ICIDA), South Africa Quantity Surveyor Research Conference, Construction Industry
Development Board (CIDB) Post Graduate Research Conference, Association of Schools of Construction in Southern
African - Built Environment Conference, West Africa Built Environment Research Conference (WABER) and one of
the founders of the International Conference on Infrastructure Development and Investment Strategies for Africa
(dubbed DII- Conference - [Link]).

Mwewa Mambwe is a Doctoral Candidate in Construction Management at the University of Johannesburg; involved
in academic research, review and examination; and is employed with the energy utility company ZESCO Limited in
March 2004 working in Property Department, SHEQ Department, Internal SHEQ Auditor, and SHEQ Trainer till
2019. She was one of the first employees to be involved in the development and implementation of the SHEQ
management system, policies and procedures, guidelines, technical specifications with user units. In her SHEQ training
and awareness, she was involved in making sure that employees including management, are aware about procedures
and process that relate to their work. As Property officer she has been fully involved in the management of the entire
property portfolio of the ZESCO Limited from lease management, land acquisition, conveyancing, valuation, auctions,
taxation, property/legal compliance and maintenance planning, stakeholder management, contract management,
negotiation of lease/purchase/sale properties, and market and property development research. She also worked as an
Wayleave Officer in Zesco and Assistant Land Surveyor at the Ndola City Council.

Epheso Sibalwa, MEng Candidate, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering,
University of Zambia and is employed at Nokia Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.

© IEOM Society International 1370