GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021

ISSN 2320-9186 1453

GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021, Online: ISSN 2320-9186

www.globalscientificjournal.com

Title: Factors Contributing to Project schedule delay in Rwanda. Case of

horizon construction ltd’.
Author: BASOMINGERA James Supervised by Dr KWENA Ronald

ABSTRACT

Delays in the construction industry are a universal phenomenon and the construction
industry in Rwanda has no exception. This research discusses the factors contributing to
project schedule delay in Rwanda, the case of Horizon Construction Ltd, through the
identification of gaps between theory and practice associated with delays in the completion
of construction projects. This research aimed at examining the role of contractor, contract,
project owner, and consultant factors in contributing to project schedule delay in Rwanda.
This research's objectives were achieved by viewing many of the research and references
for previous studies, which included study delay factors in many countries, and through set
up of questionnaires to some project parties to identify the causes of the project delay. The
population was made of contractors, consultants, and contracting firms involved in the
projects were obtained from Horizon Construction Ltd. They were selected by random
sampling and convenience sampling techniques. The primary data was obtained using
questionnaires while the secondary data was gathered from the literature and review of
project documents like Project handover reports and Project closure reports. Quantitative
data were analyzed using computer software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)
version 23.0 to enable mathematical computations. From the regression analysis, the most
predator the research was contractor factor which indicated that its change contributed to
the delay of the project at 81.6%, and the project owners’ factors contributes 71.9% to
delay the project. The consultants contribute at 67.2% and the contract also contributes at
56.2% to the delay of the project. The study recommends to the Project owner to have a
thorough study on the adequate budget in line with the requirements and have a clear
concept of what is needed on the project to avoid many changes along with the
implementations which lead to change in scope and affects time and cost hence leading the
project to delay. (Following the principle of triple constraints). Also recommends the
project contractor to pay attention while contracting the projects through applying all
project inputs, tools, techniques, and outputs (ITTOs) in all phases of the project (Initiation,
Planning, Execution, Monitoring and Evaluation and close up). The study revealed that the
delay contributed by a contractor was caused by inadequate planning, monitoring, and
evaluation whereby the detected defects and errors along the project would have been
identified before the kickoff of the project. And this leads to a stack of the schedule to first
address the issue hence leading to the delay of the project.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1454

Introduction

Project delays are considered as time lag in completion of activities from its specified time
as per contract or can be defined as late completion or late start of activities to the baseline
schedule, directly affecting specified cost (Pmalliance, 2018). Construction delay is a
global phenomenon faced by many construction industries for this reason the magnitude of
risk and unpredictability is very high in the building industries compared to other industries
(Gardezi et al., 2018).

According to (Abedi et al., 2017), eight hundred and forty-five of Kick starter top projects
in the USA missed their targeted delivery dates. Jonathan and Arditi (2018), studied 50
most funded projects around the USA and found that out of the studied projects; only 8 out
of the 50 met their set deadlines. Successful execution of projects and keeping them on
time and within budget depends on effective planning and scheduling right from the
beginning.

Chan & Kumaraswamy (2018), studied projects delays in Hong Kong. They observed that
for projects to be deemed as having been successfully delivered, they should be on time,
within budget, and expected quality, otherwise lack of any of these is deemed a project
delay. An investigation by Odeyinka &Yusif (2010) shows that seven out of ten projects
surveyed suffered delays. There are many factors that contributed to the causes of delays
in construction projects. These range from factors inherent in the technology and its
management, to those resulting from the physical, social, and financial environment.
Delays can give rise to disruption of work and loss of productivity, late completion of the
project, increased time-related costs and third-party claims and abandonment, or
termination of the contract. Delays are costly and often result in disputes and claims.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1455

According to Rwanda Development Board (RDB), construction spending in 2015 was

$546 million, growing at 10 percent, while real estate spending was $471 million, growing
at 7 percent. The construction industry contributes more than seven percent to the national
GDP. Private and public works were growing at 9.4 percent starting 2014 (Moses Gahigi,
2017). Rwanda’s construction sector has been pegged as one of the four vibrant sectors
that would propel the country to rebuild itself 22 years after the genocide and spur
economic development targets by 2020. While the construction industry is one of the
fastest-growing sub-sectors of the economy, accounting for almost 30% of the total
turnover of the industrial sector, a big part of the population cannot afford to buy, build or
even rent a decent house. Real gross domestic product (GDP) growth averages 8.2%
annually, which translates into a GDP per capita growth of 5.1% per year. At the heart of
this growth was the industrial sector, which grew at an average of 9.8% per year during the
First Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS 1), driven by the
rapid expansion of construction whose growth rate averaged 15% annually. In the same
period, the industrial sector produced 15.4% of national output, (Daniel Sabiiti, 2017).

1.2. Statement of the problem

Delays to complete projects under construction on schedule had become habitual and
persistent in the industry which made many construction firms in Rwanda inefficient. Not
only did it pose a bad reputation of the construction companies, in most cases it imposed
very high financial costs and heavy losses. Delays further affected all the stakeholders in
the construction project leading to various losses ranging from financial, credibility, and
poor performance arising from not achieving their financial performance targets. Because
of the unexpected delay to complete construction projects on time, it compelled one to
incur costs which would have been otherwise avoided (Pmalliance, 2018).

Emmanuel (2017) marked that, Permanent secretary Isabelle Kalihangabo was

speaking at a workshop between the ministry and legal officers from about 150 public
institutions, the meeting was convened to discuss the e-Procurement System in public
institutions.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1456

The Auditor-General’s report for 2015/16. “Delayed and abandoned projects always come
with a cost as it involves continuing to pay the entrepreneur and incurring extra payments
caused by the rise in prices,” Kalihangabo said. Between 2013/14 and 2015/16 financial
years, 98 contracts, worth Rwf 95.67 billion, were either abandoned or significantly
delayed, according to the AG’s report. Some 24 of those contracts, worth Rwf13.39 billion,
were abandoned and contractors disappeared after receiving payments of Rwf5.62 billion.
The abandoned contracts were in the areas of infrastructure, including water, energy and
roads, health, and agriculture. According to the 2012/2013 Rwanda national budget, 46%
of construction projects were donor-funded, and worse again where the effort to increase
taxpayers’ contribution to the budget has resulted in reducing the aid from 85% in 2000.
Absent or inadequate risk assessment and management are, in themselves, an important
source of risk for projects. Because, until now, no reliable measure has been available for
estimating risk in urban construction projects, effective risk assessment, and management
have been impossible, (Auditor general report, 2016). Kalihangabo said delayed work
contracts have been rising from nine in 2014 to 16 in 2015 and soared to 73 in 2016, which
she said is a problem as there are wasted funds, (Emmanuel Ntirenganya, 2017).

Specific objectives of the study

The specific objectives of this study are:
1. To examine the Contribution of contractor factors on the project schedule delay of
Horizon construction Ltd;
2. To examine the Contribution of consultant factors on the project schedule delay of
Horizon Company Ltd;
3. To examine the Contribution of project owner factors on the project schedule delay of
Horizon Company Ltd;
4. To examine the Contribution of contract factors on the project schedule delay of Horizon
Company Ltd.

1.5. Research hypothesis

The research tested the following hypothesis:

H01: Contractors factors has no significant effect on Projects delay in construction

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1457

H02: Consultant factors has no a significant effect on Projects delay in construction

H03: Project owner factors has no significant effect on Projects delay in construction

H04: Contract factors has no significant effect on Projects delay in construction

Literature review
Conceptual literature
Conceptual literature are general or abstract ideas that express the factors contributing to
project schedule delay phenomena to be studied. They are the subjects of inquiry and
analysis that are of interest to users.

Factors Contributing to the Construction Project Schedule Delay

Health and safety authority (2020) said that, construction work is a high-risk activity, it
must be managed from procurement, through the design process to the end of the
construction stage (completion phase). Everyone involved in a construction project, each
parties are important and must appreciate their role, from client, project supervisor,
designer, contractor and employees. Takem, Akintoye (2002) and Majid (2016) have
revealed that, a construction project as a successful one when some characteristics are
contained within it such as: good management, completed on time, within budget, conform
to the specifications required, satisfy all parties, and achieve the profitability for the
contractor with absence of financial claims and litigation.

The process of construction can be divided into three distinct and significant phases; the
project conception phase, project design phase and the project construction phase.
As stated by Chan & Kumaraswamy in 2017 a vast majority of project delay occur during
the construction phase where many unforeseen circumstances and factors occur.
Completing a construction projects within the estimated time and cost is an indicator of
efficiency, but the process of construction is subjected to many unpredictable and
changing factors which comes from different sources. These sources include
performance of parties, resource availability, environmental conditions, and involvement

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1458

of other parties and contractual relations, thus the completion of the project within the
estimated time is rare (Asaf, 2016).

Contractors’ related factors.

Enshassi et al., (2019: 126-151), stated that cash flow issues at the time of construction and
poor site administration were the first and second positioning in this group. This shows that
the cash flow issue is more discriminating than different variables in the group of
contractor obligations.

In Rwanda, between 2013/14 and 2015/16 financial years, 98 contracts, worth Rwf 95.67
billion, were either abandoned or significantly delayed, according to the OAG’s report.
Some 24 of those contracts, worth Rwf13.39 billion, were abandoned and contractors
disappeared after receiving payments of Rwf5.62 billion. The abandoned contracts were in
the areas of infrastructure, including water, energy and roads, health, and agriculture.
Kalihangabo said delayed work contracts have been rising from nine in 2014 to 16 in 2015
and soared to 73 in 2016, which she said is a problem as there are wasted funds, (Auditor
General Report, 2016).

2.3.1.2. Consultants’ related factors.

Enshassi et al., (2019), this is by all accounts sensible as the advisors are not eager to
concede or assume the liability for undertakings delay. Then again, contractors and clients
have comparable perspective with respect to consultant’s obligations regarding the delay.
This can be followed to the way that most projects are managed by consultants. Ahmed et
al. (2013); Gardezi et al. (2014); listed some of the possible factors of consultant delays
which includes lack of consultant site engineer, lack of adequate knowledge on the
part of the consultant, inexperience on the part of the consultant site staff, delayed in
making decisions, insufficient documents.

2.3.1.3. Owner Related Factors

There are several reasons for cost overruns and schedule delays caused by the client. The
lack of budget planning by clients results in cost overruns and schedule delays in
construction projects (Amoatey et al., 2015; Choudhry, Aslam, Hinze, & Arain, 2014;
Harding, 2012). A late payment to contractors is another factor contributing to schedule

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1459

delays because the subsequent effect is the contractor inability to pay subcontractors and
suppliers on time (Alinaitwe et al., 2013; Amoatey et al., 2015; Shehu et al., 2014). Most
of the financial difficulties that contractors face in the construction business in Qatar are
the result of a late payment made by the client because of the lengthy process while
releasing the claimed fund (Jarkas & Younes, 2014).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.2. Research design

Researcher adopted a descriptive research design, the researcher conducted descriptive
research for the purpose of using specific methods like observational method, case study
method, and survey method. Since the data collected is qualitative and quantitative, it gives
a holistic understanding of a research topic.

3.3. Population of the research

The study population was stakeholders in the construction industry in Rwanda. The study
was carried out in Kigali due to time and financial constraints as well as easy availability
of respondents. The respondents include the project owners, consulting firms and the
contracting firms. The population of construction projects and contracting firms involved
in the projects was obtained from Horizon Construction Ltd totaling 113 from (2017-April
2021).

3.4. Sampling design

This section of the research presents the population of research, sample size determination
and sampling technique. The sample size was calculated the Slovin’s formula:
𝑵
𝒏 = 𝟏+𝑵(𝒆)𝟐 Whereby, n: is the sample size, N: is the total population, e: is the margin of

error,
Remember that for this case N= 113 members, taking the confidence level of 95% that is
𝑵 𝟏𝟏𝟑
with a permissible error of 5%, e=0.05. Therefore,𝒏 = 𝟏+𝑵(𝒆)𝟐 , 𝒏 = 𝟏+𝟏𝟏𝟑(𝟎.𝟎𝟓)𝟐 =
𝟏𝟏𝟑 𝟏𝟏𝟑 𝟏𝟏𝟑
= =
𝟏+𝟏𝟏𝟑(𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟐𝟓) 𝟏+𝟎.𝟐𝟓𝟐𝟖 𝟏.𝟐𝟓𝟐𝟖
= 88 respondents.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1460

Data collection methods

The primary data used questionnaire and document reviews (Project closure report and
project handover reports and project worksheet gattchart)

Reliability
The Researcher achieved reliability by employing the test-retest reliability as a type of
answers the question, to determine whether the scores would be stable over time.”
Sometime later, the same test was re-administered to the same or highly similar group. The
test was subject in three weeks later with a reliability coefficient of r = 0.70, giving
evidence of consistency. This was developed by Lee Cronbach in 1951 for the uniformity
of a test or scale, and normally expressed as a number between 0 and 1.

The following equation applies. Equation (Cronbach, 1951)

𝑁. 𝐶
∞=
𝑉 + (𝑁 − 1). 𝐶
Where N is equal to the number of items, C is the average inter-item covariance among the
items and V equals the average variance.

Validity
Evaluating the validity of a qualitative study by us of Content Valid Index (CVI) Content
validity was also sought, is a scale developed by computing or ranking the relevant items
in the instrument or questionnaire by checking their clarity, their meaningfulness in line
with all objectives stated dividing by the total number of items (Neville, 2007). Content
Validity is the degree to which an instrument has an appropriate sample of items for the
construct being measured and is an important procedure in scale development. CVI is the
most widely used index in the quantitative evaluation. According to Amin (2005), the CVI
of above 0.6 is an appropriate validity.

The validity was tested using Content Validity Index (CVI).

33
CVI = = 0.89
37

The content validity index of the questionnaire was 0.89 which is greater than 0.60 thus,
the questionnaire was valid to provide information needed by the researcher.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1461

3.8. Data analysis

The Quantitative data was analyzed using computer software Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0 to enable mathematical computations since analysis of data
manually would be tedious and would lead to errors. The analyzed data was presented
using frequencies, percentages, correlation and mean. In reporting the study findings, the
highest percentage and mean was considered.

Regression Analysis
The model used in the study took the form below:
Y= α+β1X1+ β2X2+ β3X3 +ę
Where: Y= Project schedule delay.
α= Constant Term
β= Beta Coefficient –This measures how many standard deviations a dependent variable
will change, per standard deviation increase in the independent variable.

DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRENTATION AND DISCUSSION

Table: Gender of respondents

Gender Frequency Percent

Males 56 63.6
Females 32 36.4
Total 88 100.0

Source: Primary data, April 2021

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1462

Correlation analysis

Table 4.10: Summary of Correlation

Contractor Consultant Project owner Contract

factors factors factors factors
Project delay Pearson 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N 88
Contractor Pearson .663** 1
factors Correlation
Sig. (2- .000
tailed)
N 88 88
Consultant Pearson .358** .207* 1
factors Correlation
Sig. (2- .000 .000
tailed)
N 88 88 88
Project owner Pearson 0.562** - 0.056 .393** 1
factors Correlation
Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000
tailed)

Contract Pearson 0.342** 0.41 0.562 1

factors Correlation
Sig. (2- .000 .000 .000
tailed)
**. Correlation is significant at the
0.01 level (2-tailed).

Key 1- Projects delay

2- Contractor factors 3- Consultant factors 4- Project owner factors, 5- Contract factors.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1463

Results in Table 4.10 revealed that there was a positive and significant relationship
between Contractor factors and projects delay (rho=0.663, p value<0.05). This implies
that a unit change in the contractor factors in construction projects increases projects
delay by 66.3%. Secondly, there was a positive significant relationship between
consultant factors and projects delay (rho =0.358, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit
change in consultant factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 35.8%.

Thirdly, there was a positive and significant relationship between project owner factors and
projects delay (rho =0.562, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit change in project owner
factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 56.2%.

Lastly, there was a positive and significant relationship between contract factors and
projects delay (rho =0.342, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit increases in contract
factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 34.2%.
Regression analysis

In regression the researcher analyzed the model summary, variances and coefficients of
variables.

Table: Model Summary

Std. Change Statistics

Adjuste Error of
dR the R Square F Sig. F
Model R R Square Square Estimate Change Change df1 df2 Change
1 .853a .7276 .623 .16282 .1653 102.031 3 65 .000
a. Predictors: (Constant), contractors factors,
Consultant factors, Project owner factors, contract
factors)
The table 4.11 deals with combination of predictors of contractor’s factors, Consultant
factors, Project owner factors and contract factors to assess the effect of variation in
predictors, multiple regressions were performed. Table 4.11 indicates that 73.4% of the
variation in Projects delay is explained by the variation in the independent variables active
in the interaction. (Or 73.4% of the changes in Projects delay could be attributed to the

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1464

combined effect of the predictor variables or 82.4% of the variance in Projects delay is
explained uniquely or jointly by the predictor variables).
Table: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression .992 4 .248 55.11 .015a
Residual .369 82 .0045
Total 1.360 87
a. Dependent Variable: Projects delay
b. Predictors: (Constant), contractor’s factors, Consultant factors,
Project owner factors and contract factors.
The table: established regression model foretell that the dependent variable is strongly
significant and brings various changes to the independent variable. In that way, the
regression value as indicated in the table above shows that the statistical significance was
tested and brought the results of the regression to be approximately at 0.015a. As a simple
interpretation, this coefficient indicates that there is a positive and very high relationship
to exit between contractor factors and project schedule delay. Therefore, the regression
model remains statistically significant and helped us to predict the behavior for each
variable against another.

Table: Coefficients

Unstandardized Standardized 95% Confidence

Coefficients Coefficients Interval for B
Std. Lower Upper
Model B Error Beta t Sig. Bound Bound
1 (Constant) .562 .863 .292 .774 .262 .601
Contractors factors .816 .255 .212 3.200 .046 .185 .322
Consultant factors .672 .482 .237 1.394 .047 .056 .443
Project owner factors .719 .288 .461 2.496 .012 .023 .076
Contract factors .572 .322 .452 2.708 0.04 .068 .210
a. Dependent Variable: Projects delay
From the data in table 4.13, the established regression equation was:

Y = 0.562 + 0.816X1 + 0.672X 2 + 0.719X3 + 0.572X4

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1465

Table 4.13, revealed that holding contractors’ factors, Consultant factors, Project owner
factors, contract factors to a constant zero, Projects delay would be 0.562. Indeed, this
constant called y-intercept is not realistic but it is a needed parameter in the model.

Also, a unit change in contractors factors, would lead to increase in projects delay by a
factor of 0.816 which is the most predator of the research, a unit change in consultant
factors, lead to increase in projects delay by a factor of 0.672 and a unit change in project
owner factors would lead to increase in projects delay by a factor of 0.719 and a unit change
in contract factors, lead to increase in projects delay by a factor of 0.572.The study also
found that all the p-values were less than 0.05, this indicates that all the variables were
statistically significant in influencing the projects delay.

From the table 4.13, it clear that the most predator is contactor factors which is 0.816. This
indicate how contactor skills in analyzing the project before kickoff contribute the
completion of project on time. Contrary; if the contractor is unable to make a deep analysis
of project, it will contribute to the delay of that project due to different problems raised
during the execution of project.

Summary of Hypotheses Testing Results

The results presented in Table below 4.12 showed the summary of linear regression model.
Thus, the table shows (R2), the main effects as well as the choice on the formulated
hypothesis.

Table 4. 14: Summary of Hypotheses Testing Results

Hypothesis Formulated Beta ρ– Choice R2

(β) values
H01: Contractors factors has no significant
effect on Projects delay of construction .212 .046
projects Rejected
H02: Consultant factors has no a significant .734
.237 .047
effect on Projects delay of construction projects Rejected
H03: Project owner factors has no significant
.461 .012
effect on Projects delay of construction projects Rejected
H04: Contract factors has no significant effect
.452 0.045
on of construction projects Rejected

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1466

Source: (Researcher, 2021)

The table 4.14 the summary of hypothesizes test results, the first hypothesis said that
contractors factors has no significant effect on projects delay of public institution in
Rwanda, second hypothesis said that Consultant factors has no a significant effect on
Projects delay of construction projects, the third hypothesis said that Project owner factors
has no significant effect on Projects delay of construction projects and fourth said that
Contract factors has no significant effect on of construction projects; therefore since the t-
values were greater than 0.05 the researcher rejected all hypothesis of the research as it has
been revealed that contractor factors, consultant factors, project owners factors and contract
factors contribute to the delay of construction projects.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary on objective one of the study: Contribution of contractor factors on the
project schedule delay of Horizon Company Ltd.
Results revealed that there was a positive and significant relationship between Contractor
factors and projects delay (rho=0.663, p value<0.05). This implies that a unit change in
the contractor factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 66.3%.

Summary on objective two of the study: Summary of Contribution of consultant

factors on the project schedule delay of Horizon Company Ltd.

Secondly, there was a positive significant relationship between consultant factors and
projects delay (rho =0.358, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit change in consultant
factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 35.8%.
Summary on objectives three of the study: Summary of Contribution of project
owner factors on the project schedule delay of Horizon Company Ltd.

Thirdly, there was a positive and significant relationship between project owner factors and
projects delay (rho =0.562, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit change in project owner
factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 56.2%.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1467

Summary on objective four of the study: Summary of the Contribution of contract

factors on the project schedule delay of Horizon Company Ltd.

Lastly, there was a positive and significant relationship between contract factors and
projects delay (rho =0.342, p value <0.05). This implies that a unit increases in contract
factors in construction projects increases projects delay by 34.2%.
Conclusion
From the regression analysis, the most predator the research was contractor factors which
indicated that changes in contractor factors contribute to the delay of project at 81.6%, it is
followed by project owners’ factors which indicated that changes in project owners’ factors
delay the project at 71.9%. Other factors like consultants contribute at 67.2% and the
contract also contributes at 56.2%. According to the analyzed results, the Project owner
factor contributes higher to project schedule delay seconded by the Project contractor
factor.
The study recommends to the Project owner to have a thorough study on the adequate
budget in line with the requirements and have a clear concept of what is needed on the
project to avoid many changes along with the implementations which lead to change in
time and affects the cost hence leading the project to delay. (Following the principle of
triple constraints scope, cost, and time).
The study revealed that delay contributed by a contractor was caused by inadequate
planning, monitoring, and evaluation whereby the detected defects and errors along the
project would have been identified before the kickoff of the project. And this leads to a
stack of the schedule to first address the issue hence leading to the delay of the project.
From the results of the research the researcher concludes that there are different factors that
contribute to the delay of construction projects which are contractor factors, consultant
factor, project owner factors and contract factors.
Recommendations
As a researcher, I recognize the evolution in ideas based on technology industry and some
scientists’ discoveries still going on in improving construction facilities around the world.
The study considered only basic factors that hinder construction and feasibility in running
projects schedule. With this in mind, we regret not having worked on every possible factor

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1468

that might come in line with construction activities in Rwanda and we encourage future
studies to work on different factors rather than this study was able to.

a. The study revealed that project owners contribute to project schedule due to a lot
of changes in the scope of project works and delays to pay contractors. Going forward I
recommend project owners and contractors to set clear project work plans especially with
scope, schedule, and cost.
b. Setup a strong and independent Change Control Board (CCB) that helps review and
restrict changes from project owners. This will help regulate changes.
c. Engage project owners in all project phases, initiation, planning, implementation,
monitoring and control and closure, this total involvement will help to attain continuous
feedback hence reducing schedule delays in project.
d. The research recommends the contractors of the projects to always ensure validate
scope before project implementation starts while ensuring proper monitoring and
evaluation to reduce late defects detections which always results in lagging in project
schedule.
e. Manage project schedule using crashing activities and schedule compression to
enable catching up with planned projected schedule hence minimizing project schedule
delays.
f. Ensure proper schedule management including but not limited to proper define
activities, sequence activities and create work break down structure.
g. Involvement of subject matter experts that will guide the contractors on how well
to manage project schedules.
h. Researcher recommends to the project contractor to pay attention while contacting
the projects through applying all project inputs, tools, techniques, and outputs (ITTOs) in
all phases of the project (Initiation, Planning, Execution, Monitoring and Evaluation and
close).

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1469

REFERENCES

Abd El-Razek,M.E; Bassioni, H.A; Mobarak, M.A; (2008). Causes of Delay in Building
Construction Projects in Egypt‖J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 2008.134:831-841.
Abdul Rahman, H., (1993). The management and Cost of quality for civil engineering
projects. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester Institute of Science &
Technology, Manchester, UK.
Abedi, M., Fathi, M., S., & Mohammad, M., F., (2017). Major Mitigation Measures for
Delays in Construction Projects. The First Iranian Students Scientific
Conference in Malaysia, 9 & 10 Apr 2011, UPM, Malaysia.
Abudul-Rahman, H., Berawi A., Mohamed O., Othman M., and Yahya I., (2006). Delay
Mitigation in the Malaysian construction industry. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 132(2), 126 -138.
Ahmed, S., M., Azhar, S., Castillo, M., and Kappagantula, P., (2013). Construction
Delays in Florida: An Empirical Study, Final Report Submitted to State
Florida, Department of Community Affairs, and Florida.

Ahmed, S., M., Azhar, S., Kappagantula, P., and Gollapudi, D., (2013). Delays in
construction industry: A brief study of the Florida construction industry.
Proceeding of the 39th Annual Conference of the Associated Schools of
Construction. Clemson, South Carolina: Clemson University. Final report,
Miami, F1 33174, USA.
Aibinu, A., A., and Jagboro, G., O., (2002). The effects of Construction Delays on Project
Delivery in Nigerian Construction Industry. International Journal of Project
Management, Elsevier, 20, 593-599.
Aiyetan, O., A., (2014). Rework cost on building projects in the south western part of
Nigeria. Journal of Construction Project Management and Innovation, 4, 755-
769.
Alaghbari, W., A., M., (2017). Factors affecting construction speed of industrialized
building system in Malaysia. Master thesis, University Putra Malaysia,
Serdang.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1470

Alaghbari, W., Kadar, M., R., & Salim, A., (2017). The significant factors causing delay
of building construction projects in Malaysia. Engineering Construction and
Architectural Management Journal, 14 (2), 192 – 206.
Alinaitwe, H., Apolot, R., & Tindiwensi, D., (2013). Investigation into the causes of delays
and cost overruns in Uganda’s public sector construction projects. Journal of
Construction in Developing Countries, 18(2), 33-47.

Al-Sabah, R., Menassa, C., C., & Hanna, A., (2014). Evaluating impact of construction
risks in the Arabian Gulf Region from perspective of multinational architecture,
engineering and construction firms. Construction Management and Economics,
32, 382-402.
Amoatey, C., T., Ameyaw, Y., A., Adaku, E., & Famiyeh, S., (2015). Analysing delay
causes and effects in Ghanaian state housing construction projects.
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8(1), 198-214.
Ansar, A., Flyvbjerg, B., Budzier, A., & Lunn, D., (2014). Should we build more large
dams? The actual costs of hydropower megaprojects development. Energy
Policy, 69, 43-56.
Arditi, D., Akan, G., T., and Gurdamar, S., (2001). “Reasons for delays in public projects
in Turkey”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 171-
181.
Assaf, S., A., AlHejji S., (2016) ’Causes of delay in large construction projects’.
International Journal of Project Management, 24 (4), 349-357.
Assaf, S., A., and S., Al-Hejji (2016). "Causes of delay in large construction projects."
International Journal of Project Management 24(4): 349-357.
Audit Reports of RPPA of 2012-2013 and Auditor General of Rwanda of 2012-2013
Augustine, U., E. and Mangvwat, J., (2001). Time-overrun Factors in Nigerian
Construction Industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
127(5): pp. 419-425.
Azhar, N., & and Farouqi, R., U., (2018, August). Cost Overrun Factors in the
Construction Industry of Pakistan. In the 1st International Conference on
Construction in Developing Countries, Advancing & Integrating Construction
Education, Research, and Practice, Karachi, Pakistan.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com
GSJ: Volume 9, Issue 9, September 2021
ISSN 2320-9186 1471

Ballard, G., Tommelein, I., Koskela, L., and Howell, G., (2002). ‘Lean construction tools
and techniques’, in Best, R. And de Valence, G. (eds.) Building in Value:
Design and Construction, Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann, 227-255
Battaineh1, A. M. O. a. H. T. (2002). "Causes of construction delay: tradisional contracts
" International Journal of Project Managemen(20): 67 - 73.
Beinat, E., Steenbruggen, J., and Wagtendonk, A., (2007). Location Awareness 2020:
A foresight study on location and sensor services, Technical Report. Vrije
Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Bramble, B., B., and Callahan, M., T., (2011). Construction delay claims, Wolters Kluwer,
law and business. 4th Edition, London: Aspen
Chan, A., & Kumaraswamy, M., (2018). Delays and cost overruns in the construction
projects in the Gaza strip.
Chan, D., and Kumaraswamy, M., (1996). An evaluation of construction Time performance
in the building industry. Journal of Building and Environmental, 31(6), 569-
578.
Chan, D., and Kumarswamy, M., (1998). Contributors to Construction Delays.
Construction Management and Economics, 16(1), 17 – 29.
Cheng, Y., M., (2014). An exploration into cost-influencing factors on construction
projects. International Journal of Project Management, 32, 850-860.
Choudhry, R., M., Aslam, M., A., Hinze, J., W., & Arain, F., M., (2014). Cost and schedule
risk analysis of bridge construction in Pakistan: Establishing risk guidelines.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 140(7), 1-9.
De Valence, G., (2011). ‘Theory and Construction Economics’, in Modern Construction
Economics, de Valence, G. (Ed.). London, Taylor and Francis, 1-13
Doloi, H., K., (2019). "Understanding stakeholders' perspective of cost estimation in
project management." International Journal of Project Management 29(2011):
622-636.
Dunkelberger, L., (2019). How to Stop Losing Money on Inefficient Communication?
Enshassi, A., J., Al-Najjar and M., Kumaraswamy, (2019). Delays and cost overruns in the
construction projects in the Gaza Strip. Journal of Financial Management of
Property and Construction. 14(2), 126- 151.

GSJ© 2021
www.globalscientificjournal.com