Towards a Risk Assessment Process: The Case of

Contractors in Greater Beirut Area

Abbas Chokor, Ghassan El Darazi, Ismael El Nakib, Bachar Faour, and Ralph Khattar
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department
American University of Beirut
Riad El Solh, Beirut 1107 2020, Lebanon
aic05@mail.aub.edu, gme14@mail.aub.edu, ikn03@mail.aub.edu, bgf01@mail.aub.edu, and rek05@mail.aub.edu,


Abstract-One of the major concerns contractors are aware
of when pricing a projects bid is allocating an appropriate
allowance for risk. During the tendering stage preparation,
risk assessment frameworks that aim at measuring
construction projects risks have proliferated in recent
years. This issue was triggered by the fact that some
contractors have been facing major financial problems in
their projects, while others have lost bids in which they had
a competitive advantage. The purpose of this research is to
study risk management practices and to investigate the
main risk parameters encountered by contractors
operating in the Greater Beirut Area (GBA). A survey was
conducted with project managers and estimators from
different contracting companies in order to investigate
their risk assessment methods vis--vis the projects
objectives: time, cost and quality. The results showcase a
major variation between estimators and project managers
in their evaluation of risk. This paper demonstrates a need
for the improvement of the process that contractors follow
to quantify their exposure to risks. Therefore, discussing
the impact of main risks for contractors would be beneficial
and would help contractors properly manage the
construction of any project throughout its different phases.
I. INTRODUCTION
Assessing risks has always been a major problem in the
construction industry, which has a number of problematic
features such as long period, complicated processes,
abominable environment, financial intensity and dynamic
organization structures [1]. Risks are defined as the statement
of what may arise from that lack of knowledge. Concurrently,
risk management is described as a systematic way of looking at
areas of risk and consciously determining how each should be
treated. It is a management tool that aims at identifying sources
of risk and uncertainty, determining their impact, and
developing appropriate management responses [2]. A typical
risk management process can be simplified into four steps: risk
identification, risk analysis, risk response, and risk
administration [3]. No matter what the project risks are, risk
management will be really beneficial if implemented from the
planning stage until its completion [4]. Thats why, each stage
of the project should be well managed in order to satisfy the
objectives in terms of costs, time, and quality and to improve
safety and sustainability circumstances.
The aim of this study is to investigate the actual risk
assessment and management processes adopted by contractors
in the Greater Beirut Area (GBA). First, the paper compares
the difference in risk evaluation between cost estimators and
project managers in the same construction company. Second,
the paper examines the main risks that could affect the time,
cost, and quality of projects in GBA. The paper ends with a
discussion of the recommendations and suggestions to be
implemented in the tendering phase in order to manage those
risks across the multiple responsibilities of a contractor.
II. LITERATURE & BACKGROUND
A survey of previous works on risk management shows
significant findings in the classification of risks for
construction projects. Perry and Hayes [5] classified the main
risks, extracted from different sources, as retainable by
contractors, consultants and clients. Abdou [6] categorized the
construction risks into three types: construction finance,
construction time and construction design. As for project delay,
Shen [7] presented, based on a questionnaire, eight major risks.
By using the hierarchical risk breakdown structure (HRBS),
Tah and Carr [8] identified the internal and external risks in
construction industry. Shen et al. [9] listed six groups of risks:
financial, legal, management, market, policy and political.
Chapman et al. [10] assembled risks into four categories:
environment, industry, client and project. As for project cost,
Chen et al. [11] recognized 15 risks and distributed them into
three subsets: resources factors, management factors and parent
factors. Zeng et al. [12] classified risk factors as human, site,
material and equipment factors.
Risk analysis has proven to be very important in the field of
construction since it helps in reducing losses and improves
profitability on construction projects [13]. Therefore, all major
contractors and consulting firms are now aware of the fact that
risk management is very crucial and should be a part of their
organizations operating structure. Yet, few industry players
use advanced techniques of risk analysis, relying rather on,
basic, non- probabilistic methods. Having said that, research
should be done on those more advanced techniques in order to
see whether they can provide more success to the firms and
help them minimize unexpected losses.
The literature shows an increasing state of awareness
concerning risk assessment and/or management and its related
effects on the success of construction projects. Although
predicting the future is rather impossible, risk management can
be perceived as a tool that facilitates the project by helping the
contractors make better decisions. [14]. This section entails the
four steps of risk management approach and investigates,
through a survey of previous studies, the classifications of most
effective risks in construction projects. Although risks are
largely dependent of the type and size of projects, risk
management process is common and based on four cyclical
steps (see Figure 1).


A. Risk Identification
Risk identification is the first step in the risk management
plan that determines which risk components may adversely
affect the project objectives [15]. At this stage, risks are
usually characterized according to their uncertainty levels
across the different phases of the project from the planning and
design phases to the operation and maintenance phases after
the completion of the construction. In general, project risks are
identified by doing some reviews that could have been
conducted either in the past (historical reviews), or in the
present such as the study of the status and current
characteristics of the project, or even by forming a future view
of the project through several processes such as conducting
formal brainstorming sessions with many stakeholders to
discuss the probable occurrence of some scenarios at different
stages of the project.
Construction projects risks range over a very wide scale
where one can take any specific activity and find many
different but related subsequent risks that might hinder this
specific activitys process. In order to limit the set of identified
risks to those that are applicable to the project and to omit
those that are of no major concern, risk analysis is established
as an integral process of any construction project. Once
identification is executed, a list containing all the identified
project risks shall be considered as the basis for coming up
with a risk management plan or framework. Besides being
related to projects objectives (cost, time, and quality), this list
should also provide all the causes behind a specific loss and the
appropriate follow-up responses. Knowing that risks are
ingrained in the construction of any project, the list is
susceptible to continuous updates and inspections.
B. Risk Analysis
After identifying the main risks that might be associated
with the completion of a project, quantifying their impacts
becomes necessary. Many risks could be measured in terms of
their effect on cost, time, and quality. However, for many other
risks there could be insufficient objective data and the
measurement of the impact of a certain risk may depend on
some degree of subjectivity [5]. Thus, selecting a risk analysis
method depends on the available input risk measures and on
the desired output measures. Input risk measures could be
related to performance, cost or schedule. Analyzing the input
risks leads the way to the desired output, which includes cost
estimates, consequences, or ways to avoid a risk in case of
occurrence. A scan of the work accomplished by previous
researchers summarizes the used risk analysis methods into
four main categories.
Traditional Methods
Traditional risk analysis methods are subjective methods
that rely on historical data and the experiences of individuals
and companies in the assessment of risks [16]. Established on
historical knowledge, every project element is assigned a risk
factor in accordance with previous knowledge of the respective
risk. The multiplication of the cost estimated for every element
by its corresponding risk factor determines the projects
contingency. The simplicity of the method and the fact that it
produces a cost contingency estimate makes it one of the most
used methods for risk analysis. However, communicating the
consequences of specific project risks might not be
accomplished since the technique only relies on empirical
inputs. Therefore, the use of this method provides limited
information on risk contingencies and is mainly based on
subjective inputs of the individual or the company.
Analytical Methods
Analytical risk analysis methods are simple to understand
and provide a practical estimate of cost contingency. In this
method, formulas relate the mean value of individual input
variables to the mean value of the variables' output. Also, other
formulas relate the variance to the variance of the variables'
output. Although analytical risk models may be useful, several
studies conducted by contractors suggest that they are rarely
used in practice [17]. First, their application is difficult and not
appropriate for scheduled risk analysis. Second, analytical
approaches suggest that a risk premium should be added in the
bid, which contractors avoid in order to beat the competition.
Third, the proposed models may not have any justifiable
empirical basis.
Simulation Methods
Simulation models, also called Monte Carlo models, are the
most common and powerful methods of risk analysis. They
also provide a straightforward method for including
probabilistic data. Simulation can estimate the effect of various
uncertainties on project duration or project cost. However, the
probability distribution information, the mean and the standard
deviation must all be inputs provided by the user [5]. Although
Monte Carlo methods can provide detailed and illustrative
Figure 1. Risk management process.
information about risk impacts, they are too complex to use as
common analysis methods [18].
Probability Methods
Probability trees are very powerful methods that are used
only on the most difficult and complex projects. The method
consists of presenting a selection of events to a decision maker
who can consider different decision choices for facing the
event. Forcing a decision maker to place a degree of
probability for each outcome is one of the advantages of this
method. Hence, each decision is valued and the likelihood of
failure is quantified. In practice, time and cost considerations
are the main parameters obtained by this method [5].

C. Risk Response
There are four main options the contractor can consider to
treat the encountered risks:
Accept Risk
The contractor here decides to retain the risks, by
managing them internally. This strategy can be divided into
two aspects: planned or unplanned [19]. A planned risk
retention, is one in which the contractor fully understands his
risk exposure and is capable of bearing its impact. It is a
calculated risk that he is willing to take. On the other hand, in
an unplanned risk retention, the contractor is either not aware
of the risk, or has miscalculated its magnitude. Unplanned risk
retention is the most dangerous form of risk exposure for a
contractor.
Reject Risk
In some cases, contractors face types of risks that they
consider as uncontrollable. Avoidance of these risks is not
always possible. However, one-way of managing risks is to
avoid them. For instance a contractor could decide not to bid
on a project with high political instability. This, on the other
hand, would deprive the contractor from potential profits on
the project.
Mitigate Risk
While there isnt one right risk management technique,
contractors are encouraged to build a risk portfolio that in
accord with their risk tolerance/appetite. This strategy has two
drivers: either a reduction of a risk financial impact and/or a
decrease in its probability of occurrence. It is usually used for
common risks found on projects but with small financial
impact.
Transfer Risk
Risk transfer occurs when a contractor decides to sell his risk
portfolio to someone who is willing to bear it. For instance, a
contractor might decide to shift price fluctuation of materials
and commodities to his supplier by requiring a long- term fixed
price and quantity before starting construction (or preferably
during the bidding phase). Another form of risk transfer is
subcontracting which happens when another contractor handles
a specific task in the project in which he has more experience
in, and thus his risk exposure would be less costly than the
inexperienced primary contractor. Moreover, insurance is the
most common risk transfer technique. And most contractors
think of risk management as an insurance management [19].
Insurance is capable of bearing most (but not all) risks.
Operational, financial and design related risks are usually not
covered.

D. Risk Administration
Risk administration is the final stage of the risk
management process. It consists basically of two activities that
help in confirming the success and the right implementation of
the risk management process used. Risk monitoring is the first
activity performed; it deals with tracking the risks identified at
the risk identification phase and provides feedback on new
emerging risks, which is essential for future risk assessment.
As a project progresses, regularly assessing and examining
risks can serve as a risk monitoring technique.
Risk control follows risk monitoring; in this activity
information obtained during risk assessment are revisited in
order to guarantee the successfulness of the risk handling
technique used. Risk control can also alter any action taken in
the assessment process if changing its implementation can
reduce the risk.

III. OBJECTIVES
Risk assessment helps contractors better understand their
exposure to risk. The objective of this paper is to classify the
main risks being faced by contractors in the Greater Beirut
Area the ones that could significantly affect the objectives -
cost, quality and time- of any project. Consequently, this study
will provide some guidance for future industry practitioners in
planning, identification, analysis and management of
construction risks. To address the objectives of this paper, the
frequency of occurrence of different types of project risks as
encountered in GBA projects and their impacts on project
objectives were identified. Comparing between the cost,
quality and time allocated for risks by cost estimators to the
actual risks faced by project managers on site is essential to
uncover the reasons behind the considerable variations of cost
and schedule overruns on site.
IV. METHODOLOGY
The methodology used to achieve the objectives of this study
encompasses four steps: (1) selecting the main contractors in
GBA; (2) designing a risk classification survey to evaluate the
main constraints from contractors perspective; (3) collecting
data from project managers and cost estimators working with
contractors; (4) analyzing the results followed by a discussion
of the practices that can help contractors handling risks in their
future projects.
Contractor Selections
In our quest to better understand the risk assessment from
contractors perception, a total of 30 contractors were
contacted for this study. To be eligible to fill the survey, a
contractor must have at least five completed projects in GBA
on his records.
Survey Design
In order to explore the impacts of main risks along the
different phases of project lifecycle, a survey (see Appendix)
was designed to best fit the difference in risk management
practices between project managers and cost estimators. This
survey examines the frequencies, impacts, and management
strategies of 48 risks classified into six categories: Contractual
risks (CON), Engineering risks (ENG), Environmental,
External, and Political risks (EXP), Financial and Economical
risks (FAE), Managerial and Organizational risks (MAO), and
Equipment, Material, and Labor Procurement risks (EML). For
each risk, respondents were asked to rate on a Likert scale: (a)
the likelihood frequency (not applicable 0, rare 1, unlikely
2, possible 3, likely 4, and almost certain 5); (b) the
impact on cost, quality, and time ( not applicable 0, minor
1, medium 2, serious 3, major 4, and catastrophic 5);
and (c) the response strategy (accept A, reject R, transfer
T, and mitigate M).

Data Collection
From each construction company, a project manager and a
cost estimator were invited to participate in this study by
completing the survey. The responses were kept anonymous to
guarantee a strict confidentiality and privacy of the provided
information.
Data Analysis and Discussion
For each contractor, the collected data were entered and
analyzed for all six-survey categories. First, the average risk
significance index was computed for each survey participant
by using an adaptation of the Shen et al. [9] index:

Where = significance score assessed by respondent j for the
impact of risk i on project objective k ; i = ordinal number of
risk, i(1, 148) ; k = ordinal number of 3 project objectives
(time, cost, and quality), k (1, 3) ; j = ordinal number of valid
feedback to risk i , j (1, 22 respondents) ; n = total number
of valid feedbacks to risk i (n=22) ; = likelihood
occurrence of risk i , assessed by respondent j ; = level of
impact of risk i on project objective k , assessed by respondent
j . Later on, the average score for each risk considering its
significance on a project objective can be calculated through
the equation below. This average score is called the risk
significance index score and will be used to rank all risks on a
particular project objective.
Second, an unpaired t-test was then used to check the
statistical significance of the results between costs estimator
and project manager from one side and between different
contractors from the other. Finally, the main risks affecting the
objectives of construction projects in GBA were highlighted in
parallel with a comparison of contractors risk response
strategies.
V. PRELIMINARY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of this study are summarized in this section,
followed by a discussion of the main risk affecting the time,
cost and quality of construction projects in GBA. Of the 30
invited contractors, 22 accepted to participate in this study.
After designing the survey, a project manager and an estimator
were each asked to evaluate the frequency, impact and
response strategy of each risk. The figure below presents the
years of experience of the participants.

An unpaired t-test with unequal variance was computed in
order to check the significance of the results. After assuming
equal weights for time, cost, and quality average risk
significance index score R was calculated for all respondents.
Consequently, suggesting that project managers risk
significance index (a) is equal to that of estimators (b) will
contribute into the validation of results significance by
confirming, at a 95% confidence level, the null hypothesis (H0)
or its rejection (H1):
H0: a = b if p-value is greater than 0.05; then, risks are
assessed similarly by project managers and estimators
H1: a b if p-value is less than 0.05; then, project
managers and estimators assess risk in construction
projects differently.
The results show a p-value of 0.04, which is less than 0.05.
Thus, the null hypothesis rejection (H1) validates statistically
the significance of the collected results at a 95% confidence
level.
The average risks significance index R of time, cost, and
quality were computed for all 22 considered contractors. Table
1 shows the highest five risks that directly affect the project
objectives, as reported by project managers. Considering the
projects time, Sudden internal management problems that
directly or indirectly affect the construction project (MAO8)
obtains the highest index, followed by Inadequate, vague, and
contradicting terms that affect the interpretation of contract
clauses (CON8), Lack of coordination and communication
between all practitioners (MAO7), Unforeseen weather cycle.
Including but not limited to: rain, snow, storms, heat, cold,
hurricanes (EXP3) and Unstable political conditions
Figure 2. Respondents years of experience.
including but not limited to: Riots, government resignations,
war, civil disorder (EXP5). Besides, Unforeseen delays in
payments (FAE6), Sudden internal management problems
that directly or indirectly affect the construction project
(MAO8), Sudden and/or volatile price fluctuations of goods,
materials, and service (FAE1), Inadequate, vague, and
contradicting terms that affect the interpretation of contract
clauses (CON8), and Planning and implementation based on
drawings or specifications that contain errors, omissions or
ambiguities (ENG3) are the main risks affecting the cost. In
addition, regarding quality, project managers are suffering
from Lack of coordination and communication between all
practitioners (MAO7), Planning and implementation based
on drawings or specifications that contain errors, omissions or
ambiguities (ENG3), Underestimation the technical
complexity of the project which affects the availability of
technical expertise during the construction (ENG1),
Inadequate, vague, and contradicting terms that affect the
interpretation of contract clauses (CON8), and Sudden
internal management problems that directly or indirectly affect
the construction project (MAO8).

TABLE I
HIGHEST FIVE RISKS AFFECTING THE TIME, COST AND QUALITY OF
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS FOR PROJECT MANAGERS.
Time Cost Quality
Risk Factor Risk Factor Risk Factor
MAO8 20.14 FAE6 18.86 MAO7 19.18
CON8 17.64 MAO8 16.45 ENG3 15.5
MAO7 16.36 FAE1 16.23 ENG1 15.36
EXP3 16.14 CON8 15.64 CON8 13.59
EXP5 16.01 ENG3 15.05 MAO8 12.73

After limiting the analysis of this study to the 9 main risks, a
review of their indexs deviations on the time, cost and quality
scales is provided in Figure 3. A close analysis reveals the
considerable effect of some risks on all the objectives of a
project (ENG3, CON8, MAO7 and MAO8). On the contrary,
the effect of others could be restricted to only one objective.
For example, FAE1 records a high average index for the cost
(R=16.23) although its impact on time (R=3.05) and quality
(R=2.77) is negligible. Figure 4 shows the response strategies
followed by project managers concerning the 9 studied risks.


Figure 5 illustrates the comparison of risks index between
estimators and project managers after assuming equal weights
for time, cost and quality. The results showcased a noticeable
difference in the index of the 9 considered risks.


Figure 5. Project manager's vs estimator's risk significance.

While the difference in risk assessment could justify the
costs and schedules overruns in construction projects,
examining these results is a major key in uncovering the main
constraints for construction projects in GBA. First, estimators
are underestimating the managerial and organizational related
risks. Thats why project managers are facing a lack of
coordination and communication between all practitioners, in
addition to sudden internal management problems that affect
time, cost and quality of construction projects. Second,
estimators are overvaluing the weather cycle effects, goods and
materials prices fluctuations and the unforeseen delays in
payments. Overemphasizing some risks in terms of
Figure 3. A comparison of main risks' index for time, cost and quality.
Figure 4. Project manager vs. estimator risks' index.
contingencies or delays in schedule are relevant reasons behind
the ineffectiveness of contractors bids in the tendering phase.

VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Risk assessment plays a major key in the improvement of the
construction industry in Lebanon. In parallel to the absence of
a real risk management process, contractors are suffering from
a lack of continuous communication and collaboration between
all practitioners. The results of this study show a noticeable
variation between the significance index of project managers
and estimators. While estimators are under-evaluating major
risks in the tendering phase in order to win the bid, project
managers are facing the impact of such practices with high
difficulty.
The findings of this paper lead to several recommendations that
could be established to improve the state of practice of
contracting in Greater Beirut:
Involved practitioners should be connected through a
database, which will result in a more successful
project. This tool will improve the coordination
between estimators and project managers by
controlling and monitoring costs and schedules
overruns.
Project managers with previous experience in similar
projects should cooperate with estimators during the
bidding phase.
Financial derivatives and/or catastrophe bonds must
be used to hedge against risks such as weather delays
and damages, material price fluctuation and delays
due to political events.
Forward contracts should be established with
suppliers to shift the risk of price fluctuations.
Line and letters of credit and letters from the bank are
required to protect against delays in payment and
unexpected negative cash flow.
Order of Engineers in Lebanon must play a major role
in collecting data from all projects from contractors
after the completion of their projects. Each contractor
will be asked to submit a final report that compiles the
main unexpected risks encountered during the
construction period. An annual report summarizing
the obtained results should be published.

The results of this study are the first step towards a formal
risk management framework for contractors working in
Lebanon. This necessity is not limited to the case of surveyed
contractors but also can be generalized for any construction
company. Implementing a framework could be difficult and
complex; nonetheless, it will pave the way for an optimization
of time, cost and quality in construction projects.



ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The completion of this project would not have been possible
without the dedication and support of all the faculty of Civil
and Environmental Engineering Department at AUB. Authors
of this paper would like to acknowledge Dr. Mohamad Asem
Abdul-Malak for his continuous support and assistance.
Authors are also thankful to the contribution of Dr. Ali Yassine
and Dr. Issam Srour and all participant contractors who are not
responsible for the results and conclusions in this paper, which
designate, exclusively, the interpretations of the authors.

REFERENCES
[1] Smith, N.J. Appraisal, Risk and Uncertainty (Construction Management
Series). London: Thomas Telford Ltd, UK, 2003.
[2] Uher, T. Programming and Scheduling Techniques. Sydney: UNSW
Press, 2003.
[3] Berkeley, D., P.C. Humphreys, and R.D. Thomas. "Project Risk Action
Management." Construction Management and Economics I, no. 9 (1991):
3-17.
[4] Banaitiene, Nerija, and Audrius Banaitis. Risk Management in
Construction Projects. InTech, 2012.
[5] Perry, J.H., and R.W. Hayes. "Risk and Its Management in Construction
Projects." Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineering.
Engineering Management Group, 1985. 499-521.
[6] Abdou, O.A. "Managing Construction Risks." Journal of Architectural
Engineering 2, no. 1 (1996): 3-10.
[7] Shen, L.Y. "Project Risk Management in Hong Kong." International
Journal of Project Management 15, no. 2 (1997): 101-105.
[8] Tah, J. H. M., and V. Carr. A proposal for construction project risk
assessment using fuzzy logic. Vol. 18, in Construction Management and
Economics, 491-500. 2000.
[9] Shen, L. Y., W. C. Wu George , and S. K. Ng Catherine . "Risk
Assessment for Construction Joint Ventures in China." Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management 127, no. 1 (2001): 76-81.
[10] Chapman, R. J. "The Controlling Influences on Effective Risk
Identification and Assessment for Construction Design Management."
International Journal of Project Management 19 (2001): 147-160.
[11] Chen, H., G. Hao, S. W. Poon, and F. F. Ng. "Cost Risk Management in
West Rail Project of Hong Kong." (AACE International) 2004.
[12] Zeng, J., M. An , and N. J. Smith. "Application of a fuzzy based decision
making methodology to construction project risk assessment."
International Journal of Project Management 25 (2007): 589-600.
[13] Flyvbjerg, B., M. Holm, and S. Buhl. "Underestimating costs in public
works projects: Error or lie?" J. Am. Plan. Assn. 68, no. 3 (2002): 279-
295.
[14] Smith, N.J., T. Merna, and P. Jobbling. Managing Risk in Construction
Projects. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.
[15] Rezakhani, Pejman. "Fuzzy MCDM Model for Risk Factor Selection in
Construction Projects." ENGINEERING JOURNAL 16, no. 5 (2012).
[16] Avestedt, Lisa. Comparison of Risk Assessments for Underground
Construction Projects. MSc Thesis, Department of Civil and
Architectural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm:
KTH Architecture and the Built Environment, 2012.
[17] Laryea, Samuel, and Will Hughes . "Risk and Price in the Bidding
Process of Contractors." Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management (ASCE), April 2011.
[18] U.S. Department of Transportation-Federal Highway Administration.
Office of International Programs. n.d. Retreived on March 23,2014 from
http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/riskassess/risk_hcm06_04.cfm.
[19] Al Bahar, Jamal F., and Keith C. Crandall. "Systematic Risk Management
Approach For Construction Projects." Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management (ASCE) 116, no. 3 (September 1990): 533-
546.



APPENDIX

Categories Index Risks
Likelihood
frequency
( 1 - 5)
Impact( 1 - 5) Response
Strategy
(R, M, T, A)
Time Cost Quality
Contractual risks
(CON)
CON1 Failure to define the client group and contractor group property and personnel

CON2
Failure to define the costs and responsibilities of loss or damage to the parties respective
groups property
CON3 Failure to define the legal liability for third parties losses

CON4
Failure to define the contractors obligations to perform the client instructed variation
orders

CON5
Failure to define the entitlement to payment for all work performed, materials costs, and
equipment costs, in case of work termination

CON6
Misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the insurance policies and indemnity clauses,
terms, conditions, limits and exclusions of the project policy risk
CON7
Failure to define, events, conditions, and the loss where the contractor is prevented from
performing the work due to a force majeure
CON8
Inadequate, vague, and contradicting terms that affect the interpretation of contract
clauses
Engineering
risks (ENG)
ENG1
Underestimation the technical complexity of the project which affects the availability of
technical expertise during the construction
ENG2 Unexpected rework due to the absence of continuous inspections

ENG3
Planning and implementation based on drawings or specifications that contain errors,
omissions or ambiguities
ENG4 Sudden and/or unpredicted change in scope of work

ENG5 Assumptions and calculations based on incomplete quantity estimates

ENG6 Inaccurate assumptions during the planning phase

ENG7
Sudden and unexpected soil conditions that were not/could not have been accounted for
initially
ENG8 Lack of experience on similar projects

Environmental,
External, and
Political risks
(EXP)
EXP1 Exceptional noise pollution caused by construction related works

EXP2
Unforeseen, unusual air quality issues, regulations and laws affecting construction site and
surroundings
EXP3
Unforeseen weather cycle. Including but not limited to: rain, snow, storms, heat, cold,
hurricanes
EXP4
Sudden, unexpected changes in laws and regulations affecting directly or indirectly the
construction project
EXP5
Unstable political conditions including but not limited to: Riots, government resignations,
war, civil disorder
EXP6 Unexpected archeological findings during the construction project

EXP7 Unexpected level of complains, objections, and disapprovals from neighbors

EXP8
Unexpected changes in regulations, laws, restrictions, capital requirements, structural
requirements for issuance of new construction permits
Financial and
Economical risks
(FAE)
FAE1 Sudden and/or volatile price fluctuations of goods, materials, and service

FAE2 High, rapid and, unexpected inflation, currency exchange rates conversions

FAE3 Sudden bankruptcy of a project partner

FAE4
Deviation from the initially predicted stream of cash inflow and outflow causing a long term
cash flow unbalance
FAE5
Sudden financial crisis (recession) causing an increase in interest rates, available liquidity,
and demand
FAE6 Unforeseen delays in payments

FAE7 Failure to engage with local businesses

FAE8
Differences between the predicted cost of materials and equipment between the bidding
phase and the construction phase
Managerial and
Organizational
risks (MAO)
MAO1 Wrong and/or unsuitable selection of the construction method

MAO2 Overestimation of engineers and superintendents qualifications

MAO3 Overestimation of the subcontractors qualifications

MAO4 Mismanagement of the utilities and services (site logistics)

MAO5
Miscalculation of a subcontractors' expected performance with regard to the schedule
and/or the quality of the deliverables
MAO6 Improper planning, cost estimation, and budgeting of the construction project

MAO7 Lack of coordination and communication between all practitioners

MAO8
Sudden internal management problems that directly or indirectly affect the construction
project
Equipment,
Material, and
Labor
Procurement
risks (EML)
EML1 Unexpected failing into delivering the required materials on time

EML2 Unexpected damage and/or security of the material

EML3
unavailability/interruption of specific material, goods, services needed for the completion of
specific critical tasks during the construction project
EML4 Unavailability of appropriate procuring technology machine

EML5 Unexpected damages and repairs of the used equipment

EML6 Employee-employee and/or employee-contractor sudden conflict

EML7 Difficulty or unavailability of construction safety, plan and training

EML8 Shortage in labor (skilled and/or unskilled)