construction project change management in singapore

8/12/2019 Construction Project Change Management in Singapore

1/10

Construction project change management in Singapore: Status, importanceand impact

Bon-Gang Hwang a, , Lee Kian Low b

a Dept. of Building, National University of Singapore, 117566, Singapore b Keppel FMO Pte. Ltd., Golden Agri Plaza, 108 Pasir Panjang Road 118535, Singapore

Received 11 July 2011; received in revised form 5 October 2011; accepted 3 November 2011

Abstract

Changes in construction projects are inevitable. In order to minimize the impact of changes on a project, it is imperative to implement changemanagement. This study aims to assess the status, importance and impact of change management implementation in the Singapore constructionindustry. To achieve the objective, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to gain an in-depth understanding of change management,and a questionnaire survey was conducted. Analyzing the data collected from 384 projects submitted by 32 companies, the implementation statuswas investigated at both company and project levels, followed by identi cation of key factors that encourage and discourage companies to practicechange management. Furthermore, the importance and impact of change management in terms of project performances such as cost, time, andquality were also examined. The analysis results establish that the implementation status in the Singapore construction industry is relatively lowwhile improvement in project cost, time and quality performances achieved by the companies that implement change management tends to begreater than the companies that do not. Recognizing the implementation status, importance and impacts of change management will be a starting point to reduce changes that negatively affect project performances, ultimately allowing the Singapore construction industry to increase opportu-nities for project success. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Change; Change management; Cost; Schedule; Quality; Performance; Best practice; Construction project; Singapore

1. Introduction

The construction industry is one of the sectors that providesignificant contributions to Singapore's economy and thus, it is imperative to sustain successful deliveries of construction

projects in Singapore. While construction projects vary insize, duration and complexity, several common features can be found. One of the most common concerns in construction projects is project changes ( Ming et al., 2004 ). Changes usuallyoccur at any stage of a project due to various causes from differ-ent sources, and have considerable impacts ( Karim and Adeli,1999; Motawa et al., 2007) . Any additions, deletions or modifi-cations to the scope of the project are considered as changes.According to Park (2002) , construction changes refer to work state, processes, or methods that differ from the original

construction plan or specification and usually resulted from dif-ference in work quality and conditions, scope changes, or uncertainties that make construction dynamic and yet unstable.Also, Zhao et al. (2009) emphasized that the complex and dy-namic nature of construction projects poses uncertainties and

risks.The earlier the changes are rectified, the lesser impact it willhave on the project. Furthermore, conflicts over project changescan be minimized when the problem is found at the earlier phase of the project. Hence, it is very important to implement change management to construction projects and among many project management best practices, change management has be-come one of the most important practices ( Motawa et al., 2007;Zou and Lee, 2008 ). The efficacy of overall change manage-ment practice in different types of projects can vary widelydepending on project nature, industrial type, project complexi-ty, project size, contract methods and the level of experience Corresponding author.

0263-7863/$36.00 2011 Elsevier Ltd. APM and IPMA. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

International Journal of Project Management 30 (2012) 817 826www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.11.001


2/10

of project participants. Nevertheless, with appropriate changemanagement, preventive measures can be planned for potentialchanges, and for changes that have already occurred, it can beresolved in a timely and systematic manner. This will ensurea successful execution and good management of a project, ulti-mately generating more revenues for the economy.

Under this assertion, this study aims to encourage more practitioners to implement change management into their projects in an attempt to minimize cost and schedule overrunsand quality problems. More specifically, the objectives of thisstudy are: (1) to investigate the current implementation statusof change management in the Singapore construction industry;(2) to explore benefits and barriers of change management implementation; and finally (3) to analyze the impact of changemanagement on project performances. For this study, perspec-tives of contractors working mostly in small and mid-sizedfirms in Singapore were analyzed and changes that occurredin both design and execution phases were considered.

2. Background

2.1. Definitions of project change

Ibbs et al. (2001) stated that any additions or deletions to project goals or scope are considered to be changes, whether they increase or decrease the project cost, schedule or quality.Similarly, Arain and Low (2005) defined that a change is anymodification to the contractual agreement provided by the con-tractors or owners. When project changes occur, there are bound to be certain consequences. The impact of project changes can either be significant or trivial as it may affect theoperation and progress of the project. In addition, Isaac and Navon (2008) claimed that the main causes of changes aresuch as project delays, cost overruns and quality differencefrom the agreed requirements. Therefore, impacts of changesshould be examined and dealt with in a systematic manner asit may hinder the project performance.

2.2. Sources of project change

It is also important to identify different sources of project changes before attempting to minimize it. Project changes can be originated from numerous factors that are related to the con-

struction projects. Both internal and external elements can influ-ence any project changes to occur ( Love et al., 2002 ). Firstly,the internal factors include project, organizational and stakehold-er related issues. Project related issues comprise of uncertaintiesof project, increasing project complexity, inaccurate cost estimat-ing, shortage of resources availability, or change of financial sta-tus of any party involved in the project. Next, organizationalrelated issues refer to change in management, lack of timelyand effective communication, and lack of integration between de- partments (Ibbs et al., 2001 ). Stakeholder related issues are for in-stance, design errors, omissions, or modifications to the drawingsleading to infective design, poor project definition by owners, in-adequate pre project planning, inadequate project change man-agement, poor communication among owners, designers and

constructors, or constructability ignored in the design process(Hwang et al., 2009 ).

Secondly, the external factors consist of natural unforesee-able circumstances, government intervention, economy, or legal issues. Due to natural unforeseeable circumstances suchas inclement weather, project duration is often delayed as it isunpredictable. During inclement weather especially rainy or stormy seasons, it will not be possible for workers to performany work at the construction site. As safety is also one of themain concerns in construction industry, the well-being of theworkers should not be risked. Government related issues arefor example, statutory requirements or strict rules and regula-tions that must be complied with.

Changes in tax and interest rates are some of the economyrelated issues. It affects the project in terms of the financial vi-ability. Uncertain inflation rate can affect the cash flow and ma-terial availability of the project. As for legal issues, theimplementation of new law or regulations may impose project

scope to change and incur more project cost.As a consequence of all these factors that surfaced, it willlead to project changes and eventually having an impact onthe project. The degree which project will be affected will beelaborated further.

2.3. Effect of project change

Considering that changes can have both positive and nega-tive effect on project cost, schedule and quality, changes can be categorized into two main types, namely beneficial changesand detrimental changes ( Ibbs et al., 2001). Beneficial changescan be resulted from exercising value management. Althoughvalue management may incur more cost to the project, it is use-ful and helpful to the project in the long run. Since beneficialchanges are of advantage to a project, these changes are encour-aged in a project by the management team. In contrast, detri-mental changes are discouraged and result in negative impactsto the project, reducing values going to the owner. Ibbs(1997) concluded that because changes are common in projects,it is critical for project management team to confront, embrace,adapt and use variations to impact positively on the situationsthey face and to recognize changes at the early phase of theconstruction. Also, in order to contribute to a successful project,it is very important for the timely identification of impacts of

project changes. Some of the major negative impacts of changes are as follows:

2.3.1. Increase in project cost This is the most common effect of project changes which

may occur (Arain and Low, 2005; Assaf et al., 1995; CII,1990; Clough and Sears, 1994 ). Any major additions to theoriginal work scope will lead to a significant increase in project cost. Therefore, there is always the contingency sum in the con-tract to counter for this purpose.

2.3.2. Recruiting New ProfessionalsAccording to the research conducted by CII (1995) changes

are frequent in complex technological projects. Considering

818 B.-G. Hwang, L.K. Low / International Journal of Project Management 30 (2012) 817 826


3/10

that specialized manpower is one of the integral resources re-quired for complex technological projects ( Fisk, 1997 ), whenthere are new changes to a project, engagement of specialized professionals may be essential to facilitate the changes ( Arainand Low, 2005 ). Furthermore, if the professionals are not read-ily available to deal with the new changes, there will be accu-mulated problems.

2.3.3. Increase in overhead expensesAs stated earlier on, project changes indicate some minor or

major differences to the contractual scope agreed betweenowner and contractor. In order to make the changes validatedand agreed upon mutually by both parties, proper documenta-tion is vital (O'Brien, 1998 ). This is to ensure that the proposedchanges are properly communicated and documented to all the parties involved. Hence, it implies that more expenses will benecessary for the legal documentation and paper procedures pertaining to the agreed changes ( Arain and Low, 2005 ).

2.3.4. Quality degradationThis is also one of the main concerns for owners. Contrac-

tors may tend to compensate for the losses by cutting cornersdue to the frequent changes of the owners. Thus, this will affect the quality of the work negatively ( Arain and Low, 2005 ).

2.3.5. Decrease in labor productivityLee et al. (2005) highlighted that working overtime could

demoralize the morale of workers and deteriorate the productiv-ity of workers. Consequently, the productivity degradation willaffect the delaying of the project too. In relation with that, Minget al. (2004) also mentioned that in cases whereby workers wereexpected to work for overtime over a prolonged period to compensate for the project schedule delays, productivity will begreatly affected.

2.3.6. Delay in procurement processProcurement delays can be frequent in a construction project

as a result of project changes (Hester et al., 1991; O'Brien,1998). New specialized materials or equipment may be neededto be the resources of the project (Arain and Low, 2005 ).

2.3.7. Rework and DemolitionRework and demolition are considered the most potential ef-

fect of project changes that can occur ( Clough and Sears, 1994 ; ).This is especially in the event whereby the construction has ei-ther just commenced work or already in the midst of the con-struction process ( Arain and Low, 2005; CII, 1990 ). Minor or major rework may be needed depending on the timing whenthe changes occurred. Hwang et al. (2009) adds on that project cost performance can be improved by recognizing the impactsof reworks.

2.3.8. Safety conditionsSafety conditions in construction projects may be affected

by changes (Arain and Low, 2005; Arain et al., 2004;O'Brien, 1998 ). Employers should always ensure a safe work- place condition for workers. Health and safety of the workers

should be carefully taken care of. When there is new equipment or other construction methods used, proper and additional safe-ty measures must be prepared for the workers.

2.3.9. Delay in completion scheduleCompletion schedule delay is the most frequent effect that

can occur. A survey finding in Kumaraswamy et al. (1998)showed that 50 percent of the projects surveyed were delayed because of the frequent changes.

2.4. Change management processes and systems

Change management is one of the project management prac-tices that resolve problems when changes occurred in a project or minimize changes that may occur and disrupt the progress of the project (Zhao et al., 2009 ). It seeks to forecast possible

changes, identify changes that have already occurred, plan for preventive measures, and coordinate changes across the entire project among all stakeholders. Besides addressing the impact of changes, an effective change management should also look into the cost, time and quality considerations for the project.

Inconsistent management of the change process can result inmany disruptive effects ( Motawa et al., 2007 ). Additionally, if changes are not resolved through a formalized change manage-ment process, it may become the major source of contract dis- putes and leading to a project failure. The process of changemanagement comprised of four basic principles: (1) to identifychanges; (2) to evaluate changes; (3) to implement changes;and (4) to learn from past experiences. These four principleswork together to achieve the objective of an effective changemanagement system.

Motawa et al. (2007) outlined that development of changemanagement systems should include various factors such as project processes and all the internal and external factors that influence project changes. Sun et al. (2006) designed a changemanagement toolkit for construction projects which include thechange dependency framework, and change prediction andworkflow tools. The research done by Lee and Pea-Mora(2005), and Motawa et al. (2007) also established integratedchange management systems, based on a system dynamics,leading to the Dynamic Planning and Controlling Methodology

that can evaluate negative impacts of errors and changes onconstruction performance. Also, Charoenngam et al. (2003)suggested a Change Order Management System which was de-veloped to manage problems of changes in construction projects. This system comprised of a change order procedurewhich involved workflows, documents, records keeping, anda centralized database. Similarly, Isaac and Navon (2008) pre-sented a model that identifies and emphasizes on the possibleimpact of proposed changes in building projects. Lastly, Zhaoet al. (2009) proposed a simulation method using DependencyStructure Matrix (DSM) to predict changes in the process of the construction. This method includes identifying the sourcesof changes and verifying the effectiveness of the DSMmodel.



4/10

3. Methodology and data presentation

Looking into aspects of change management and its signifi-cant impact on project performances will assist in achieving theobjective of this study. The literature review conducted aided inhaving better understanding of change management in the con-struction industry and gathering information to develop the sur-vey questionnaire used for this study.

The first section of the questionnaire captured the basic pro-file of companies and respondents that participated in thisstudy. The next section was designed to identify how manycompanies and projects practiced change management, fol-lowed by the section capturing factors that encourage and dis-courage companies to implement change management. Thelast section involves questions that capture the importance of change management in a five-point likert scale, and that explorethe impact of change management on project cost, time andquality performances in terms of the percentage of improve-

ment obtained.Having these sections including a total of 27 questions, thequestionnaire was sent out to contractor companies registeredunder the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) registry,and 32 complete sets were returned. Upon obtaining the data,analyses were performed and the results are discussed in thenext section. Table 1 presents the profile of the data collectedfrom the questionnaire.

The registry grade, as shown in Table 1 , indicates different tendering limits for different contractors, which is regulatedand managed by the BCA in Singapore. In general, companieswith the registry grade of A1 have unlimited tendering limitswhile A2 indicates its limit at S$85 million. Grades B1 (up toS$40 million), B2 (up to S$13 million), C1 (up to S$4 million), C2 (up to S$1.3 million), and C3 (up to S$0.65 million) have lower tendering limits than Grades A1and A2. 63% of the companies have an average of 20 to29 years of experience in the construction industry. Similarly,the surveyed respondents who are directors (16%), managers(47%), and engineers (37%) have an average of 10 to19 years of experience in the construction industry.

Table 1 also summarizes the number of projects surveyed bythe project type, nature, and cost. Building projects made up themajority of 66% while there was an almost even distribution of addition, grass roots, and modernization projects in terms of the

project nature. Due to having more responses obtained fromGrades B and C contractor companies, 87% of the projects in-volved the project cost less than $20 million.

4. Data analysis and discussions

Having analyzed the data from the survey, this section dis-cusses: (1) the implementation status of change management at the company level; (2) the implementation status of change man-agement at the project level; (3) factors that affect organizations decision on whether or not to implementchange management; (4) perceptions on barriers and benefits of change management; andlastly, and (5) the impact on project performances.

4.1. Change management implementation status companylevel

This analysis provides an understanding of the extent towhich contractor companies in Singapore practice change man-agement. As shown in Table 2 , 66% of the companies indicated

that they did not implement change management at all whereas34% of the companies indicated that they practice it. It is, how-ever, of interest that none of the companies has implementedchange management for more than 50% of their projects. It

Table 1Profile of companies, respondents, and projects.

Characteristics N %

Company (N + 32) Registry Grade* A (A1&A2) 6 19%B (B1 & B2) 12 38%C (C1, C2 & C3) 14 43%

Years of Experience Less than 10 3 9%10-19 6 19%20-29 20 63%30-39 2 6%40 or more 1 3%

Respondent (N= 32) Job Title Director 5 47%Management 15 47%Engineer 9 28%Administrator 3 9%

Years of Experience Less than 10 2 6%10-19 18 57%20-29 9 28%30-39 2 6%40 or more 1 3%

Project Type Building 256 66%

Infrastructure 14 4%Heavy Industrial 29 8%Light Industrial 85 22%

Project Nature Addition 146 38%Grass roots 137 36%Modernization 101 26%

Project (N = 284) Project Cost $0 $10 million 238 62%$11 $20 mill ion 96 25%$21 $30 million 18 5%$31 $40 million 13 3%$41 $50 million 8 2%$51 $60 million 1 0%$61 $70 million 1 0%$71 $80 million 6 2%$81 $90 million 0 0%

$91 $100 million 0 0%>$100 million 3 1%

*A1 - unlimited tendering limit; A2 up to S$85 million; B1 - up to S$40 million; B2 - up to S$13 million; C1 - up to S$4 million; C2 - up to S$1.3 million; and C3 - up to S$0.65 million.

Table 2Implementation status company level (I).

Extent of Change Management Implementation

No. of Companies(Total=32)

% of Companies

Not at all 21 66%b 50% of Projects 8 25%50% of Projects 3 9%>50% of Projects 0 0%

All of Projects 0 0%



5/10

can be inferred that the current implementation status of changemanagement in the Singapore construction industry is relativelylow based on the results. The reason for this low implementa-tion status may be due to unfamiliarly to the process of changemanagement or companies are unaware of potential benefitsfrom implementing it. Hence, barriers and benefits of changemanagement implementation are further investigated and dis-cussed later.

Based on the company grades, Table 3 presents the number and percentage of companies which implemented change man-agement. The companies of higher grades (A1 & A2 67%;B1 & B2 42%) tend to implement change management more than those lower grades (C1, C2 and C3 14%). One possible reason for this result is that bigger companies might be better equipped with readily available resources, more expe-rience in the industry, more professionals with expertise, andadvanced technology and implementation processes. This alsotends to cause bigger companies to more appreciate benefits

from change management.

4.2. Change management implementation status project level

Following the analysis at the company level, the implemen-tation status at the project level was also analyzed to provide amore comprehensive and accurate assessment of the implemen-tation status. In general, out of a total of 384 projects, only 121 projects (32%) implemented change management, indicatingthat the implementation status of change management is alsomoderately low. Furthermore, in order to attain in-depth under-standing of the implementation status at the project level, fac-tors such as project type, nature, and cost were considered for further analyses, and the results are summarized in Table 4 .

First, the projects were categorized into the categories of building, infrastructure, heavy industrial and light industrialaccording to project types. For this study, building projects arethose that include offices, institutions, residential, and retails. In-frastructure projects refer to highways, airport, tunneling, and bridges. Next, heavy industrial projects focus on chemical, elec-trical, mining, and refining. Lastly, light industrial consist of con-sumer products manufacturing, pharmaceuticals manufacturing,and electronics manufacturing.

As shown in Table 4 , 38% of building projects implemented

change management. Isaac and Navon (2008) underlined that

managing changes in building projects can be difficult becausethe changes often generate unanticipated side effects. As build-ing projects may require careful planning to meet and cater tothe requirements of the users, there should be minimal errorsand changes especially at the initial stage where emphasis is placed on planning. Therefore, building projects might imple-ment change management more than other projects, ensuringthat changes occurred are timely tackled in the shortest timeand thus their impact on project performance can be minimized.

Next, the projects were classified into addition, grass roots,and modernization categories according to their nature. Addition

refers to adding on to current existing facilities which may oftenresult in the expansion of the capacity while grass roots refer tocompletion of a new construction projects or demolition of exist-ing facilities before the commencement of a new construction.Lastly, modernization refers to modification or improvements toexisting facilities which may often involved certain equipment or structure of components to be removed, replaced or improved.From Table 4 , itcan be seen that 87 out of 137 grass roots projects(64%) implemented change management, which takes the highest percentage among the three categories. As mentioned above,grass roots refer to new construction projects. Therefore, carefuland proper planning for the entire project is essential. If there isany delay in any of planned activities, it will eventually have animpact on project cost as well. To avoid this, the project

Table 3Implementation status company level (II).

Registry Grade* No. of Companies

No. of CompaniesImplementingChangeManagement

% of CompaniesImplementingChangeManagement

A (A1, A2) 6 4 67%B (B1, B2) 12 5 42%C (C1, C2, C3) 14 2 14%Total 32 11 34%

*A1 - unlimited tendering limit; A2 up to S$85 million; B1 - up to S$40 million; B2 - up to S$13 million; C1 - up to S$4 million; C2 - up to S$1.3 million; and C3 - up to S$0.65 million.

Table 4Implementation status project level.

Project Characteristics No. of Projects

No. of ProjectsImplementingChangeManagement

% of ProjectsImplementingChangeManagement

Project Type Building 256 96 38%Infrastructure 14 2 14%HeavyIndustrial

29 3 10%

Light Industrial 85 20 24%Project

NatureAddition 146 22 15%Grass roots 137 87 64%Modernization 101 12 12%

Project Cost $0 $10 million 238 89 37%$11 $20 million

96 15 16%

$21

$30 million18 2 11%

$31$40 million

13 9 69%

$41$50 million

8 5 63%

$51$60 million

1 0 0%

$61$70 million

1 0 0%

$71$80 million

6 1 17%

$81$90 million

0 0 0%

$91$100 million

0 0 0%

>$100 million 3 0 0%Total 384 121 32%



6/10

management team has to consider various factors that can causechanges in any phrase of the project. This may further encourageadoption of change management as its proper implementation canresult in early identification of project changes ( Ibbs et al., 2001).

Lastly, the projects were categorized based on their totalcosts as seen in Table 4 . 69% and 63% of the projects costing between $31 million to $40 million and $41 million to$50 million implemented change management respectively.As these projects involved a relatively large sum of project cost, the implementation percentage tends to be higher thanthe others. For bigger projects, the project management teamis more careful with the issues that can affect the project, espe-cially cost. Although project cost ranging from $0 to$10 million constitutes to the majority of the total number of projects, the implementation percentage for these projects isonly 37%. This could be due to the small scale of the projectsthat may afford to have neither full time staff nor effective pro-cesses and systems for change management. In addition, it is of

interest that the higher project cost may not eventually lead tomore implementation of change management as seen inTable 4 - only one out of 11 projects costing over $51 millionimplemented change management. However, having only 11companies for this range of project cost is too small to deter-mine conclusive results for the entire population.

4.3. Decision factors determining implementation of changemanagement

As presented above, the analysis revealed that the extent of change management implementation in the Singapore construc-tion industry is relatively low. Therefore, in order to increase itsusage, it would be meaningful to identify decision determinantsof change management implementation. For this analysis, fivemost plausible factors (Project Cost, Project Size, Project Type, Project Nature, and Statutory Requirement) were listedin the survey questionnaire and the respondents were asked toassign their ranks to the five factors with 1 as the least influen-tial factor and 5 as the most influential factor. Table 5 summa-rizes the result.

As seen in Table 5 , there are two main factors that encouragecompanies to implement change management into their projects(Mean Score>3): (1) project cost; and (2) statutory require-ment. According to Zou and Lee (2008) project cost is the

most sensitive and important aspect in construction projects.As a result, when decision on whether or not to practice certainmanagement approaches is made, the additional cost for imple-mentation may be considered seriously even if the practices

have been already proven in terms of their benefits. This may be one possible reason that the project cost is recognized asthe most important decision determinant. Next, statutory re-quirement was the second most influential factor, indicatingthat it would act as enforcement for companies to undertakechange management. In other words, if any statutory were toenforce this as a Must , companies will comply with it inorder not to violate the regulation and thus to be penalized. It is of interest that the project size (Rank= 4) and type(Rank=5) may not be seriously considered when the decisionis made.

4.4. Barriers and benefits of change management

Among the companies that do not implement change manage-ment, a subsequent question on their barriers against its imple-mentation was asked. 7 factors were listed in the questionnaireand the responses are summarized in Table 6 .

81% of the respondents indicated that being comfortable withcurrent operations is the greatest barrier hindering them fromimplementing change management, followed by the small scaleof projects (48%). Companies may be reluctant to be adapted toa new management style and prefer to maintain with their current operations. Furthermore, practicing new management approachesrequire additional resources and technical requirements to support them. This also incurs additional cost and thus becomes the mainissue when companies consider the implementation of changemanagement. It is of interest that there were respondents whoeven consider change management time consuming (38%).While the result might be due partly to concerns about timetaken for its implementation, it draws attention as the result mayimply that benefits from change management have not beenwell recognized in the Singapore construction industry. As a re-sult, in order to encourage more implementation, perceptions of the respondents on benefits of change management were investi-gated and highlighted in Table 6 as well.

In general, the respondents agreed that their companies have benefited from the implementation. More specifically, 82% of the respondents indicated that they can respond faster and

Table 5Decision Factors Determining Implementation of Change Management.

Factors Scale TotalScore

Mean Rank

1 2 3 4 5

Project Cost 2 0 0 16 14 136 4.25 1Statutory Requirement 3 3 5 12 9 117 3.66 2Project Nature 9 7 6 1 9 90 2.81 3Project Size 7 10 13 2 0 74 2.31 4Project Type 11 12 8 1 0 63 1.97 5

Table 6Barriers and benefits.

Category No. of Respondents %

Barriers Comfortable with current operations 17 81%Project scale is too small 10 48%Time consuming 8 38%Implementation cost 6 29%Lack of management 2 10%Lack of specialised professionals 1 5%Lack of resources 1 5%

Benefits Fast responses to changes 9 82%Time saving 6 55%Cost saving 6 55%Project risk reduction 4 36%Productivity improvement 4 36%Quality improvement 3 27%Communication & teamwork

improvement

3 27%



7/10

more readily to project changes, practicing change manage-ment. This is supported by Motawa et al. (2007) who arguedthat change management can aid in the planning and control-ling of actions to be taken in an event of potential project changes. Next, cost and time savings were found to be the sec-ond most benefits identified. Hence, this further supports theimportance of implementing change management in projects.Cost and time have been the two major objectives of construc-tion projects and as change management may reduce cost andtime, more companies will implement it. Another important aspect of projects is quality. However, it was reported that only27% of the respondents recognize improvement in quality byimplementing change management. In fact, change manage-ment may not directly improve quality while it would remove potential risks that are caused by changes, which affect qualityof the project.

4.5. Importance and impact of change management

This analysis was first focused on identifying the importanceof change management in improving project performances. Therespondents were asked to rate the scale of the importance with1 as not important and 5 as extremely important. In addition, percentage of cost and time savings, and quality improvement were analyzed based on the inputs from the respondents. Therespondents provided data showing how much of project cost and schedule could be reduced by implementing change man-agement. Similarly, quality improvement by implementing the practice was also investigated. For the 21 respondents who in-dicated that change management was not implemented intheir projects, the responses were based on perceptions of therespondents while the 11 respondents who practiced changemanagement for their projects responded based on their project data. The analysis results of the importance of change manage-ment to project overall, cost, time and quality performances aresummarized in Table 7and Fig. 1 while Table 8 and Fig. 2 are provided for the results of its impact on project cost saving,time saving, and quality improvement.

For overall project performance improvement, only 15% of the companies that have not implement change management per-ceived its importance at the level of 4 and 5 while 73% of thecompanies that implemented the practice selected either 4 or 5.The mean difference between the two groups was statistically sig-

nificant as shown in Table 7 (p-value= 0.008). This tendency was

also reported in the analysis for cost (p-value=0.000), time (p-value=0.006), and quality (p-value=0.003) performances. As aresult, it can be concluded that those who have implementedchange management to their projects are aware of its importancein improving project performances more than those who havenot.

More specifically, as shown it Table 7 , 14 out of 21 compa-nies (66%) that have not implement change management indi-cated a neutral view (Mean=2.9) towards the importance of change management in improving cost performance. This result is also along with the result of the analysis on cost savings fromchange management, as shown in Table 8 . 66% of the respon-dents in the same group as above indicated that their perceptionof the impact of change management on project cost saving isonly 1% to 3%, and even 24% of the respondents reportedthat no cost savings could be obtained from change manage-ment. In contrast, the 11 companies implementing change man-agement argued that change management plays an important

role for improving cost performance (Mean= 4.1- SeeTable 7 ) and can result in cost savings by an average of 5.7%(See Table 8 ), which is much greater than the average cost sav-ings of the other group that does not practice change manage-ment(1.8%). The difference in cost savings between the twogroups is statistically significant (p-value=0.000) as shown inTable 8 .

In addition, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2, the distributions of the group implementing change management tend to be placed in the higher scores for the importance and the greater cost savings for the impact respectively. This may infer that those who have ever implemented change management rec-ognize its importance and appreciate benefits (cost savings)more than those who have not. Therefore, it may be deducedthat companies with change management are more likely toachieve better cost performance. This result could beexpected as project changes identified at the earlier phrasecan be resolved with less impact on cost performance ( Zouand Lee, 2008 ).

As seen in Table 7 and Fig. 1, the importance of change man-agement in improving time performance is also prominent fromthe perspectives of the companies practicing it (Mean= 3.8)while a majority of the respondents in the other group (80%)took a neutral stand (Mean=3.0). Also, as shown in Table 8 ,47% of the 21 respondents mentioned that change management

cannot produce time savings. This might infer that these

Do Not Implement Change Management

Implement Change Management

Fig. 1. Importance of change management.



8/10

respondents rarely perceive change management as an approachto improving time performance. These respondents may deemimplementation of change management as time consuming rather than time saving in a project. They may not be willing to invest

extra time in implementing change management due to their hec-tic schedule. Nonetheless, as shown in Table 8 , the respondentsthat have implemented change management still report its benefit of schedule reduction by an average of 7%, which is statisticallysignificantly different (p- value=0.000) from the average timesaving of the other group (1.6%).

In addition, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2, there is a tendency that the group with greater recognition to the importance producesmore time savings in their projects. In order to implement changemanagement, a considerable amount of time may be required dueto, for example, decision making processes, documentation andtracking of changes, development of mitigation plans, and execu-tion of the plans. However, it can also result in time saving whenthe term refers to fewer delays to projects or less rework to bedone (Roundtable, 2004 ). With concise evaluation on project changes, rework can be reduced, mitigating the risk of delaying projects. Therefore, despite a considerable amount of time spent in implementing change management, the time savings obtainedcan offset it.

In case of quality, although 64% of the companies that implemented change management reported that it has an impact on quality improvement by 1 to 3% (Mean=4%), as shown inTable 8 , 71% of the respondents in the other group felt that change management does not have any impact (Mean=0.9),resulting in the statistically significant mean difference between

the two groups (p-value=0.010). Figs. 1 and 2 also confirm the

result, showing the extreme contrast of the distributions of thetwo groups. It is of interest that the quality improvement bychange management is not as high as cost and time savings.This might be because improvement in quality would not be

measured as explicit as cost and schedule savings.

4.6. Limitations

Although the findings from the analyses provide better un-derstanding of the status, importance and impact of changemanagement in the context of the Singapore construction indus-try, there are a couple of limitations. The survey questionnaireswere sent out to developers, quantity surveyors, project man-agement consultants, facilities management consultants, andcontractors. However, due to the low response rate of theother designations, only responses from contractors were ana-lyzed. As a result, the findings should be interpreted from the perspective of contractors. Also, it should be noted that the re-spondents were mostly from small and mid-sized companiesand thus, the analysis results presented in this study may not be readily generalized, especially for relatively large construc-tion firms and projects. Finally, as the statistical tests were per-formed with small samples, cautions should be warranted whenthe test results are generalized.

5. Conclusions and recommendations

The main objective of this study was: (1) to investigate theimplementation status of change management in the Singapore

construction industry; (2) to explore benefits and barriers of

Table 7Importance of change management in improving project performances.

N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 2 10%2 1 9% 7 33% 0 0% 5 24% 0 0% 2 10% 1 9% 14 66%3 2 18% 11 52% 1 9% 14 66% 4 36% 17 80% 8 73% 3 14%4 7 64% 2 10% 8 73% 1 5% 5 46% 2 10% 1 9% 2 10%5 1 9% 1 5% 2 18% 1 5% 2 18% 0 0% 1 9% 0 0%

0.006*

T-Test(P-Value)

0.003*

Quality PerformanceOverall Performance

T-Test(P-Value)

0.008*

T-Test(P-Value)

0.000*

Cost Performance Time Performance

T-Test(P-Value)

3.2 2.23.7 2.9 4.1 2.9 3.8 3.0

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

Importance(1 - Notimportant;5- Extremelyimportant)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

*Indicates statistically significant results at the 0.05 level; indicates the highest frequency in the group; Bold indicates the higher mean in the comparison groups.

Do Not Implement Change Management

Implement Change Management

Fig. 2. Impact of change management.



9/10

change management implementation; and (3) to assess the importance and impact of change management in terms of project performances. Based on the analysis results, it can be conclud-ed that the implementation status of change management in

Singapore is relatively low as majority of the companies and projects do not implement change management. In an attempt to investigate the reasons for the low implementation status, de-terrence factors were determined, and being comfortable withthe current operations and constraint from project cost andtime were the prominent barriers that the industry must get through to appreciate more benefits from implementation of change management.

As for the importance of change management to project per-formances, in general, the companies that do not implement change management perceived it at a neutral stand while theother group is fully aware of the importance. Furthermore,more cost and time savings, and quality improvement could be achieved by the group practicing change management, andwhen compared to the outcomes of the other group, the differ-ence was statistically significant.

Considering that perceptions of those who do not implement change management on benefits of change management are al-ways lower than actual improvement and savings that can beachieved by its implementation, construction contractors in Sin-gapore seem to be unaware of or unfamiliar with change manage-ment and its benefits. In an attempt to increase the usage, trainingsessions should be provided and further emphasis should be placed on barriers that deter its implementation so as to addressconcerns of those who do not implement change management.

For future studies, it is recommended to quantify level of change implementation at project and company levels since de-gree of performance improvement can be affected by the extent to which change management is implemented. Also, the impact of change management on other performances such as productiv-ity, safety or customer satisfaction can be analyzed. Lastly, a sim-ilar study can be done based on input from project owners,developers, and architecture, considering that the project participants may have more control on the issues arising from changes.

References

Arain, F.M., Assaf, S., Low, S.P., 2004. Causes of Discrepancies between De-

sign and Construction. Architectural Science Review 47 (3), 237 249 .

Arain, F.M., Low, S.P., 2005. The potential effects of variation orders on insti-tutional building projects. Facilities 23 (11/12), 496 510 .

Assaf, S.A., Al-Khalil, M., Al-Hazmi, M., 1995. Causes of Delays in LargeBuilding Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering andManagement 11 (2), 45 50 .

Charoenngam, C., Coquinco, S., Hadikusumo, B., 2003. Web-based applicationfor managing change orders in construction projects. Construction Innova-tion 3, 197 215 .

CII, 1990. The Impact of Changes on Construction Cost and Schedule. Con-struction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

CII, 1995. Qualitative Effects of Project Changes. Construction Industry Institute,University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

Clough, R.H., Sears, G.A., 1994. Construction Contracting, 6th ed. John Wiley& Sons Inc., New York, NY.

Fisk, E.R., 1997. Construction Project Administration, 5th ed. Prentice-Hall,upeer Saddle River, NJ.

Hester, W., Kuprenas, J.A., Chang, T.C., 1991. Construction Changes andChange Orders: Their Magnitude and Impact. University of California,Berkeley, CA.

Hwang, B.G., Thomas, S.R., Haas, C.T., Caldas, C.H., 2009. Measuringthe Impact

of Rework on Construction Cost Performance. Journal of Construction Engi-neering and Management 135 (3), 187 198.

Ibbs, C., 1997. Change's impact on construction productivity. Journal of Con-struction Engineering and Management 123 (1), 89 97.

Ibbs, C.W., Wong, C.K., Kwak, Y.H., 2001. ProjectChange Management System.Journal of Management in Engineering 17 (3), 159 165.

Isaac, S., Navon, R., 2008. Feasibility study of an automated tool for identifyingthe implications of changes in construction projects. Journal of ConstructionEngineering and Management 134 (2), 139 145 .

Karim, A., Adeli, H., 1999. CONSCOM: An OO Construction Scheduling andChange Management System. Journal of Construction Engineering andManagement 125 (5), 368 377 .

Kumaraswamy, M., Miller, D., Yogeswaran, K., 1998. Claims for extension of time in civil engineering projects. Construction Management and Economics16 (3), 283 294.

Lee, S.H., Pea-Mora, F., 2005. System dynamics approach for error andchange management in concurrent design and construction. Proc. of the2005 Winter Simulation Conf., Orlando, FL, pp. 1508 1514.

Lee, S.H., Pea-Mora, F., Park, M., 2005. Quality and Change Management Model for Large Scale Concurrent Design and Construction Projects. Journalof Construction Engineering and Management 131 (8), 890 902.

Love, P.E., Holt, G.D., Shen, L.Y., Li, H., Irani,Z., 2002. Using systemsdynamicsto better understand change and rework in construction project management systems. International Journal of Project Management 20 (6), 425 436.

Ming, S., Sexton, M., Aouad, G., Fleming, A., Senaratne, S., Anumba, C.,2004. Industrial Report: Managing Changes in Construction ProjectsRe-trieved May 10, 2010, from Bristol UWE: School of the Built and NaturalEnvironment: http://www.bne.uwe.ac.uk/cprc/publications/mcd.pdf .

Motawa, I., Anumba, C., Lee, S., Pea-Mora, F., 2007. An integrated systemfor change management in construction. Automation in Construction 16

(3), 368 377 .

Table 8Impact of Change Management on Project Performances.

N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean N % Mean0% 0 0% 5 24% 0 0% 10 47% 0 0% 15 71%

1-3% 0 0% 14 66% 1 10% 8 38% 7 64% 4 19%4-6% 9 82% 2 10% 5 45% 2 10% 2 18% 2 10%7-9% 1 9% 0 0% 0 0% 1 5% 0 0% 0 0%10% 1 9% 0 0% 5 45% 0 0% 2 18% 0 0%

0.000*

T-Test(P-Value)

0.010*

Cost Saving Time Saving Quality Improvement

T-Test(P-Value)

0.000* 4.0% 0.9%5.6% 1.8% 7.0% 1.6%

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21)

ChangeManagement

(N = 11)

No ChangeManagement

(N = 21) T-Test

(P-Value)Scale

*Indicates statistically significant results at the 0.05 level; indicates the highest frequency in the group; Bold indicates the higher mean in the comparison groups.

http://www.bne.uwe.ac.uk/cprc/publications/mcd.pdfhttp://www.bne.uwe.ac.uk/cprc/publications/mcd.pdf


10/10

O'Brien, J.J., 1998. Construction Change Orders. McGraw Hill, New York, NY.Park, M., 2002. Dynamic Change Management for Fast-tracking Construction

ProjectsRetrievedJune22, 2010, fromBuilding and Fire Research Laboratory:Fire on the Web: http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build02/art129.html .

Roundtable, T.C., 2004. Construction Project Controls: Cost, Schedule, andChange ManagementRetrieved May 10, 2010, from NW Ohio Great LakesConstruction Alliance: http://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%

20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdf (September).

Sun, M., Senaratne, S., Fleming, A., Motowa, I., Yeoh, M., 2006. A changemanagement toolkit for construction projects. Architectural Engineeringand Design Management 2 (4), 261 271 .

Zhao, Z.Y., Lv, Q.L., Zuo, J., Zillante, G., 2009. A Prediction System for Change Management in Construction Project. Journal of Construction Engi-neering and Management 136 (6), 659 669 .

Zou, Y.,Lee, S.-H.,2008. Theimpacts of changemanagement practiceson project

change cost performance. Construction Management and Economics 26 (4),387 393.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build02/art129.htmlhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://www.nwoglca.org/PDF_Files/Construction%20Project%20Controls_%20Cost,%20Schedule%20and%20Change%20Management.pdfhttp://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build02/art129.html

construction project change management in singapore

Documents