Volume 65 | No. 1 & 2 |2019|ISSN:116 -915X

THEQUANTITYSURVEYOR

Volume 65 | No. 1 & 2 |2019|ISSN:116 -915XCost management | Procurement Management | Project Management

is published bi-annually (twice per year) including special issue(s) where necessary, through theNigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors.

publishes high quality - minimum of double - blind peer-reviewed research papers in the areas ofCost management; Cost information management; Construction economics; Construction project management; Designand construction management processes; Housing and infrastructure development; Stakeholders management; Projectplanning and project impact assessments; Procurement management; Management of construction companies; Industrydevelopment; Knowledge management in construction; Innovation in construction; Sustainable construction; Projectfinancing; Current and emerging infrastructure issues in developing countries. as well as other relevant issues.

The goal of the journal is to broaden the knowledge of construction professionals and academicians by promoting accessto quality information and providing valuable insight to construction-related information, research and ideas.

welcomes research or technical articles, which are published after proper peer-review process,and provided the author(s) adhere strictly to the guideline for publication.

Copyright: © 2019, The Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors

All rights Reserved. In accessing this journal, you agree that you will access the contents for your own personal use butnot for any commercial use. Any use and or copies of this Journal in whole or in part must include the customarybibliographic citation, including author attribution, date and article title.

In no event shall the management of The Quantity Surveyor be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, or consequentialdamages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use of the articles or other material derived from The QuantitySurveyor, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability.

This publication is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limitedto, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement.

Descriptions of, or references to, products or publications does not imply endorsement of that product or publication.

While every effort is made by management of The Quantity Surveyor to see that no inaccurate or misleading data, opinionor statements appear in this publication, they wish to make it clear that the data and opinions appearing in the articles andadvertisements herein are the responsibility of the contributor or advertiser concerned. Management of The QuantitySurveyor makes no warranty of any kind, either express or implied, regarding the quality, accuracy, availability, orvalidity of the data or information in this publication or of any other publication to which it may be linked.

ISSN:116-915X©2019 TheNigerianInstituteofQuantitySurveyorshttp://journal.niqs.org.ng

Prof. Deji R. OgunsemiDepartment of Quantity Surveying,Federal University of Technology Akure, NigeriaEmail: drogunsemi@futa.edu.ng

Dr. Ayodeji E. OkeDepartment of Quantity Surveying,Federal University of Technology Akure, NigeriaEmail: emayok@gmail.com, aeoke@futa.edu.ng

Prof. HenryA. Odeyinka Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile -Ife, NigeriaProf. Olukayode S. Oyediran University of Lagos, Akoka, NigeriaProf. Ahmed D. Ibrahim Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, NigeriaProf. Yahaya M. Ibrahim Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, NigeriaProf. Yakubu Ibrahim Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, NigeriaProf King N.O. Nyenke Rivers State University, Port-Harcourt, NigeriaDr. Samuel I. J. Onwusonye Imo State University, Owerri, NigeriaDr. Uchenna O. Ajator Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, NigeriaDr. Richard Kolawole Federal Polytechnic, Bauchi, NigeriaDr. Simon Eigbe Auchi Polytechnic, Auchi, Nigeria

Prof. Abdul Rashidi Universiti Sains MalaysiaProf. Charles Egbu University of East London, UKProf. George Ofori London South Bank University, UKProf. Godwin Jagboro Obafemi Awolowo University Ile -Ife, NigeriaProf. Hamman Tukur Sa’ad Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, NigeriaProf. Joseph Afolayan Anchor University Lagos, NigeriaProf. Kabir Bala Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, NigeriaProf. Martin Skitmore Queensland University of Technology Sydney, AustraliaProf. Paul Olomolaiye University of the West of England Bristol, UKProf. T. C. Mogbo Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, NigeriaProf. Theo Haupt Mangosuthu University of Technology Durban, South AfricaProf. Julius Fasakin Federal University of Technology Akure, NigeriaProf. Stephen Ogunlana Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh, UK

Ms. Lauretta GerardNigerian Institute of Quantity SurveyorsPlot 1743, Cadastral Zone, B6 Mabushi DistrictAbuja, Nigeria

ISSN:116-915X©2019TheNigerianInstituteofQuantitySurveyorshttp://journal.niqs.org.ng

VOLUME 65 ISSUE 1-2 SEPTEMBER 2019 ISSN 116-915X

4 EDITORIAL 65(1)

6-13 Kolawole Taoheed Bashir and GbemisolaAjoke AkinolaAssessment of factors influencing theuse of advance payment on buildingprojects in Lagos, Nigeria

14-20 Ayodeji Oke and Olayinka OmoleDrivers influencing the adoption of IBS in theconstruction industry

21-29 Adesoye Morakinyo and Oluwaseyi A.AwodeleCareers awareness among stakeholders forsustainability of built environment in Nigeria

30-42 Grace Kehinde Ojo and Esther IloriEbunoluwaRisk matrix analysis approach of marketing ofconstruction professional services

43-57 Najimu SakaAn assessment of the impact of foreign directinvestment (FDI) on the Nigerian constructionsector (NCS)

58-73 Ahmad Sani Ahmad, Abdullahi Yahya Waziriand Abdullahi Nafiu ZadawaA conceptual model for building informationmodelling (BIM) adoption by Nigerianconstruction professionals

74-81 Bamidele Temitope Arijeloye, DouglasOmoregie Aghimien Olusola FestusAkinradewo and Ruqayyah Titilayo Abdul-KareemCost variability of educational buildingprojects in Ondo-State, Nigeria

82-97 Ayokunle Olubunmi OlanipekunAssessing the approaches for implementingproject owners’ motivation and commitment inthe delivery of sustainable buildings

98-110 Usman Mohammed Datti, Ibrahim IbrahimInuwa, Nuru Gambo, and Joshua ShedrackMangvwatPreconditions for estimating building projectcost in design and management contract

113 EDITORIAL 65(2)

PAPERS

114-125 Rilwan Shuaibu Abdulrahman, Baba Adama Kolo,Ahmed Doko Ibrahim and Abdulrasheed MaduguAbdullahiCorrelates of risk factors in joint venture projects

126-138 Muhammad Laminu Ibrahim, Yahaya MakarfiIbrahim, Abdulazeez Abdulmumin and AliyuGaladima ShehuAssessment of stakeholder engagement in tertiaryeducation trust fund (TETFund) constructionprojects

139-158 Alexander Ejiro Omoraka, Ayodeji EmmanuelOke and Isaac Olaniyi AjeTraining of construction professionals in supplychain management: a case of Nigerian QuantitySurveyors

159-166 Gbemisola Ajoke Akinola and Kolawole TaoheedBashirAssessment of professionals’ level of awareness ofproject planning processes in the Nigerianconstruction industry

167-175 Olusola OlatunjiCritical success factors for PPP projects in theNigerian construction industry

176-184 Kenneth Otasowie and Ayodeji OkeAppraisal of required mentoring practices inquantity surveying firms in Nigeria

185-1933 Samuel Opeyemi Williams; Razali Adul Hamid;Funmilola Florence Williams; Hellen OmoladeObagboye and Taki Eddine SeghierA critical review of the responsibilities ofstakeholders in building construction safety

194-208 Inuwa Nuruddeen Mohammed, Gambo Nuru &Abdullahi Nafi’u ZadawaEffect of moral stakeholders’ participation onsatisfaction with delivery of projects in FederalUniversity Kashere

(September, 2019) 113

ISSN:116-915X©2019TheNigerianInstituteof QuantitySurveyorshttp://journal.niqs.org.ng

Risk have always been a major threat to the successful delivery of construction joint venture (JV) projects. Researchers haveemployed risk factors that are known to affect JV project performance with the assumption that, these factors are independentof one another. However, the independencies of these factors have not been tested. And so, it is worthwh ile to evaluate therelationships amongst the risk factors affecting construction JV projects. Abdulrahman, Kolo, Ibrahim And Abdullahiuncovered a strong and positive relationship with a high level of significance between the different categories of risk factors.This depicts the dependencies of these risk categories on one another and renders the categorisations unreliable.

The stakeholder management concept has become an important tool for steering project stakeholders towards successfulproject delivery. However, there are no adequate research studies in Nigeria that have examined the practice used in engagingproject stakeholders in construction projects. Ibrahim, Ibrahim, Abdulmumin and Shehu thus studied the practice used inengaging project stakeholders in TETFUND construction projects. They compared the practice used by consulting projectmanagement firms in engaging project stakeholders to the guidelines stated in the literature. This study will assist projectmanagers in handling the various stakeholders to achieve more successful project delivery.

Omoraka, Oke and Aje assessed the training of Nigerian quantity surveyors in relation to the knowledge requirements ofSCM, with a view to examine their capability to function as supply chain managers. They revealed the level of incorporationof the knowledge requirements of SCM into the quantity surveying curricula and thus concluded that Nigerian quantitysurveyors have the potential to function as supply chain managers. Finally, they recommended a need for academicinstitutions, and the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (NIQS) to take into serious consideration certain areas whenreviewing the academic programme of Quantity Surveying.

Project planning is an essential element in the management and execution of construction projects. The knowledge of theplanning processes will influence its ultimate implementation. The professionals’ level of awareness of project planningprocesses in the Nigerian construction industry was exposed by Akinola and Bashir. They provided enlightenment on theknowledge areas with the least level of awareness and posited that trainings in this areas will enhance project performance.

Olatunji acknowledged that the use of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) for infrastructure projects in Nigeria haveincreased significantly in recent years across the three levels of government. He carried out a comparative analysis betweenthe result of his survey in Nigeria with previous studies carried out in the United Kingdom and the United Arab Emirates.This revealed some similarity in some of the key factors. His work will support relevant stakeholders in PPPs policyformulation and development; and enhance the collaboration and manner in which partners go about PPP projects.

Oke and Otasowie appraised the required mentoring practices in quantity surveying firms in Nigeria with a view toproviding possible practices for effective professional transition and developing leaders within the built environment. Thestudy affirms the problem of adopting mentoring concept in quantity surveying firms despite knowledge of the concept. Thispaper highlighted the required mentoring practices in Nigerian quantity surveying firms and postulated ways through whichthe practices can be implemented in the firms for better professional transition and development of leaders in the constructionindustry.

Majority of the construction sites in Nigeria experience a wide gap between safety expectation and safety realization.Williams, Hamid, Williams, Obagboye and Seghier blamed this on the passion to achieve cost minimization, quality andtimely delivery of the project. They systematically reviewed past studies to unearthed and affirm the factors responsible forpoor safety performance by construction stakeholders in Nigeria. They identified those responsible for the poor safetyperformance and illustrated various ways to promote safety in the construction sites.

Using inputs from both teaching and non-teaching staff of Federal University Kasher, Gombe State, Nigeria; Mohammed,Nuru and Zadawa showed the effect of moral stakeholders’ participation on satisfaction with delivery of projects in theuniversity. The authors stated that there is need for both private and public clients to integrate the expectations of moralstakeholders into the planning, design, and delivery of their project. This is necessary to improve the usability of the projectafter completion.

(2),

(September, 2019) 126-138

ISSN:116-915X©2019TheNigerianInstituteof QuantitySurveyorshttp://journal.niqs.org.ng

Muhammad Laminu Ibrahim1*, Yahaya Makarfi Ibrahim 2, Abdulazeez Abdulmumin 1 and AliyuGaladima Shehu1.

The stakeholder management concept has become an important tool for steering project stakeholders towards successful projectdelivery. However, despite the importance of project stakeholder management as a major criterion for project success, thereare no adequate research studies in Nigeria that have actually assessed project stakeholder engagement processes in constructionprojects. This study assesses the practice used in engaging project stakeholders in TETFUND construction projects. Semi-structured interview guide was employed to conduct interview to (10) ten selected project managers that were determined bypurposive sampling. The responses were analysed using comparative content analysis. The study reveals the current practiceuse by consulting project management firms in engaging project stakeholders is a not properly in accordance with the guidelinesstated in the literature. Therefore, there is need for proper engagement of project stakeholders throughout the phases ofconstruction projects. This study will help project managers in capturing and meeting the various stakeholders’ needs andexpectations involved in construction projects for achieving more successful project delivery.

The notion of project stakeholders and their role in determining project success is increasingly attracting more attention inproject management research (Takim, 2009; Ibrahim, 2014; Onarinde, 2011). Construction project management is not anexception to this considering the complex nature and size of the construction industry as well as its composition of differentstakeholders with differing interests. According to Olander and Landin (2005) construction projects involve many differentand sometimes discrepant interests that must be managed. PMI (2008) further supported this assertion by describing projectas the process of adapting the specifications, plans, and approaches to the different concerns and expectations of the variousstakeholders. Therefore, projects must be designed and structured in such a way that it accommodates the different interestsof its stakeholders. Stakeholder management is an aspect of project management that deals with managing the relationshipsand interests of different stakeholders involved in a project.

Construction projects involve many phases, and at each phase/stage, there are key individuals or group of people that areneeded to act (Ibrahim et al. 2016). These individuals or groups are termed project stakeholders. McElroy and Mills (2003)defined project stakeholder as a person or group of people who have a vested interest in the success of a project and theenvironment within which the project operates. Hence, project stakeholders can either affect project positively towards itssuccess or negatively which may result to project failure. This incorporates both the internal and external stakeholders of aproject. Usually, internal stakeholders tend to have interests within the project or its successful accomplishment whileexternal stakeholders are in most cases affected by the project because it operates within their environment. Through adequateand proper stakeholder engagement, the potential project risks associated with stakeholders can be more effectively managed(Bourne & Walker, 2008).

Dosumu and Onukwube (2013) recommended that for construction projects to be successful, attention must be paid to user’srelated factors, professionals’ factors and organisation’s factors. All these can be effectively ach ieved through properstakeholder engagement. In Nigeria, studies have concentrated on establishing the importance project stakeholders(Ogwueleka, 2011); assessing the awareness and relevance of project stakeholder among construction practitioners(Onarinde, 2011); stakeholders’ roles in time overrun (Bashir, 2014); the effects of poor stakeholders’ management in road

(2),

127

projects (Ezeabasili 2015); appraisal of stakeholder analysis in construction projects (Ibrahim 2016); allimportantly leaving out an assessment of stakeholder engagement process. Furthermore, Gambo (2017) concluded thatmost of the construction projects completed under the TETFUND scheme were deemed unsuccessful by the end users. Thesecalls for an assessment of the steps used in engaging the various project stakeholders involved in the projects. Stakeholderengagement process in construction projects involves: identification, prioritization, mapping, engaging and managing (Yuand Shen 2005; Ye et al. 2009; Bourne, 2009; Beach and Keast, 2010; Bourne 2010; Nash and Chinyio 2010). Therefore,this study assesses the practice of engaging project stakeholders in TETFUND construction projects in Nigerian.

Project success can be perceived from different perceptions depending on the criteria used in determining it. These rangefrom: completing projects within budgets and schedule, achieving the desired quality, meeting clients’ requirements andsatisfying end users; to accommodating the differing interest of project stakeholders. There is significant evolution over timewith regards to the perception of project success (Davies, 2014; Dekkar and Qing, 2014). However, Berk and Kartal (2012)pointed out that the key elements for success in construction projects are life cycle management and stakeholders. Ibrahim

(2016) further lamented that there is a paradigm shift from the traditional perception of project success (using the irontriangle as a yardstick) to the modern approach where the success of a project is determined by meeting needs andexpectations. This gave rise to stakeholder management which serves as a project management tool for engaging andmanaging project stakeholders in construction projects. Recent studies continue to show that effective stakeholdermanagement and project success are inseparable (Davies, 2014; 2017; Dekkar and Qing, 2014; Aaltonen and Jaakko, 2016).While Berardi (2013) further argued that Stakeholders influence the adoption of projects’ required success factors.

Stakeholder management is increasingly regarded as one of the most important concept under project management usedin achieving project success through managing the relationships and interests of the different stakeholders involved in aproject. Stakeholder management is now considered a key concept for the completion of construction project work (Atkinand Skitmore, 2008). This makes stakeholder management a significant component in managing a firm as well as a project.The project management team must work with the stakeholders to convince them to provide the contributions needed by theproject (Eskerod and Vaagaasar, 2014). However, stakeholder management can be effectively achieved t hrough activestakeholder engagement. Yang . (2011) indicated that because of the uncertain and complex nature of construction, it isimportant that a proper stakeholder analysis and engagement process is carried out in order to successfully manage theprocess.

Stakeholder engagement has been identified as a critical issue (Doyle, 2008; Yang 2009). Therefore, it is animportant task for the project manager to identify, engage and communicate (keeping them informed) with projectstakeholders properly and frequently. This will help in delivering successful projects that meet stakeholders’ needs andexpectations. Due to the complex nature of construction projects, and the time it takes i.e. different phases of constructionprojects, steps were methodologically identified in the literature for stakeholder engagement (Freeman, 1984; Bourne, 2009;Bourne and Weaver, 2010). These steps are:

x Identify;

x Prioritise;

x Map (visualize);

x Engage and;

x Manage (monitor)

Olander and Landin (2005) recommend that it is good practice for project teams to identify any stakeholders who can affectthe product (construction project) and then manage their differing demands through good communication. Ye (2009)describe the construction industry involving a wide range of stakeholders, each bringing them with a great variety of interests,

128

concerns, requirements and potential opportunities, thus it is very important to carefully identify all the relevant stakeholders.The stakeholder identification process is an important tool in stakeholder management as it is the starting point of stakeholderanalysis and engagement. The identification focuses or helps on defining stakeholders of an infrastructure project. Theidentification of different stakeholder groups can subsequently help an organisation to determine what type of stakeholdermanagement strategy is needed for each group.

Sometimes it may not be possible to grant all the wishes of stakeholders, so prioritisation and optimization help in makingthe best possible decision in each situation (Nash and Chinyio, 2010). Organisations/firms can prioritise certain stakeholdersat the cost of others through using factors that include: dependence theory, pressure from regulation and technologicalinnovation or industry membership (Kolk and Pinkse, 2007). These factors lead firms to deal with certain stakeholders thanmore than others. Johnson . (2005) asserted that when the differing expectations of stakeholders cannot be achieved atthe same time, compromises become worthwhile.

Mitchell (1997) developed the use of stakeholder attributes: Power, Urgency and Legitimacy as a means ofprioritising stakeholders. With the degree of these attributes, the project manager ascertains the level of response requiredfor stakeholders’ needs and expectations.

Assessing stakeholders’ attributes is one of the critical success factors for stakeholder management (Yang ., 2009).Yang (2014) pointed out that stakeholders’ attributes help project managers in effective decision making.

The stakeholders’ mapping in construction processes is a complex task (Berardi, 2013), thus Project Managers must striveto achieve this in construction projects. Mapping ensures that stakeholders are listed and at the same time assessed base onsome key identify characteristics. According to Bourne and Weaver (2010) stakeholder mapping is developing a useful listof stakeholders and assess some of their key characteristics as well as presenting the assessments in a way that helps theproject team develop insight and understanding to support their implementation of planned stakeholder initiatives. One wayin which project managers can identify stakeholders from within the construction project environment is by undertaking amapping exercise. The power/interest matrix presented by Newcombe (2003) is the most common used matrix use inmapping project stakeholders. The power/interest matrix ranks stakeholder’s dependent upon the level of power they yieldand the level of interest that they have in the operations of the project/organisation.

Stakeholder engagements (involvements) do not just deal with project manager/team interacting with the various projectstakeholders identified in the project but also encompass the full spectrum of interaction between stakeholders (Aloni

) and the decision-making process. The term encompasses both consultation and participation. According to Bourne(2010) engaging stakeholders enable the team to understand where to focus their scarce resources to ensure maximum gainfor their project. Therefore, it is very essential to engage stakeholders during all phases of the project. Different avenues forengaging stakeholders were identified by Chinyio and Olomolaiye (2010) that includes consultation, dialogue, partnershipand regular supply of information and further suggested that these avenues can be exploited at corporate events, exhibitionsand meetings. Channels of communication could also be exploited, such as uses of posters, websites, newsletters and emails.The idea is to use an approach and tactics that are effective.

As stakeholders have claims, rights, interests and expectations, they must be managed in each project to avoid any of theirinfluences that could be contrary or negative to project objectives as this will significantly affect the success of the project.Differing stakes can become a major source of conflict between stakeholders and hence it is worthwhile to managestakeholders in most project undertakings. Communication is essential for maintaining the support and commitment of allstakeholders (Briner , 1996).

129

Stakeholders are dynamic in nature, with high a tendency of changing view towards the project in the course of projectexecution. Aaltonen (2015) describes stakeholder dynamics to be changes in stakeholders’ positions and attributestowards the projects during the execution of the project. Hence, stakeholders’ positive support towards the project can changeat any time. Therefore, it is important to closely interact with them through the appropriate communication medium.

Bourne (2010) suggests that communication in its many forms is the only tool (or technique) for managing stakeholderrelationships. Effectively planning and implementing the specific communication strategy tailored for the project’sstakeholder community must be considered one of the most important roles of the team and the project manager oftenconsuming. Communication is perceived by most project stakeholders as the main factor that determines project success(Davies, 2014). While Moyanga and Ayodele (2016) identified poor communication between projects’ sta keholders as amajor source of risk at the pre-contract stage of construction. Hence, communication is the major tool that is used in ensuringproject stakeholders are adequately manage in construction projects.

For effective management of stakeholders in construction projects to take place, the firm/project team/project managermust constantly keep using the various tools at each step of engagement throughout the phases of the project. By combiningall the engagement steps, the appropriate management strategy for each stakeholder group can be identified and subsequentlyimplemented. Figure 1 provides a framework for stakeholder engagement steps. The engagement process should be acontinuous process that spans throughout the projects cycle to ensure that relationships are constantly checked and maintain,as well as identifying any change of attitude of a stakeholder or group of stakeholders towards the project.

130

Identification

Surveys, workshops, media, town hall meetings,questionnaires, formal memos/letters, public

consultation

Prioritisation

Assessing attributes through: Power, urgency,legitimacy and proximity.

Mapping

Using dimensions to map stakeholders;attitudes; attributes; and threat/cooperation.

Power/interest matrix,

Engaging

Communication through: Consultations,meetings, dialogue, decision-making

Managing

Maintenance of relationships, goodcommunication channels, identifying constantshift of interest,

131

The TETFUND was established as an intervention agency under the TETFUND ACT – TERTIARY EDUCATION TRUSTFUND (ESTABLISHMENT, ETC) ACT, 2011; charged with the responsibility for managing, disbursing and mo nitoringthe education tax to public tertiary institutions in Nigeria. One of the mandates of TETFUND is to administer and disbursemonies to Federal and State tertiary educational institutions, specifically for the provision and maintenance of essentialphysical infrastructure for teaching and learning which includes construction projects. Onuora (2017) asserted thatTETFUND has made significant positive impact towards the educational development in Nigerian tertiary institutions.

The fragmented nature of the construction industrydue to its large size and diversification laid to assessment of TETFUNDconstruction projects. TETFUND construction projects are projects with the same set up (project scheme) and within thesame type of environment (tertiary institutions). Thus, this makes the data collected comparable.

Mitchell . (1997), Chinyio and Akintoye (2003), Newcombe (2003), Olander and Landin (2005), Boatright (2006),Olander (2006), Sutterfield (2006) and Kerzner (2010) all asserted the responsibility of managing project stakeholdersto project managers. Thus, the target population is consulting Project management firms.

According to Newcombe (2003) modern construction clients tend to manifest as dynamic configurations of stakeholderswho engage with a multifaceted market. In projects involving multifaceted clients, large project teams and many otherstakeholders, there is the dire need for effective coordination and general management of the different stakes, and thiswarrants effective client leadership (Chinyio and Olomolaiye, 2010). This laid to the selection of TETFUND projects; beingprojects involving multifaceted clients. Thus, there is the TETFUND itself and the beneficiary institutions in the targetprojects selected.

Olander (2006) described project as a unique process, consisting of a set of coordinated activities with a start and a finishdate, undertaken to achieve an objective conforming to specific requirement, including constrains on time, cost and resources.As such, no two (2) projects can ever be the same. Each of the construction projects under the TETFUND scheme willdefinitely be unique in its undertaking. However, the TETFUND construction projects share the same project set-up becauseof the uniform structure of the TETFUND scheme.

Semi-structured interview guide was used to conduct interviews among the interviewees of the study. The interviewquestions were structured to provide information on the firm’s background and the approach use in engaging projectstakeholders in TETFUND construction projects.

The sample of the study was drawn using purposive sampling technique by selecting only firms that have managed morethan three TETFUND construction projects, which resulted in ten (10) firms. The samples for the research were only limitedto beneficiary tertiary institutions in North-western zone of Nigeria constituting of seven (7) states.

The targeted respondents for interview were the chief executives or senior management staff of the ten (10) firms used forthe study. This was necessary because they were in the right position to have adequate information regarding theirorganisation’s strategies or practice used in engaging stakeholders in projects. The identities of the Project management firmswere kept anonymous and referred to as: PM1, PM2, PM3, up to PM10. The results were analysed using the comparativecontent analysis, i.e., the opinions of the respondents have been combined where applicable.

Table 1 provides summary of the first section of the interview guide used for the study. The results from the show that PM1and PM3 are multi-disciplinary firms, i.e. the firms provide all range of professional services within the disciplines of thebuilt environment, while PM7 and PM9 only offer Quantity Surveying and Project Management services. All the other firmsconcentrated on the provision of architectural, planning and project management services with the exception of PM5 thatprovides further additional service of structural works.

132

PM1 Multi-disciplinaryconsultancy

5 1

(MSc. PM)

PM2 Architectural and PM 3 None

PM3 Multi-disciplinaryconsultancy

7 None

PM4 Architectural and PM 7 3

(MSc. PM)

PM5 Architectural,Structural and PM

20 4

(PMP)

PM6 Architectural and PM 15 2

(MSc. PM)

PM7 QS and PM 5 None

PM8 Architectural and PM 15 2

(PMP)

PM9 QS and PM 7 1

(MSc. PM)

PM10 Architectural and PM 5 None

Source:

The second section of the interview focused on how the firms engage the various stakeholders involve in the projects. Thefive (5) steps for stakeholder engagement identified in the literature were used in assessing the engagement of stakeholders.

All the respondents acknowledged that they identified the major project stakeholders (technical units of the institutions) atthe initial stage of the projects.

The respondents all assert that the technical units of the institutions appoint the relevant stakeholders. Identifying the endusers was another method acknowledged by all the respondents in identifying stakeholders with the exception of PM4. PM1also noted that they use the resources needed for the project as criteria in identifying stakeholders. However, when PM1 wasasked further to explain, there was no adequate and proper explanation. This suggests that resources were not used inidentifying any stakeholder.

133

All the firms admitted that they did not conduct stakeholder prioritizing or mapping exercise. Seven (7) of the respondentsare of the view that it is a responsibility of the tertiary institutions to prioritise the project needs. None of the firms havecarried out any stakeholder mapping in any way using any tool, but six of the respondents asserted that as the projectsdevelop, interest and power always emerge to influence the projects. PM5 specifically admitted that the influence and powerof some stakeholders played a role in prioritising one of the project scope handled by their firm in some way.

No single methods or tool as identified in literature was used in prioritizing or mapping the project stakeholders identified.However, economic consideration and immediate utility use were mainly the two (2) criteria used generally by all the firmsin prioritising the needs and expectations of the stakeholders.

Most of the firms admitted that the technical units of the institutions were the main group of stakeholders being engaged inthe projects. Other stakeholders especially the end-users were engaged at later phases of the project.

Consultations and site meetings were the two (2) main mediums identified by the respondents through which the stakeholdersengaged in the projects.

All the respondents identified communication as the most important tool used in managing stakeholders. The respondentsfurther emphasised that effective communication ensures and promotes good relationships between the different stakeholdersinvolved in the project. Seven (7) of the respondents identified site meeting as the most important medium through whichrelationships between the different stakeholders can be promoted.

The various communication tools used by the respondents in communicating include: Progress review meetings, writing,phone calls, Presentations, site meetings, progress reports and photos, physical demonstrations, Letters, emails and furtherconfirmations in writing. PM1, PM2, PM4 and PM10 emphasised on the need to employ the right communication tools foreach group/class of stakeholders, i.e. adequate attention should be paid in using the right tool for the right stakeholders.Result of the study also showed that form of communication used was not strategic; the project managers do not adopt thenecessary and right communication approach to the right stakeholder(s) at different levels and phases of the project. PM2and PM4 also emphasised on the need to allocate more resources to project managers for them to be able to adopt all thenecessary communication channels needed to communicate to stakeholders.

The study reveals the absence of trained or qualified project managers in four (4) of the firms. PM1, PM4, PM6 and PM9have qualified project managers with a master’s degree in construction project management. However, PM5 and PM7 haveemployees that are trained and certified in project management (Project Management Professional) which may not beadequate or sufficient to match Masters’ degree in Construction Project Management. The responsibility of managing projectstakeholders lies with project managers (Mitchell ., 1997; Chinyio and Akintoye, 2008; Newcombe, 2003; Olander andLandin, 2005; Boatright, 2006; Olander, 2006; Sutterfield 2006; and Kerzner, 2010; Dekkar and Qing 2014).

The project manager or team must be well trained and qualified to have the essential skills needed for managingstakeholders (Cleland and Ireland, 2002; and Dekkar and Qing, 2014). While Morris (2013) and PMI (2013) further attributedthat project-based firms should have the key responsibility of understanding stakeholders, their influences and devisingengagement strategies based on analyses. Therefore, there is a high tendency of poor stakeholder engagement in some of the

134

projects due to lack of the competent trained staff of some firms. And it became apparent that the majority of the projectmanagers ended paying more emphasis/attention to top management with less paid on end users.

The identification process in managing stakeholders is the starting point for both stakeholder analysis and engagement,thus more resources should be employed to achieve an effective outcome. The technical unit of the institutions (EstateDepartments and/or Physical Planning Units) appoints the project stakeholders; hence, this has conformed to the suggestionsof Pouloudi and Whitley (1997) and Brugha and Varvasovszky (2000) where persons in the organisation are relied upon topoint out stakeholders. Other ways through which the respondents identify stakeholders is by assessing the resources neededfor the project as well as through identifying the end users, which is also in line with the assertion made by Yu and Shen(2005) that project stakeholders are identified by their interests in the project resources and how those resources are likely toaffect their well-being. Other tools such as: brainstorming, generic stakeholder list, surveys, workshops, questionnaires andinterview used in identifying stakeholders as suggested in the existing literature were neither mentioned nor identified by theproject management consulting firms despite the huge importance of these tools in identifying stakeholders.

Urgency is the main attributes used by all the respondents in prioritising the wishes of the stakeholders. The criteria usedby the TETFUND in funding projects may contribute to this due to its policy that it only finances projects that will beimmediately be utilised and put into use. Also, once the TETFUND finances a project, there is no room for variation; as suchthe project manager is left with the responsibility of ascertaining the degree to which a claim demands immediate attention,making sure it falls within the project’s budget. Also, some of the project managers do prioritise some of the project demandsbased on the powers of the stakeholders. Urgency and Power are some of the attributes identified by Mitchell (1997)in prioritising stakeholders’ needs. Prioritising is one of the steps used in engaging stakeholders; therefore, it is expected thatevery project manager should conduct this exercise to optimize the project human resources and meet stakeholders’expectations.

All the respondents noted that they did not conduct any mapping using any tool. This could be attributed to the assertionof Berardi (2013) that stakeholders’ mapping in construction processes is a complex task. According to Bourne and W eaver(2010) the mapping exercise helps in assessing some of the key characteristics of the stakeholders. Although some of therespondents admitted that as the projects develop, interest and power always emerge from some of the stakeholders toinfluence the projects. Power and interest are among the dimensions identified by Bourne and Weaver (2010) that are usedin mapping project stakeholders. Also, Newcombe (2003) used power and interest to establish a matrix used in mappingstakeholders. Therefore, the firms have mapped out stakeholders, only that they did not employ any formal approach or toolin doing so. Hence, employing the tools is important as it would have made it more efficient.

Engagement with stakeholders especially the end-users was minimal at the initial stage of the project from the interviewresponses. More emphasis is being paid towards the technical unit and management of the university. Goodpaster (1991)described this approach of managing project stakeholders as “strategic approach” where shareholders’ are allotted a greaterpriority above the interests of other stakeholders. PM5 reported that the entire initial design brief presented by the technicalunit of the university had to be changed when they engaged with the end-users during the construction phase; whichsubsequently changed the entire scope of the work. Thus, each group of stakeholders probably holds a different view of theway in which the objectives could be valued and balanced (Harrison and Lock, 2004); as such it is important to involve andmanage all project stakeholders in every phase of the project.

PM5 further pointed out that they could have ended up working without a clear and comprehensive work definition andmeeting goals that were never intended by the end-users. Meredith and Mantel (2003) have also attributed these factors (lackof clear and comprehensive definition of project success or failure and project managers striving to meet goals that werenever intended) to inadequate involvement of stakeholders. The tools used in engaging the stakeholders as identified by thefirms involves: meetings, supply of information and progress reports. This is in line with the avenues identified by Chinyioand Olomolaiye (2010).

Some of the stakeholders were only engaged through consultation and meetings especially the end-users while some wereactively engaged in decision-making towards the project. These have also conformed to Low and Cowton (2004) two (2)steps for engaging stakeholders.

Communication was identified by all representative of the firms as the most important tool that could be used in managingstakeholders as well as promoting relationships between the stakeholders. Yang (2009) identified communicating withand engaging stakeholders properly and frequently as a major critical success factor of stakeholder management. Bourne

135

(2010) also suggests that communication in its many forms is the only tool (or technique) for managing stakeholderrelationships. Thus, there is strong correlation between the survey findings and what is in established literature in terms ofmanaging stakeholders.

According to Eskerod and Vaagaasar (2014) stakeholders may change their positions on project over time especially inlong-term projects (potential for threat to the potential for cooperation and vice versa). The project manager/ projectmanagement team seems to detect and handle this situation through involvement and more frequent communication.Therefore, keeping stakeholders well informed and maintaining good interaction with them through communication is veryessential to foresee potential threat from a project stakeholder and towards achieving overall project success.

The various communication forms used by the firms were also the same as what Bourne (2010) identified in the literature.Bourne (2010) further posits that effective planning and implementing the right specific communication strategy for each ofthe project stakeholder(s) is considered as one of the most important role the project manager often time-consuming. So also,the representatives of the firms emphasized that the communication has to be well planned, in the sense that the PM must beable to adopt the necessary and right communication approach to the right stakeholder(s) at different levels and phases of theproject. Therefore, ensuring effective communication is critical to successful management of project stakeholders.

x Lack of adequately trained and qualified project managers in some consulting firms that offer project managementservices for TETFUND construction projects.

x There is poor engagement of end users in TETFUND construction projects.

x Prioritizing and mapping exercises are not employed when engaging stakeholders in construction projects by thefirms.

x Communication in its many forms was identified as the major tool for managing project stakeholders.

x Proper academic training and orientation are required as pre-requisite to proper adoption of the current guidelinesfor stakeholder engagement provided in the existing literature.

x Strategic approach is the major approach used by the firms in managing project stakeholders.

The study reveals that there is inadequate stakeholder involvement in TETFUND construction projects due to poor adoptionof the current guidelines for engaging and managing project stakeholders as identified by literature. There is need for moreemphasis and attention towards project stakeholders especially the end users of the TETFUND construction projects as thiswill help more in completing projects that meet stakeholders’ needs and expectations. This will ensure that the huge amountof capital invested on construction projects by the Federal Government through TETFUND are adding maximum and desiredvalue to the beneficiary tertiary institutions and the end users. The outcomes of this research cannot be generalised due tothe complex nature and size of the Nigeria Construction Industry. There is need to explore the practice of engaging projectstakeholders in other types of project schemes and set ups, especially projects associated with many external stakeholders.

Atkin, B. and Skitmore, M. (2008). Editorial: stakeholder management in construction., (6), 549-552.

Bashir, Z. (2014). . Unpublished PGD projectsubmitted to Department of Building, Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria, Nigeria.

136

Beach, S. and Keast, R. (2010) Governance networks and stakeholders: engaging through salience. In:, 7 9 April 2010, Bern,

Switzerland.

Berardi, U. (2013). Stakeholders’ influence on the adoption of energy-saving technologies in Italian homes.60, pp. 520–530

Berk, C. and Kartal, C. (2012). Determining major risk factors in construction projects from the viewpoint of life cycle andstakeholder. . Vol. ; No 2: pp. 11-20, 2012. ISSN: 1309-8047 (Online)

Boatright, J.R. (2006). “What’s wrong and what’s right with Stakeholder Management”, , (2),106 – 127

Bourne, L. and Weaver, P. (2010). Mapping stakeholders. InMalaysia: Wiley-Blackwell.

Bourne, L. (2009). . Farnham, Survey,UK, Gower.

Bourne, L. (2010). Beyond reporting the community strategy.22-24th Feb., 2010. Melbourne – Australia.

Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2005). “Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence”, , (5), 649-660

Bourne, L. and Walker, D.H.T. (2008). Project relationshi p and the Stakeholder Circle., (1), 125 - 130

Briner, W., Hastings, C. and Geddes, M. (1996). . Aldershot, UK, Gower.

Brugha, R. and Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). 2000; (3): 239–46.

Chinyio, E. and Akintoye, A. (2008). Practical Approaches for Engaging Stakeholders: Findings from the UK,, :6, 591-599

Chinyio, E. and Olomolaiye, P., eds. (2010) Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 9781405180986Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/17910

Cleland, D. I. and Ireland, R. L. (2002). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dosumu, O. S. and Onukwube, H. N. (2013). Analysis of project success criteria in the Nigerian Construction Industry., (1)

Doyle, N. (2008). Civic Engagement in Queensland Australia: Participation in Road System Management A Case Study ofMain Roads Experience, Queensland. In (pp. 157-198). New York UnitedNations

Eskerod, P. and Vaagaasar, A. L. (2014). Stakeholder management strategies and practices during a pr oject course., (4), pp. 71-85. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21447

Ezeabasili, A. C. C., U-Dominic, C. M. and Okoro, B. U. (2015). Contemtious issues on Poor Stakehoder Management insome major road construction projects in Anambra State, Nigeria. , Vol.7, No.2, pp.120-129

137

Gambo, S., Ibrahim, K., Iliyasu, M. A., Shakantu, W. M. W. and Ibrahim, M. L. (2017). Stakehoders Perception on theSuccess of Tertiary Education Fund Construction Projects. , Vol. 10, No. 2.

Goodpaster, K.E., (1991). Business ethics and stakeholder analyses. Business Ethics Quarterly, (1), 53-73.

Harrison, F. and Lock, Dennis (2004). .Fourth Edition; GowerPublishing Limited, Aldershot, England.

Ibrahim, M. L.; Ibrahim, Y. M. &Adogbo, K. J. (2016).Appraisal of stakeholder management practice in Tertiary EducationTrust Fund (TETFUND) construction projects. In Ebohon, O. J., Ayeni, D. A, Egbu, C. O, a nd Omole, F. K. Proceedingsof the Joint International Conference (JIC) on , 21-24 March 2016, Akure, Nigeria, page number 1219-1225

Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2005). Harlow:Financial Times Prentice-Hall

Kerzner H. (2010). “ , 10th edition,London: John Wiley & sons Ltd.

Kolk, A. and Pinkse, J. (2007). Towards strategic stakeholder management? Integrating perspectives on sustainabilitychallenges such as corporate responses to climate change. , 7(4), pp. 370-378

Low, C. and Cowton, C. (2004). Beyond stakeholder engagement: The challenges of stakeholder participation in corporategovernance. , 1(1), 45–55.

McElroy B. and Mills C. (2003). Managing Stakeholders, In: Turner RJ, editor. . Aldershot:Gower; 2003. p. 99–118.

Meredith, J. R. and Matel, S. J. (2003). Fifth Edition. New York: John Wiley.

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B.R. and Wood, D.J. (1 997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining theprinciple of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review (4), 853-886.

Moryanga, D. and Ayodele, M. (2016). Risks Associated with Stakeholders at the Pre -Contract Stage of ConstructionProjects in Ondo State, Nigeria. In Ebohon, O. J., Ayeni, D. A, Egbu, C. O, and Omole, F. K. Proceedings of the JointInternational Conference (JIC) on , 21-24 March2016, Akure, Nigeria, page number 805-813.

Nash, S. and Chinyio, E. (2010). The Magnitude of Stakeholders? Interests in the Course of Construction Projects. WorkingPaper 4-7 November, 2010. South Lake Tahoe, CA

Newcombe, R. (2003). From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach., : pp. 841-848

Ogwueleka, A. (2011). The critical success factors influencing project performance in Nigeria., 6(5): pp. 343-349.

Olander, S., (2006). . PhD Thesis, Lund University, UK.

Olander, S. and Landin A. (2005). Evaluation of stakeholder influence in th e implementation of construction projects,23: pp. 321–328.

Onarinde, O. S. (2011). . UnpublishedMSc. Thesis, submitted to School of Built Environment, Heriot Watt University.

138

Onuora, O. A., Ogbodo, O. and Ezejiofor, R. A. (2017). Effect of Tertiary Education Tax Fund (TETFUN D) in Managementof Nigerian Tertiary Institutions. , 2(1):Pp. 140 -150

PMI (2008). (PMBOK), 4th ed., Newtown Square, PA, ProjectManagement Institute.

Pouloudi, A. and Whitley, E. A. (1997). Stakeholder identification in inter-organisational systems: gaining insights for druguse. , 6(1):1.

Sutterfield, J.S., Friday-Stroud, S.S. and Shivers-Blackwell, S.L. (2006).A case study of project and stakeholder managementfailures: Lessons learned. , (5): pp. 26–35.

TETFUND (2019). ; retrieved on 7th March, 2019.

Yang, J., Shen, G. Q., Ho, M., Drew, D. S. and Xue, X. (2011). Stakeholder management in constructio n: An empirical studyto address research gaps in previous studies. 29 (7): pp. 900-910.

Yang, J., Shen, Q. P., Ho, M. F., Drew, S. D., Chan, A. P. C. (2009). Exploring critical success fac tors for stakeholdermanagement in construction projects. , 15 (4), 337–348.

Ye, J., Hassan, T. M., Carter, C. D. and Kemp, L. (2009). Stakeholders’ requirements analysis for a demand-drivenConstruction industry. ; Vol. 14: pp. 629 -641.

Yu,A. T. W. and Shen, Q. P. (2005). Managing Multiple Stakeholders in the briefing process. The Chinese Research Instituteof Construction Management - CRIOCM , Hangzhou, China, 30 October – 2November 2005.