International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)

ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8 Issue-5, January 2020

Critical Success Factors in Construction Projects

Maninder Singh, S.K. Sharma

Abstract: For the successful implementation of the Zawawia, et al (2011)[15], CSFs are a management
construction projects, researchers have tried to analyze the terminology for a section that is essential for an organization
success factors. In the available literature, there is no clear
indication to the success factors that are related to the projects or plan to accomplish its mission. To realize their goals they
related to construction. Many major construction journals were must be responsive to each key success factors and the
included to review the project success factors and developed a disparities between these elements and the diverse roles of
framework including six groups of independent variables, namely
key result area. CSFs have been utilised extensively to
PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF & EF and one dependent
variable, i.e., CPS. The main purpose of this research is to test categorize a few key elements that business organizations
the developed conceptual framework on the CSFs in construction should concentrate in order to be unbeatable.
projects. Further the scale is tested for validity and reliability and
finally SEM is applied and it is found that CSFs have 70.8% Identifying CSFs is vital as it permits the
impact on the CPS. And also it is found that PMRF has the organisations to emphasis their efforts on structuring their
maximum impact in the success of construction projects. capabilities to meet the CSFs, or even let the organisations
Keywords: - ”CSFs – Critical Success Factors to decide if they have the competence to build the
PRF – Project Related Factors requirements essential to meet CSFs. Chen et al (2012)[4],
Construction project success is dependent on the
PMTMRF – Project Management/Team Member related factors organization effectiveness. Company’s works on their skills,
ability, knowledge, and experience, to complete the
PMRF – Project Manager related factors construction projects but still it may lag in the successful
CLRF – Client Related Factors
completion of the project. Zavadskas, et al (2012) [14],
Project success of the construction projects could be
CORF – Contractor Related Factors achieved by the better performance of the project managers
in the construction project. As most of the researchers found
EF – External Factors human factors as an important role in the success of a
project. CSFs are usually identified in such key areas such
CPS – Construction Project Success
as construction methods, employees and business skills,
SEM – Structural Equation Modeling” functions, methods, and technologies. This Paper begins
with providing key insights about what CSFs are all about. It
I. INTRODUCTION is then followed by identifying some of the important key
variables on the basis of available Literature that contributes
Construction Industry is one of the most vibrant and to the success of an organisation. The next section talks
evolving sector of Indian Economy providing livelihood to about methodology that is used to identify, correlate and
number of people. The construction industry constitutes finding the impact of the prominent variables using
those individuals and organisations who are engaged in the statistical tools like smartPLS. The paper ends with
designing, manufacturing, and maintenance of the deliberation of the research limitations and future
construction projects. In the past few years, this implications for future practitioners.
industry internationally has laid increasing dependence on
accentuating the prominence of construction to the economy II. LITERATURE REVIEW
of the country. Engaging an extensive variety of practices
and methodologies, the intention of the industry is to There is vast literature available on the CSFs in
influence policy makers to inspire development of Construction projects. Researchers have worked on finding
construction related activities or, at a least, to avoid the success factors for the enhancement of the construction
implementing policy actions that would discourage the companies. CSFs are in the introduction stage in India in
companies to get involved in construction projects. construction projects. Review of Literature is conducted to
develop the framework on CSFs in Construction Company
in relation to the success of construction projects.
Ngacho and Das (2005) [9] developed a framework
for the evaluation of the performance of the construction
projects that are based on the six major key indicators that
were, cost, quality, time, minimum disputes, safety and
environmental disputes. Researcher surveyed literature and
Revised Manuscript Received on January 15, 2020 identified characteristics of the construction projects named
Maninder Singh, Assistant Professor, Mittal School of Business, as CSFs of the projects. These CSFs were divided into six
Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, India. Email: broad variable named as PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF,
maninder.19446@lpu.co.in CORF & EF. Conceptual framework was framed to
Dr. S.K.Sharma, Professor, UIAMS, Panjab University, Chandigarh,
India. Email: sksharma@pu.ac.in calculate the overall success performance of the project with
regard to the variables
defined.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
1799
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520 & Sciences Publication
 Critical Success Factors in Construction Projects

Pilot survey was conducted with few of the experts of the most important factor and the “Good Subcontractor” was the
construction industry and a questionnaire was developed. least important success factor. “Slow decision making” was
They found that these variables defined were very much the most important and the “Price Fluctuation” was the least
related to the construction projects especially in the important failure factor. Nallathiga, et al (2017)[8] also
developing countries. Finally researcher’s concluded that worked on analyzing the success/failure factors in road
the performance of the projects also effects the satisfaction construction project by PPP on the basis of different stages
of the community. of project. They used questionnaire to draw responses from
Saqib, et al. (2010)[4] observed that the stakeholders of the project like Government firms, Road
construction projects were dynamic due to the uncertainties contractors, Consultants, Financial institutions and Users.
in the budgets, technologies and the development process. Using relative importance index, researchers found that
And they claimed that the CSFs could lead to the “Traffic assessment” was the most important success factor
effectiveness of projects. Researchers surveyed 37 at “Project preparation stage”, “Bid criteria (Financial
construction firms in Pakistan with the help of a Attraction of Project to Investors” was most important
questionnaire. Questionnaire was based on the performance success factor at “Procurement stage”, at “Development
selected indicators of the construction project and 77 factors stage” the most important success factor was “Infusion of
were framed in 6 variables, namely PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, Capital into Project” and finally “Availability of
CLRF, CORF & EF and the respondents ranked and scored Contractor’s Resources” was the most important success
these variables. On the basis of the critical score, researchers factor at “Construction, Operation and Management stage”.
found that the CORF was the most important for the success Similarly researchers found that “Public Protest &
of the construction projects and CLRF was the least Opposition” was the most important failure factor at
important. Individually, decision making ability was scored “Project preparation stage”, “Influence of Higher
as the most important factor for the success of construction Authorities & Political Parties” was most important failure
project. factor at “Procurement stage”, at “Development stage” the
Alzahrani and Emsley (2012) [1] tried to analyze most important failure factor was “Force Majeure” and
the success and causes of the cost and the time overrun in finally “Maintenance Cost Overruns” was the most
the construction industry. Researcher surveyed the vast important failure factor at “Construction, Operation and
literature and framed a questionnaire. On the data collected Management stage”
factor analysis was applied and nine cluster were framed Tamgadge and Shinde (2018)[12] proposed that
namely “(i) safety and quality; (ii) past performance; (iii) construction projects faces challenges due to unexpected
environment; (iv) management and technical aspects; (v) changes therefore CSFs needed to be studied. They analyzed
resource; (vi) organization; (vii) experience; (viii) size/type six major variables as PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF,
of pervious projects; and (ix) finance”. Further logistic CORF & EF. Using questionnaire and Relative importance
regression was applied and results indicated that “turnover index method, researcher found that “Good leadership” in
history, quality policy, adequacy of labour and plant PMRF was the most critical factor related to the success of
resources, waste disposal, size of past projects completed, the project. And “Cost control”, “Organizing of project”
and company image” were the most important factors was the least important factor in PMTMRF and
affected the project’s success. “Clients/contractors type & experience” in CLRF & CORF.
Gudiene et al (2013)[5] developed a conceptual
framework model for the construction projects in Lihuania. III. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND HYPOTHESIS
They found seven major factors of success, that were
institutional factors, PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF Many researchers have worked earlier on CSFs and
& EF. found many essential details that could benefit other
Muhammad, et al. (2016)[7] suggested that the researchers. However there are very few studies that have
Public-private partnerships (PPP) as an alternative strategy worked on the construction companies with regard to CSFs.
could be utilized by the government to overcome the The research question for this study comes out to be “To
independent inability of public firms to meet the incremental find out the impact of the CSFs in the success of the
infrastructure and services demand. While conducting
construction projects?”
literature review they found that there were mixed verdicts
given on the application of PPP. For the improvement of the And objective of the study is framed as: -
implementation of the PPP projects, CSFs were established.
And researchers found that time were the most important Objective 1: “Effect of Critical Success Factors in
factor for the successful implementation of the PPP projects. Success of Construction Projects”
Also found that the social and political and economic
environments of the county were complex and dynamic to 3.1 Variables of the study
understand which may lead to the barrier in the
implementation of PPP. CSFs have been identified and classified differently
Thote, et al (2017)[13] claimed that the construction by a number of authors. On the basis of review of literature,
industry contributed to the economic growth of the nation. CSFs as independent variable is divided into six extensively
Researchers identified the success factors and the failure
used variables, i.e, “Project Related Factors (PRF), Project
factors and included commercial and the residential projects
in the city of Pune. They further identified 24 CSFs grouped Management/Team Member related factors (PMTMRF),
in 5 variables and 11 failure factors. 80 respondents were
interviewed and relative importance index was used to find
the results. Researchers found that the “Leadership” was the

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520
1800
& Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8 Issue-5, January 2020

Project Manager related factors (PMRF), Client Related

Factors (CLRF), Contractor Related Factors (CORF) and
External Factors (EF)” to find the impact on the dependent
variable, i.e., Construction Project Success (CPS).

PRF – includes project value, type, size, complexity, , risk,

goals, etc.

PMTMRF – Selection of team members, Coordination

between all the stakeholders. PMTMRF includes factors
such as competence, effectiveness in decision making,
experience, motivation, personnel issues, and technical
capability.

PMRF – Project manager competence in project planning

and implementation. Skills of project manger like
leadership, authority, trust, etc

CLRF – includes client’s experience, public or private, size,

timely decision making ability, influence, risk taker or
averter, clear and precise goals, etc. Figure 4.1: Framework for the Study

CORF – expertise and performance of contractor. Includes For the collection of data, respondents above the
engineering position were taken into account. And data is
economic and financial condition, technical capability, collected from these engineers that are working on the
professional capability, maintaining health and safety construction projects in the state of Punjab. Projects are
standards, providing good working conditions, etc selected on the basis of the investment and importance of
the project to the state. And simple random sampling is be
EF – Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and used to select the respondents from the selected construction
Ecological analysis of the region/nation. projects. A total of 99 employees are selected for the study.
Finally a framework is designed and then finally SEM has
CPS – includes timely completion of project, quality been applied. Using smartPLS, discriminate validity is been
project, etc checked and then statistical tools, i.e, correlation and
regression is be applied to find out the association and
3.2 Hypothesis of the Study dependence of PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF & EF
For the purpose of this study hypothesis is framed on the on CPS.
basis of the review of literature. Hypothesis based on the
explicit survey done on the earlier researches is given V. RESEARCH FINDINGS
below: - By visiting the selected construction projects in Punjab,
simple random sampling is used to collect data with the help
H1: Proper implementation of CSFs enhances the of structure questionnaire. Data is being collected from 99
success rate of the Construction Projects. respondents that are working in construction projects above
the position of engineers in the selected project in Punjab.
IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Framework designed is first tested for reliability and validity
by using smartPLS. Below is the analysis shown of the
This study deals with six major variables that is decided on
same: -
the basis of the review of literature and on the basis of
Table 5.1: “Cronbach’s Alpha, Composite Reliability
through discussion with knowledgeable people of
and Average Variance Extracted”
construction companies, i.e, PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF,
CORF & EF. For the purpose of the study, structured
questionnaire is designed having two section. First section
includes the general description of the respondents and the
second section includes the questions asked on PRF,
PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF, EF and CPS. Nine items
(PRF1 to PRF9) are designed for PRF, six for PMTMRF
(PMTMRF1 to PMTMRF6), seven for PMRF (PMRF1 to
PMRF7), five for CLRF (CLRF1 to CLRF5), six for CORF
(CORF1 to CORF6), four for EF (EF1 to EF4) and six items
(CPS1 to CPS6) are designed for CPS on the basis of the
items used in the earlier studies. Five-point Likert scale that
is ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” is
used.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
1801
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520 & Sciences Publication
 Critical Success Factors in Construction Projects

As per table 5.1, it can be inferred as Cronbach’s Alpha

value for PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF, EF and
CPS is 0.929, 0.859, 0.896, 0.791, 0.921, 0.872 and 0.948
respectively, which is greater than 0.7. This means that the
data collected using the questionnaire is reliable for the
study. Even Composite Reliability is greater than 0.7, means
that the questionnaire is reliable.
Average Variance Extracted is also depicted in the table and
it reports as 0.724 for PRF, 0.755 for PMTMRF, 0.781 for
PMRF, 0.704 for CLRF, 0.719 for CORF, 0.723 for EF and
0.796 for CPS, which is greater than 0.5. This means the
questionnaire is convergent valid.
Further Discriminate Validity is calculated. For this
calculation square root of the Average Variance Extracted is
calculate and put in the diagonal and checked if all the
remaining values are below this square root value. This
method is used in Fornel and Larcker (1971). It is calculate
and reported below in table 5.2.

Table 5.2: Discriminate Validity

Figure 6.1: Final evaluated model

For the evaluation of the above hypothesis, regression is

applied in smartPLS and regression value is reported in table
below.
Table 6.1: Multiple Regression of PRF, PMTMRF,
PMRF, CLRF, CORF, EF with CPS

As per the above table, Adjusted R Square value is 0.708.

As per the above table it can be reported that the This means that 70.8% of the variance in the CPS
questionnaire is discriminate valid. Hence the data collected (dependent variable) is explained by CSFs (independent
on the questionnaire is valid and reliable for the study. variable including PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF,
Further test of association (correlation) and dependence EF) (C. Ringle, et al, 2015) [10].
(regression) is applied and is reported one by one. Hence it can be inferred that the H1 is fully supported. And
also the Objective 1 is fully supported.
VI. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Finally the model for the study is tested using Smart-PLS VII. RESULTS
and the below depicted image explain the effect of CSFs on
competitive advantage of the company. In this section the results are depicted and
SEM is tested using smartPLS as shown in figure 6.1, and it interpreted. Below is the table representing the results
is found that PMRF, CLRF and EF have a positive relation of the correlation and regression evaluated by using
with the CPS. It also depicts that PMRF has the maximum smartPls software.
positive (r = 0.596) relation with CPS. Finally using SEM,
Table 7.1: Results of the Statistical Tools
the hypothesis of the study is tested.

H1: Proper implementation of CSFs enhances the

success rate of the Construction Projects.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520
1802
& Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8 Issue-5, January 2020

From the table above it can be interpreted that PMRF and  The industry picked for the study is on construction, so
CORF has a moderate positive relation with CPS. And EF the results are limited to construction industry only.
has a weak positive relation with CPS. It can be inferred
 Only six major variables of CSFs is taken into
from the results that for the success of the construction
projects, project related and contractor related factors consideration, which where related to the success of the
needed to be addressed efficiently. Finally it can be inferred construction project, so for further studies with more
that the effect of the independent variable (PRF, PMTMRF, items/variables could be taken into account.
PMRF, CLRF, CORF & EF) on CPS is 70.8%. Therefore it
can be inferred that for the success of the construction REFERENCES
project, these independent variable plays a vital role. So
1. Alzahrani, J. I., & Emsley, M. W. (2013). The impact of contractors’
these variables needed to be monitor properly and attributes on construction project success: A post construction
efficiently. evaluation. International Journal of Project Management, 31(2), 313-
322.
VIII. CONCLUSION 2. Chan, A. P., Chan, D. W., Chiang, Y. H., Tang, B. S., Chan, E. H., &
Ho, K. S. (2004). Exploring critical success factors for partnering in
In the conducted research, following conclusion can be construction projects. Journal of construction engineering and
inferred: - management, 130(2), 188-198.
 There is a need of proper training programs for the proper 3. Chan, A. P., Scott, D., & Chan, A. P. (2004). Factors affecting the
implementation of the CSFs, as it is in the early stages of success of a construction project. Journal of construction
engineering and management, 130(1), 153-155.
implementation in construction companies.
4. Chen, W. T., Chen, T.-T., Lu, Ch. Sh., Liu, Sh.-Sh. 2012. Analyzing
 If construction companies implement CSFs properly, they relationships among success variables of construction partnering using
can achieve better edge over the competitors in the structural equation modeling: a case study of Taiwan's construction
industry. industry, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 18 (6): 783–
794.
 Hypothesis testing done on independent and dependent 5. Gudienė, N., Banaitis, A., Banaitienė, N., & Lopes, J. (2013).
variable shows the PMRF has the maximum positive Development of a conceptual critical success factors model for
(correlation coefficient value, r = 0.596) relation with construction projects: a case of Lithuania. Procedia Engineering, 57,
CPS. And CORF is having positive (correlation coefficient 392-397.
6. Hanafi, A. G., & Nawi, M. N. M. (2016). Nine factors for
value, r = 0.501) relation with CPS. This means that the competitiveness of construction companies in Asian region. Revista
PMRF and CORF is having a moderate (0.5>r>0.7) tecnica de la facultad de ingenieria universidad del zulia, 39(8), 33-44.
positive association with CPS. 7. Muhammad, Z., Sik, K. K., Johar, F., & Sabri, S. (2016). An overview
of critical success factors of public private partnership in the delivery
 Hypothesis testing done on independent and dependent
of urban infrastructure and services. Planning Malaysia Journal, 14(4).
variable shows the EF has the positive (correlation 8. Nallathiga, R., Shaikh, H. D., Shaikh, T. F., & Sheik, F. A. (2017).
coefficient value, r = 0.292) relation with CPS. This means Factors Affecting the Success/Failure of Road Infrastructure Projects
that the EF is having a weak (0>r>0.3) positive association Under PPP in India.
9. Ngacho, C., & Das, D. (2015). A performance evaluation framework of
with CPS. Therefore it can be said that even after having a
construction projects: insights from literature.
control over all the internal activities of the construction 10. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., and Becker, J.-M. 2015. "SmartPLS 3."
project, still external factor plays a role in the success of Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH, http://www.smartpls.com.
the project. 11. Saqib, M., Farooqui, R. U., & Lodi, S. H. (2008, August). Assessment
of critical success factors for construction projects in Pakistan. In First
 For the final hypothesis, to evaluate the combined effect of
international conference on construction in developing countries,
PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF & EF on CPS, Karachi, Pakistan (pp. 392-404).
regression was applied. Adjusted R Square value 12. Tamgadge, V., & Shinde, D. K. (2018). Analysis of Critical Success
calculated using SEM is 0.708. This means that the overall Factors for Construction Projects.
13. Thote, G., Shinde, R. D., & Kanase, A. K. (2017). Exploratory Study
effect of PRF, PMTMRF, PMRF, CLRF, CORF & EF on
on Critical Success Factors in Construction Projects.
CPS is 70.8%. This shows that if the CSFs are managed 14. Zavadskas, E. K., Vainiūnas, P., Turskis, Z., Tamošaitienė J. 2012.
properly construction project has a major chance of Multiple criteria decision support system for assessment of projects
successful completion. managers in construction, International Journal of Information
Technology & Decision Making, 11 (2): 501–520.
LIMITATIONS 15. Zawawia, E.M.A, Kamaruzzamanb, S.N., Ithnina, Z., Zulkarnaina,
S.H. A. 2011. Conceptual framework for describing CSF of building
For conducting this study there are some limitations as every
maintenance management, The 2nd International Building Control
study conducted have some or the other limitation. Below Conference, Procedia Engineering 20 (1): 110–117.
are the limitation reported of this study: -
 The area of the study is limited to Punjab only, so for
father studies the area of the study can be enlarged.
 Respondent that are selected in the study are only above
the level of engineers, so for further studies supervisors
and foremen’s could be taken into account as these
people have the knowledge of the ground level realities.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
1803
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520 & Sciences Publication
 Critical Success Factors in Construction Projects

AUTHORS PROFILE
Maninder Singh, Pursuing Ph.D. from UBS,
Punjab University, Chandigarh, on topic: “Supply
Chain Management Practices of Selected
Infrastructural Mega-Projects”. And currently
working as Assistant Professor at Lovely
Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India.
He has 5 publications in International journals and
UGC listed Journals.

Dr. S.K.Sharma, is currently working as Professor

at University Institute of Applied Management
Sciences (UIAMS), Panjab University, Chandigarh.
And also working as Dean, Faculty of Business
Management and Commerce, MRSPTU. He has been
the Director of UIAMS department. He has guided
more than 40 PhD researchers and has undertaken 7
major research projects. He has 3 books and 65 research papers to
his credit.

Published By:
Retrieval Number: E6408018520/2020©BEIESP Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
DOI:10.35940/ijrte.E6408.018520
1804
& Sciences Publication