Causal Factors and Impacts of Schedule Revisions: A Case Study of The Penang Second Bridge Project (Sultan Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah Bridge)
Causal Factors and Impacts of Schedule Revisions: A Case Study of The Penang Second Bridge Project (Sultan Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah Bridge)
Causal Factors and Impacts of Schedule Revisions: A Case Study of The Penang Second Bridge Project (Sultan Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah Bridge)
ARTICLE
1
Universiti Sains Malaysia
ABSTRACT
The Penang Second Bridge is the longest bridge in Malaysia and Southeast Asia, and was completed in March
2014. There were two major schedule re-adjustments throughout the project duration: (1)revision of
commencement date, and (2)changing of the bridge’s opening day. The published factors of schedule
revisions were design matters, land acquisition and increased costs of building materials. There could
ostensibly be more factors causing such revisions, which have not been divulged, which prompted the interest
to conduct an academic investigation. This study also includes the investigation on the effects subsequent to
the project schedule revisions. Qualitative research method using in-depth interviews was conducted to
collect the data, and respondents approached had been involved in the planning, design and construction
stages of the project. The results showed that contractor-related factors have the highest impact on the project
schedule, followed by client related factors and external factors, and also revealed additional factors like
changes to the concessionaire and ramp collapse incident, further contributed to project delays. The impacts
of schedule revisions included acceleration, cost increases and negative reputation from the public. To prevent
issues of delays in the construction industry, actions and solutions should be implemented by practitioners by
taking into account the different nature, culture and regulations of each project.
Keywords: Penang Second Bridge project, factors, effects, schedule revision, delay, construction industry,
infrastructure
1. INTRODUCTION
Infrastructure construction is one of the vital categories which contributes to the well-
functioning of economic activities. A key driver of economic productivity and social well-
being depends on the modern and efficient infrastructure (Russell, 2013). Transport
infrastructure such as roads, highways and bridges can be one of the services and facilities
to attract foreign investors in their investment decisions. Poor infrastructure obstructs the
growth of nation’s economic and international competitiveness (Dr. Jeffrey Delmon, The
World Bank 2006). Besides, insufficient infrastructure also reflects the reduction in comfort
and quality of life, health and death of the people in a country (Willoughby, 2002). It
therefore becomes an essential component in the economy which can boost the
development of a country.
Penang is one of the highly industrialised and urbanised states in north peninsular Malaysia.
It is not only one of the economically most well-developed state of the country, but also a
thriving tourist destination. The perception towards Penang still remains as an attractive
location for investments and tourism (Nathaniel, 2014). However, the rapid development
and traffic congestion are concerned issues to the state (Himanshu and Looi, 2015). In the
International Conference in Civil Engineering and Geohazard Information Zonation 2012,
Dato’ Prof. Ir. Dr. Ismail bin Mohamed Taib, the Managing Director of Jambatan Kedua
Sdn Bhd mentioned that traffic demand on the existing widened Penang Bridge has been
increasing yearly, and the traffic projection without the second crossing is expected to reach
163,400 vehicles per day in year 2020. This projected that the first Penang Bridge and ferry
services are inadequate to satisfy the demand on infrastructure connecting Penang Island to
the mainland in the near future. Consequently, the Penang Second Bridge, a transport
infrastructure which was completed last year will be an essential element in the future
development of Penang.
The Penang Second Bridge project faced several problems that necessitate revision in
project schedule. According to the fifth Prime Minister, Tun Abdulah Ahmad Badawi
(2008), the project was delayed by nine months owing to the land acquisition, design
problems and rising cost of construction materials. The original plan to complete the
construction of the bridge and to be opened to public in 2013 was deferred until 2014.
Another crucial issue was the collapsed of one of the ramps at the Batu Maung interchange
during the construction stage. Therefore, the focal point of this paper is to meet the
following objectives:
• To study causal factors of revising the schedule of the Penang Second Bridge project.
• To investigate the impacts arising from revising the schedule of the Penang Second
Bridge project.
Since the performance of transport infrastructure is inter-related to the national economy, the
most basic goal of practitioners in the construction industry is to achieve the timely completion
of projects within the estimated budgets. The apprehension in terms of quality of transport
infrastructure construction should be addressed among players in the construction industry.
The findings of this study will reflect the current major problems faced by practitioners in
Malaysia’s construction industry, and will be useful reference for industry players in
comprehending the factors causing time overrun in a project, especially Malaysian bridge
construction projects. Moreover, it is expected to draw attention to the construction community
on the impacts of time overrun to the construction project so that they can put efforts to
minimize and mitigate problems of delay for future infrastructure projects.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Factors Causing Time Overrun In Construction Industry
2.1.1 Owner-related Factors
Owner-related factors in time overrun problems are events which the client is responsible
for. Changes in orders or designs, late approvals of design documents and shop drawings,
client’s financial difficulties and delays in payments to contractors are some of the most
common owner attributed causes extracted and entified from several sources (Ahmed et al,
2003; Sambasivan and Soon, 2006; Alaghbari et al, 2007; Hamzah et al, 2011).
In the construction industry, variation is a change in design aspects and specification,
construction work, project schedule or other aspects caused by modifications to pre-
planned conditions, requirements or assumptions (Sun and Meng, 2009). These delay
factors are quite common in other countries either in developed or developing countries like
Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, United Kingdom (UK), United States (US) and others. Sweis
(2007) stated that numerous changes in designs and orders are viewed as one of the most
critical delay causes from the perspective of consultants and contractor.
In order to allow the contractor to carry out works related to changes in designs, a formal
approval has to be delivered to the contractor by the client or through client’s
representatives, architect or engineer. However, the client or his representatives were
always late in approving design documents and shop drawings (Ejaz, 2010; Chan and
Kumaraswamy, 1996; Alaghbari et al, 2007). Based on the observations, Chan and
Kumaraswamy (1996) found that the majority of contractors blamed client’s slowness in
authorizing the design documents and shop drawings. Ejaz (2010) defined this factor as the
fourth ranked cause of project delays.
Owners may face financial problems or difficulties during the construction stage due to
excessive alterations in a project. In Malaysia’s construction industry, financial problems is
defined as the main factor from the client’s internal side (Alaghbari, 2007; Sambasivan and
Soon, 2006). Besides, the reason may also be due to other factors like unpredictable site
conditions and sudden increases in material costs. This will vary the original budget to a
higher cost, and clients without contingency plans will inevitably cause the project to be
delayed for a certain period, or may totally abandon it, in future. Financial difficulties of
clients trigger other factors which will influence the whole construction process. The most
obvious inter-related factor is the delay in payments to contractors.
The essential of payment is magnified because construction industry usually involves long
periods, huge amounts of money and the commonly used credit payment terms in
purchasing of materials to complete the project (Ameer, 2005). Delays in payments will
invariably lead to critical cash flow problems for contractors. According to Frimpong et al
(2002) from a Ghana case study, monthly payment difficulties from agencies of government
or client were the most important delay factor from the point of view of contractor and
consultant. Among the five most vital factors of delays in Uganda’s public sector projects,
delay in payments was one of them (Henry et al, 2013).
2.1.2 Contractor-related Factors
Poor contractor site management and supervision are some of the delay elements due to the
shortage of competent construction managers in the industry. Hemanta et al (2011)
forwarded the reason of lack of management skills among the site managers, who were
most probably with high education and working experience; but lacked formal training.
Furthermore, local contractors have little experience in management because they are
seldom involved in large and complex projects, which are virtually limited to large
contracting firms or international contractors (Odeh and Battaineh, 2001). Another
management failure among the contractors was due to poor coordination of subcontractors
(Bramble and Callaham, 1987).
A research about Malaysian construction projects by Alaghbari et al (2007) supported the
findings in the Ghana case study, which not only showed the high ranking of poor
contractor administration as the vital factor in time overrun problems, but also pointed out
that this is a major issue in developing countries (Frimpong et al, 2002). The chairman of
the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) supported the statement of weak management which
was a “systemic” problem in government public projects such as the National Feedlot
Centre (NFC) (The Malaysian Insider, 2011). However, this factor was not ranked in the
top five factors of time overrun in developed countries (Vidalis and Najafi, 2002),
highlighting the difference between developed and developing countries.
The study of Sambasivan and Soon (2006) was agreed by Sweis (2007), where most clients
and consultants blamed that contractor’s inadequate planning and scheduling caused the
time overrun. Bertin (2011) stated that one of the vital factors of time overrun in Cameroon
was lack of project planning or programming. One of the reasons was local contractors
were unwilling to apply scheduling techniques to update schedules on a regular basis
(Doreen, 2006).
Financial problems which caused delays in a project not only emanated from the client, but
also from the contractor (Alaghbari et al, 2007). Within the contractor’s range of problems,
financial difficulty still ranked as the highest in regards to problem of delay (Sweis, 2007;
Akintoye 2014). All three groups, namely consultants, contractors and clients agreed that
financial crisis was among the most critical delay factors in the residential construction
sector in Jordan. Financial burden results in contractors to be incapable of hiring skilled
workers; thus they may hire unskilled workers which are cheaper to carry out the works
(Sweis, 2007). This phenomenon will lead to poor workmanship in the construction works.
As a result, the project may be delayed when the contractor has to take extra corrective
action to recover the construction defects arising from poor workmanship.
Lack of labour supply was positioned as the third most vital factor in time overrun for
residential projects in Jordan (Sweis, 2007). It is hard to prevent the problem of worker
shortages during the construction process because labourers tended to quit and join other
companies during the construction stage of a project (Sambasivan and Soon, 2006). This
situation caused the disruption of work which will further the delay of the project.
2.1.3 External Factors
Most contracts share the risk for delays caused by unpredictable conditions or called as
“acts of God”, which are not under the control of the owner, consultants or contractor. The
findings in a study of Indian construction projects revealed similar situation with the
Malaysian construction industry where shortages of material was one of the main elements
causing time overrun in a project (Hemanta et al, 2011). Mansfield et al (1994) investigated
the factors of delay in Nigerian construction projects and the results indicated that shortage
of materials was one of the delay factors. From the perpectives of clients, contractors and
consultants from Gaza Strip, one of the indicated factors of delays was lack of materials in
the market (Adnan et al, 2009). Moreover, delay in material and equipment procurement
had delayed the highway projects in Nepal (Manavazhi and Adhikari, 2002).
Unforeseen site conditions are the unexpected, unpredicted or unanticipated conditions
occurring on project sites. An earlier study mentioned unforeseen site conditions as the
second most critical factor that caused the delay in construction projects in Hong Kong
(Chan and Kumaraswamy, 1996). After a few years, Chan and Kumaraswamy (2010)
conducted the third phase of investigation on factors of construction delays. They found
that unforeseen site conditions still remained as one of the critical delay factors.
Researchers from Malaysia had the same opinion with the previous researchers. Unforeseen
site conditions like soil obstruction and ground situation will delay the schedules of
construction works as planned in early (Alaghbari et al, 2007).
1 Main navigation span, substructure and foundation Contractor A Design and build contract
works for approach spans
2 Superstructure works of approach spans Contractor B Design and build contract
3A Batu Maung Interchange Contractor C Conventional contract
3B Batu Kawan expressways Contractor D Conventional contract
3C Batu Kawan trumpet interchange Contractor E Conventional contract
3D Toll plaza and administration building Contractor F Conventional contract
3E Toll collection system Contractor G Design and build contract
3F Traffic control and surveillance system Contractor H Design and build contract
3G Electrical installations Contractor I Conventional contract
3H Landscape works Contractor J Conventional contract
claimed that the revision of commencement date was due to land acquisition, design
matters and the increasing costs of building materials (The Online Star, 2008). Another
revision of date was on the opening day of the bridge. The reason behind rescheduling the
opening date is unclear. Table 2 shows the timeline of the bridge project from planning until
completion stage.
4. DATA ANALYSIS
Discussion on data analysis is divided into two sections: (1) causal factors of schedule
revision, and (2) impacts of schedule revision.
4.1 Causal Factors Of Schedule Revision On Penang Second Bridge Project
Causal factors are discussed under three heading: (1) client-related factors, (2) contractor-
related factors, and (3) external factors. Table 4 shows the ranking of client related factors
through the calculation of mean from the questionnaires filled by the respondents.
Changes in orders or designs were the most critical causal factor of schedule revision for
the Penang Second Bridge project under client-related factors, and this is consistent with
the argument by Sun and Meng (2009) and Sweis (2007). Both client and contractors
revealed that changes in structural design had forced the client to revise the completion date
because the process involved numerous changes in the project’s schedule and the cost of
original design is higher.
“When client take over the concession, the bridge design is 16 modules (engineering term).
We then changed to 6 modules because the initial concept will cost a lot of money to us”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent C)
This factor is supported by another respondent. When the contractor was asked whether
they faced any problems of revising the construction schedule, it prompted the following
response:
“Yes there were some changes to the original design proposed to minimize the budget of
the project. That is revision of construction schedule due to revision of Package 2 design
from “16 Span Module” to “6 Span Module”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent E)
Four out of six respondents indicated that slow approvals from client had caused the Penang
Second Bridge project facing to revise both the commencement date and opening date
several times. Respondent B supported the statement made by Chan and Kumaraswany
(1996), claiming that client’s slowness in approving the design documents and shop
drawings affected the project schedule. Poor commitment by the client in approval matters
will inevitably put the contractor in a difficult position to get the information on time.
“This situation has caused the late supply of information and drawings to us. We need the
drawings to carry out the works. When we don’t have drawings, we cannot carry out the
works. Sometimes, the issue is not only in giving late information to us, but also the details
of drawings were insufficient. Then, we had to make queries, so they take time to response
to us”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent B)
Although the mean score for client’s financial problems and delay in payments to
contractors was high, the respondents expressed that they were not in the appropriate
position to discuss these issues.
Table 5 shows the mean scores of the contractor-related factors. Contractor’s inadequate
planning and scheduling were ranked first, while poor site management and supervision of
contractor ranked second, shortage of manpower ranked third and the last is contractor cash
flow problems. This phenomenon revealed clear similarities between the result and
previous studies which was mentioned in the literature review (Alaghbari et al, 2007;
Frimpong et al, 2002; Sambasivan and Soon, 2006; Sweis, 2007; Bertin, 2011).
For contractor related factors, the critical problem was raised from package 3D. According
to the Respondent C, the agreement between the contractor for package 3D had a lot of
obstacles. There was termination of contract with the first selected contractor due to their
financial problems which caused the particular contractor to delay the works for a period of
time. The client’s representative explained that the contractor was only able to complete the
piling works during the agreement duration. However, another issue arose when the another
contractor was engaged to carry out the works of package 3D. The new contractor had poor
management and supervision in this bridge project despite the fact that they had showed
their excellent background and previous record during the tendering process. The client’s
representative stressed that the biggest problem of this particular contractor was due to their
failure to manage their own subcontractors, and thus caused the construction works of
package 3D to be delayed. In addition, the client’s representative also reported that the
contractor was facing a minor financial problem during that time.
“We awarded package 3D to the first contractor, but the contract had to be terminated
because the contractor faced some financial problems along the period of agreement. Then,
we engaged another contractor whose background and history record were very good. But,
when the project started, they failed to manage their subcontractor. They also said they have
some financial problems”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent C)
Respondent F supported the statement made by the above respondent and mentioned that
the delay in opening of the bridge for the public was due to poor performance of the
respective package contractor during the construction stage. The poor performance of the
contractor was related to poor management and inadequate planning.
“There was delay in award of contract and construction of the toll plaza and the
administration building which was under package 3D. The previous contractor of package
3D was terminated because of poor performance”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent F)
Table 6 shows the mean scores of the external factors.
From the data extracted from interviews, it was found that shortage of materials were one
of the problems that affected the schedule of the Penang Second Bridge project. All of the
practitioners involved in the project agreed that this issue is not under the control of any
party (See, for example, James, 2000). Although the client’s representative disagreed
shortages of materials were one of the factors because they had considered this issue during
the planning stage, but Respondent B informed that the project was having difficulties in
resource supply by the government at that time.
“At that time, the government not only has Penang Second Bridge which is a mega project,
but also other big projects like the double track in Northern Region. Although the double
track project is supposed to complete before the bridge construction started, they failed to
do so. Moreover, Penang government also took the opportunity to develop their land in
Batu Kawan at that time. This situation caused the shortage of material, and the biggest
shortage was the material for land fill”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent B)
Although the unforeseen site conditions were ranked second among the external factors, the
respondents were not opened to explaining it. However, the interesting part in this research
was the additional factors that were given by the respondents. From the overall interviews,
client’s representatives, contractors and consultants revealed that the revision of
commencement date in the Penang Second Bridge project was mainly because of the
change in ownership of the concession company. This statement is supported by the
following excerpts when the respondents were being interviewed about the reason of
rescheduling the commencement date from January 2008 to 8th November 2008.
“So, basically the main reason is actually the formation of the concession company. The
project owner is not really clear”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent D)
“Starting from July 2008, the concession of 2nd Penang Bridge has been taken over by
Government of Malaysia and formed a special purpose Concession Company named,
Jambatan Kedua Sdn Bhd (JKSB) to manage and deliver the project. The government
decided to take over the concession and manage by Khazanah”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent C)
The client’s representative mentioned that the changing of the concessionaire lead to the
problem of land acquisition from the land owners because there was no authority in charge
to go through the land acquisition issues at that time. When JKSB took over the position of
the concessionaire, they need a period of time to solve the problems and go through the
procedure with different land owners, and the most difficult to handle was the individual-
owned land due to disagreements on the reparation fee.
One of the remarkable, if somewhat unfortunate, events in the Penang Second Bridge
project was the collapse of Span 6 Ramp 2 of the Batu Maung interchange. All respondents
agreed that the incident caused the project to be delayed. The main reason was the project
received an order to stop work, sent from the safety authority for investigation purposes.
The related authority took more than one month to carry out all the investigation works to
find out the actual reason of the incident. Consequently, the original scheduled opening day
on November 2013 was delayed.
“DOSH (Department of Occupational Safety and Health) gave a stop work order, so that
has delayed the work. They stop everything to let the authority do the investigation”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent C)
Respondent F revealed that the completion of package 3A were delayed by two months
because of the collapse incident. The contractor had to rebuilt the collapsed ramp with an
accelerated programme by increasing the resources to ensure minimal delay which can
influence the progress of the whole project.
“The collapse of ramp had delayed the work of package 3A by two months and the
contractor rebuilt the ramp with an accelerated programme so that the delay was minimal”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent F)
4.2 Effects Arisen From Revising The Schedule Of Penang Second Bridge Project
Delay in schedule will lead to acceleration in a construction project as stated by Bramble
and Callahan (1987). All the respondents agreed that the revision in the schedule of the
Penang Second Bridge project had brought up the impact of acceleration. Two respondents
revealed that the numerous schedule revisions had caused the client to lose some potential
profit. Respondent D further added that the project cost was increased due to the additional
overhead required to recover project delay. Respondent D agreed with the cost which has
to borne by the contractor was the overhead expenses like job trailers, administration,
supervision and utility charges before the official commencement. Respondent F supported
the statement of Respondent D and added that the impact was not only faced by the
contractor, but also the consultants, who needed to increase supervision costs to ensure
compliance with the revised schedule. The feedbacks were stated below when the
respondent was being asked about the effects of revising the schedule.
“I think the impact to the contractor was the overhead expenses before the official
commencement. This is because we already agreed to pay fixed lump sum, but the official
awarding was delayed and the completion date remains the same. So, the delay is actually
extra cost to the contractor in terms of overhead expenses”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent D)
“Because of the revision of dates, the consultants supervision costs increased”.
(Excerpt from interview report of Respondent F)
The project cost was increased as the result of revising the schedule of Penang Second
Bridge. This situation resonated with the comments of Asnaashari and Knight (2010). The
client’s representative indicated that time and cost were inter-related. When the project
schedule has to be revised, the cost of project will increase as well, and the reasons mostly
point toward the overhead expenses involved to continue the construction works.
Another impact of revising the schedule of Penang Second Bridge project was the negative
reputation it garnered from the public. Respondent B explained that society does not
understand the whole process and procedure of this project, and blamed the contractors’
without any evidence and understanding on the actual causes. The scenario is obvious when
the collapse at Batu Maung has caught the attention of the public and social media. Some
contractors mentioned that their reputation was affected due to the collapse incident,
although their packages were not related to the collapse package.
To conclude, more efforts are required to find out about other critical factors that can cause
a construction project to be rescheduled. Several recommendations are discussed below
with the aims to increase the awareness on project delay issues as well as the quality of a
construction product:
i) The practitioners in construction industry have to be aware with the highlighted issues
and avoid the problems to be repeated again in future construction projects.
ii) Although every construction project may have different nature, culture and regulation,
gross project rescheduling invariably lead to the same effects. Every party in the
construction industry must be conscientious and take full responsibility and complete
ownership to prevent problems associated with delays.
iii) All practitioners in the construction industry should investigate and implement the
appropriate solutions to solve common delay problems in the industry.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to thank the guidance and supports provided by the supervisor,
Associated Professor Dr. Nazirah Zainul Abidin and Associated Professor Surveyor Azlan
Raofuddin Haji Nuruddin from Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
6. REFERENCES
Adnan E. (2009), Delays and cost overruns in the construction projects in the Gaza Strip,
Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 14(2), 126-151.
Ahmed Syed M., Azhar S., Kappagantula P. & Gollapudi D. (2003), Delays in
Construction: A brief study of the Florida construction industry, ASC Proceedings of the
39th Annual Conference, Clemson University-Clemson, South Carolina, 257-266.
Alaghbari W., Razali M., Kadir A., Azizah S. & Ernawati (2007), The significant factors
causing delay of building construction projects in Malaysia, Journal of Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 14(2), 192-206.
Ameer A. (2005), Construction industry payment and adjudication act, Reducing payment
default and inceasing dispute resolution efficiency, International Forum on Construction
Industry Payment Act and Adjudication 2005, Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Kuala
Lumpur Malaysia.
Arditi D. & Pattanakitchamroon T. (2006), Selecting a delay analysis method in resolving
construction claims, International Journal of Project Management, 24, 145-155.
Asnaashari E. & Knight A. (2010), Causes of Construction Delays in Iran, Design and the
Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, Burton Street, Nottingham.
Bertin B. A. (2011), Cost overruns and time delays in highway and bridge projects in
developing countries, Thesis of Michigan State University.
Bramble B.B. & Callaham M. T. (1987), Construction Delay Claims, Wiley Law
Publications, New York.
Chan W. M. & Mohan Kumaraswamy M. (1996), A comparative study of causes of time
overruns in Hong Kong construction projects, International Journal of project
Management, 15(1), 55-63.
Chan W. M. & Mohan Kumaraswamy M. (2010), Contributors to construction delays,
Construction Management and Economics, 16(1), 17-29.
Sun M. & Meng X. (2009), Taxonomy for change causes and effects in construction
projects, International Journal of Project Management, 560-572.
Sweis G., Sweis R., Abu Hammad A. & Shboul A. (2007), Delays in construction projects:
The case of Jordan, International Journal of Project Management, 26, 665-674.
The Malaysian Insider (2014), Najib opens second Penang bridge, naming it after the King,
Available from http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/najib-opens-second-
penang-bridge-naming-it-after-the-king.
The Online Star (2008), PM: Many reasons for Penang bridge delay, Available from
http://www.thestar.com.my/story/?file=%2F2008%2F4%2F22%2Fnation%2F2008042214
1550&sec=nation.
The Online Star (2012), Construction of second Penang span 84% finished, Available from
http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2012/10/03/Construction-of-second-Penang-
span-84-finished/.
Vidalis S. M. & Najafi F. T. (2002), Cost and time overrun in highway construction, 4th
Transportation Specialty Conference of the Canadian Society in Civil Engineering.
Willoughby E. (2002), Inequality does cause underdevelopment: New evidence from
commodity endowments, middle class share, and other determinants of per capita income,
Washington DC: Centre for Global Development.
Zayyana S., Intan R. E. & Akintoye A. (2014), Factors contributing to project time and
hence cost overrun in the Malaysian construction industry, Journal of Financial
Management of Property and Construction,19(1), 55-75.