by Jeffrey C Kadlowec, Registered Architect

Risk management (RM) involves identifying hazards and threats, estimating the probability and impact of these conditions and events, developing and implementing strategic responses, and monitoring the outcomes during the project lifecycle (Okudan 2021). Design complexities and the dynamic nature of construction present many uncertainties for project managers. These factors create challenges that are best approached through utilization of risk assessment tools.

Construction supervision is an effective tool for reducing risks. Organizations offering this service work several areas concurrently: 1) design and permit documents, 2) compliance with parameters, 3) conformity of work, and 4) material selection (Topchiy 2018). This provides the advantage of integrated control and centralization of several processes. Shared responsibility and authority allow for faster processing of information and data-based decision-making. The integrated approach prevents financial and industrial losses by setting parameters through statistical methods. Two types of metrics or a combination of both are used in these measurements: qualitative, selection for a general total by level of acceptable quality; or quantitative, requirement of a selection sample meeting verified test criteria.

Private investors and government agencies, in the interest of preserving existing and historic buildings while improving the quality of construction, rely heavily on architects, engineers and project managers. The main goal is controlling the cost, time and quality of these projects which often overrun estimates and projections (Sigmund 2014). As recent economic changes are impacting the urban landscape, there is a need to revitalize these areas by repurposing of old structures through seismic stiffening, fire protection, and accessibility upgrades. Risk identification tools are a key component of feasibility studies due to the wide variety of risks and uncertainty involved in these types of projects.

Table 1: Risk Breakdown Structure for Construction Projects (Sigmund 2014)

Construction sites are a unique workplace with limited access for research purposes. Risk assessment tools do not capture all aspects of risks, centered on a predefined hierarchy. Research on accidents focus primarily on related tasks and risks without accounting for distinct information specific to each one (Forteza 2016). Reconstructing accident scenarios in an operational risk model (ORM) could provide valuable data for risk analysis. By analyzing the entire construction site for associated risks, not just individual ones, new tools can be generated to reduce their potential and improve overall performance. The construction site risk assessment tool (CONSRAT) utilizes two broad indicators and two valuation criteria to evaluate work conditions by a site technician.

There are a wide variety of tools and techniques for project managers (PMs) to manage risks in construction. These methods can be categorized as: 1) look up, referencing work, 2) supporting, providing documentation, 3) scenario, sequence of events, 4) functional, problem breakdown, 5) control, checks and procedures, 6), statistical / stochastic, mathematical models, 7) evaluation, determining merit, and 8) multi-criteria, examining conflicting elements (Dikmen 2008). Of Construction PMs prefer qualitative tools for referencing, documenting and evaluating risks, with a heavy reliance on past projects and prior experience. One area of improvement to be made is in the communication transfer of knowledge between teams and experts.

Risk management (RM) seeks to identify and define sources of uncertainty, estimate the severity of impact for these events or conditions, develop strategic responses to reduce, mitigate or eliminate the threats, and provide feedback about outcome through review and monitoring (Jepson 2018). While the RM philosophy is primarily to ‘manage adverse effects’, a change to ‘learning from risks’ in the post-construction phase will likely lead to a shift in expectations and better project planning.

References
Dikmen, I; Birgoul, MT; Anac, C; Tah, JHM & Aouad, G. (2008). Learning from Risk: A Tool for Post-Project Risk Assessment. Automation in Construction. 18. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2008.04.008.
Forteza, Francisco; Sesé, Albert & Carretero-Gómez, José. (2016). CONSRAT: Construction Site Risk Assessment Tool. Safety Science. 89. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.07.012.
Jepson, Jacqueline; Kirytopoulos, Konstantinos & London, Kerry. (2018). Insights into the Application of Risk Tools and Techniques by Construction Project Managers. International Journal of Construction Management. 20(8): 848-866. doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2018.1494673.
Okudan, Ozan; Budayan, Cenk & Dikmen, Irem. (2021). A Knowledge-Based Risk Management Tool for Construction Projects Using Case-Based Reasoning. Expert Systems with Applications. 173. doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114776.
Sigmund, Zvonko & Radujkovic, Mladen. (2014). Risk Breakdown Structure for Construction Projects on Existing Buildings. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences. 119. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.100.
Topchiy, Dmitriy; Shatrova, Anastasia & Yurgaytis, Alexey. (2018). Integrated Construction Supervision as a Tool to Reduce Developer’s Risks When Implementing New and Redevelopment Projects. MATEC Web of Conferences. 193: 05032. doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819305032.