The Impact of Stakeholders’ Requirements on Stumbled Projects in Kuwait

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

The Impact of Stakeholders’ Requirements on Stumbled Projects in Kuwait

Eng. Bader Althaidi, Dr. Mohamed Abdel-Monem, and Prof. Karim Eldash*

Civil Engineering Department

Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra Benha University Cairo, Egypt

Abstract This paper introduces the impact of stakeholders requirements on blundered projects in Kuwait. The main objective of this descriptive research is to investigate and explore the influence of the stakeholders on stumbling blocks in construction projects in Kuwait. This study was conducted based on examining a portion of the total population selected in a way that reflects the structure of the whole. To achieve the research objectives, the researcher employed a questionnaire survey as a means of gathering information. The results showed that the project's key success was realistic management planning. This study also determined that it is a necessity to have stakeholder groups involved in the planning process and establish a basis for further improvements. this study recommends that project leaders should ensure that there is effective management during the construction process, which aids the success of the construction projects.

Keywords: Stakeholders; stumbled; construction project

  1. INTRODUCTION

    Construction projects attract interests from various stakeholders who express needs and expectations regarding the project. These often conflict with each other, and it is unlikely that all of them fulfill the stakeholder management process which involves evaluating the requirements, needs and expectations of the stakeholders in relation to the main objective of the project. Kuwait is one of the Gulf States, which is currently witnessing great development in the field of construction. This is of great significance in that the construction industry in Kuwait is a major simulant to the countrys economic growth. The government has a major share in the construction activity and is involved and contributes to the building and housing industry. Many public agencies oversee the construction process on behalf of the government of Kuwait. In addition, the construction industry has expanded and developed since the liberation of Kuwait in 1991. In this era of globalization, the construction industry faces unique challenges in their coordination with clients, financiers, developers, designers, and contractors. It is necessary to ensure that construction projects are completed on time and within the required cost.

    Construction projects face many challenges, such as delays and stumbling blocks, causing them to exceed the planned budget. Thus, the common mode of execution of construction projects in Kuwait, as well as many other countries could be explained using a tripartite system model where the main three parties in any construction project are the employer (manager), the consultant and the contractor who have mutual responsibilities and requirements.

    Thus, the current research attempts to determine the influence of the stakeholders requirements on the problems encountered in the construction projects in Kuwait.

  2. BACKGROUND

    The term stakeholders refers to any person, group, or entity that may have an impact or influence on the outcome of a project or may be affected by the outcome of a project.[1]

    Thus, a project stakeholder can be defined as a person (or a group of people) who has a vested interest in the success of a project and the environment within which the project operates. Therefore, we can define vested interest as having possession of one or more of the stakeholders attributes of power, legitimacy, or urgency for the clams upon the project. There are fundamentally two categories of stakeholders: internal stakeholders, who are actively involved in project execution, and external stakeholders, who are affected by the project [2].

    Theoretically, the widespread adoption of the stakeholder's perspective in business makes a move away from a neo- classical economic theory of organization to a socioeconomic theory [3].

    The stakeholders model contrasts with the input-output model. Stakeholder management assumes that all persons or groups with legitimate interests, in principle, will place a priority for one set of interests and benefits over another ]4[.

    The stakeholder model recognizes the mutual dependencies between organizations and various stakeholder groups and knows that each party can equally affect the organization, its operations and performance [5]. Thus, the stakeholder theory represents one of the common concepts in the field of strategic management throughout the last decade and its relationship to business ethics [6].

    In addition, the stakeholder theory assumes that we must equally deal with the interested party in terms of equity, fairness, or simply through discussions that relate to the balance of the stakeholder groups ]7[. Therefore, management involves identifying and classifying the facility through initial and subsequent engagement in a timely, planned, and coordinated manner [8].

    Stakeholder management involves a relationship between an organization and its stakeholders, which influences both positively and negatively. Stakeholders must be managed to minimize their negative impact and ensure that they do not hinder the achievement of goals by individuals and organizations. Donaldson and Preston (1995) argue that the fundamental basis of the stakeholders theory is normative

    and, therefore, involves acceptance of the following ideas, including the thought that the interests of all stakeholders are of intrinsic value [9]. Therefore, Donaldson and Preston's major contribution to the stakeholder theory in management views three main perspectives: a) descriptive b) instrumental and c) normative.

    The descriptive aspect describes the corporation as a constellation of cooperative and competitive content possessing intrinsic value. The instrumental style of stakeholder relationships does not project management as a unique set of coordinated activities with a definite starting and finishing point, undertaken by an individual or organization to meet specific objectives within a defined schedule, cost, and performance parameter. Project management may be defined as the overall planning coordination and control of a project from inception to completion, aimed at meeting a client's requirements to produce a functionally and financially viable project that will be completed on time, within authorized cost and to the required quality standards [10].

    The designer's team provides planning and design services and administers the construction contract between the owner and the contractor. The contractor's team coordinates and is responsible for the physical work as well as the performance of sub-contractors and product supplies. On larger projects, the owner will have the assistance of a team, typically made up of both employees and consultants and including a project manager who is responsible for coordinating and managing the owner's interests [11].

    Muizz et al., identified 63 main causes for delays in the construction industry. The authors divided these factors into ten groups, but the five most significant factors include late payments by the client, poor site management and supervision by the contractor, lack of skilled labor, contractor problems in financing the project, and lack of successful planning and scheduling by the contractor [12].

  3. LITERATURE REVIEW

    Srinevasam and Dhwya (2020) in their study titled An Empirical Study on Stakeholder Management in Construction Projects based their rsearch on empirical data through a questionnaire survey taken among various engineering and managerial personnel (project managers). The findings identified the major factors influencing stakeholder management in construction projects and analyzed them using principal component analysis and mean score analysis by means of the frequency distribution method [13].

    Another study by Faisal Al Shamari et al. (2020) aimed to provide a review of skills of the project manager framework (PMSF) that are required in improving complex construction projects in Kuwait. The study relied on extensive literature reviews of the project managers skills. The findings of the study determined that skills, such as teamwork, effective communication with staff and contractors, effective resource management, effective planning and training, and risk management were significant factors [14].

    Opeymie Oye Yapo et al. (2019) examined the factors inhibiting stakeholder management of mega construction projects. The research employed the case study method to examine project managers of 40 mega construction projects in Lagos, Nigeria. The study, which used questionnaires, found

    that ineffective communication with stakeholders, complexity of the projects, and changes of the stakeholder's interests were the most inhibiting factors affecting the stakeholder's management of mega-construction projects [15].

    Other research aimed to explore the concept of stakeholder dynamics through a power/ interest matrix based on data collected from 12 projects from five business sectors conducted in Norway. Wakeel and Anderson (2019) used an online closed questionnaire to analyze various statistical approaches. The findings showed that stakeholders dynamics is a contextual phenomenon, which takes different forms and shapes from one stakeholder group to the other, from one industry or business sector to the other, and even from one project to the other within the same industry or business sector [16].

  4. DATA COLLECTION

This is a descriptive research as previously mentioned. The main objective is to show the impact of stakeholders' requirements on stalled projects in Kuwait. Based on examining a portion of the total population, the authors were able to reflect the structure of the whole. To achieve these objectives, the researcher employed the questionnaire survey as a means of gathering information. This suggests that attitudes are mental positions that cannot be observed directly but must be analyzed based on research results. The fact that attitudes are learned affirms they will be affected by information and experience [17].

The following answers to each paragraph were in accordance with the five-point Likert scale:

Category

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Degre e

5

4

3

2

1

After completing the encoding of data from a qualitative form to a quantitative form, the data was transferred to the amount allocated to discharge cards. Therefore, according to the previous rules, serial numbers must reflect every single form of the vocabulary of the research community.

The questionnaire consisted of the main variable requirements of stakeholder and below are the sub- variables:

I. High-level leadership and support

  1. Interdependence and relationship management

  2. Clarity of purpose and processes

  3. Knowledge and skill

  4. Knowing the needs and limitations of the stakeholders

  5. Credibility

  6. Anticipating the impact and influence of stakeholders.

  7. Involving others

  8. Ownership

  1. The Research Community

    The study consisted of 62 samples to determine the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled project of the Public Authority for Housing Welfare in Kuwait.

    1. Research methodology This empirical study aims to clarify the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled project of the Public Authority for Housing Welfare in Kuwait.

    2. Measurement model assessment This section of the study explains the procedures that the researcher has undertaken to examine the validity and reliability of the constructs. An exploratory factor analysis has been conducted on SPSS 20 to account for construct validity. For examining reliability, Cronbachs alpha has been used to evaluate the internal consistency of the measures that have been adopted for the purposes of this study.

    3. First: reliability analysis Reliability means that a measure or questionnaire should consistently reflect the construct that it is measuring [18]. Reliability is used to measure the same scale items multiple times, ensuring that the same result is found every time, as long as the underlying phenomenon is not changing. Reliability is also a measure of internal consistency between different items of the same construct. When a multiple-item scale is provided to respondents and yields a similar score every time, even if it is completed at two different points in time, this reflects internal consistency. Therefore, it can be said that reliability can be estimated in terms of average inter-item correlation, average item-to-total correlation, or more commonly, Cronbachs alpha[19]. In this study, reliability of each scale has been tested through Cronbachs alpha to identify the internal consistency of the scale.

      The alpha coefficient value depends on the number of items on the scale. In general, reliabilities less than 0.6 are considered poor, the 0.7 range, accepted, and over 0.8 is good [20].

      In a reliable scale all items should correlate with the total. If items do not correlate with the overall score from the scale with their values being less than approximately 0.3, it means there are problems, as a particular item does not correlate very well with the scale overall. Items with low correlations may have to be dropped [18]. For the data in this study, all data have item-total correlations.

      The following table summarizes the reliability test results for the study variables. All the variables show an alpha coefficient of more than 0.6.

      Table I.

      The results indicate that the research variables measure requirement of stakeholders in the organization, and this is intended to stabilize the scale and lack of contradiction. It gives the same results if re-applied to the same sample and shows test stability using Cronbach alpha coefficient. The Cronbach alpha for requirement of stakeholders was 0.959.

    4. Validity analysis Validity refers to the degree to which a measure adequately represents the fundamental construct that it measures and examines the measurement scale of the theoretical construct that it measures[19]. The validity has been tested using factor analysis.

    5. 5)Factor analysis the factor analysis is a class of procedures used for reducing and summarizing data. In marketing research, there may be large number of variables, most of which are correlated, and must be reduced to a manageable level. Relationships among sets of many interrelated variables are examined and represented in terms of few underlying factors. Factor analysis is an interdependence technique in that an entire set of interdependent relationships is examined [21].

      Table II.

      Statement

      Person Corr.

      Sig.

      1

      There is a strong core group with strong commitment and representation of the participating stakeholders

      .726**

      .000

      2

      There are high-level and influential people who support the stakeholder dialogue.

      .621**

      .000

      3

      Besides the primary group, there are enough participants to challenge the goal.

      .819**

      .000

      4

      Management at the highest level of the participating institutions unites with the goal.

      .509**

      .000

      5

      Stakeholders have sufficient time to build relationships among themselves. In so doing, the people involved meet each other with mutual respect and acceptance.

      .688**

      .000

      6

      There is a communicative and inspiring exchange.

      .399**

      .000

      7

      Sufficient attention is paid to the relationships between the participating stakeholders and the institutions they represent.

      .405**

      .000

      8

      The stakeholders dialogue contribution to achieving a common goal is known to all the stakeholders involved.

      .613**

      .000

      9

      There is adequate coordination between the stakeholders involved around the objective.

      .523**

      .000

      10

      The process structure and methods used are transparent and reliable.

      .477**

      .000

      11

      All participants have the necessary knowledge and skills.

      .762**

      .000

      12

      The process architecture includes capacity development to implement stakeholder dialogues.

      .626**

      .000

      13

      Sufficient resources exist to conduct and implement the stakeholder dialogue.

      .617**

      .000

      14

      ensure training capacity development to know the needs and limitations of stakeholders

      .752**

      .000

      Statement

      Person Corr.

      Sig.

      1

      There is a strong core group with strong commitment and representation of the participating stakeholders

      .726**

      .000

      2

      There are high-level and influential people who support the stakeholder dialogue.

      .621**

      .000

      3

      Besides the primary group, there are enough participants to challenge the goal.

      .819**

      .000

      4

      Management at the highest level of the participating institutions unites with the goal.

      .509**

      .000

      5

      Stakeholders have sufficient time to build relationships among themselves. In so doing, the people involved meet each other with mutual respect and acceptance.

      .688**

      .000

      6

      There is a communicative and inspiring exchange.

      .399**

      .000

      7

      Sufficient attention is paid to the relationships between the participating stakeholders and the institutions they represent.

      .405**

      .000

      8

      The stakeholders dialogue contribution to achieving a common goal is known to all the stakeholders involved.

      .613**

      .000

      9

      There is adequate coordination between the stakeholders involved around the objective.

      .523**

      .000

      10

      The process structure and methods used are transparent and reliable.

      .477**

      .000

      11

      All participants have the necessary knowledge and skills.

      .762**

      .000

      12

      The process architecture includes capacity development to implement stakeholder dialogues.

      .626**

      .000

      13

      Sufficient resources exist to conduct and implement the stakeholder dialogue.

      .617**

      .000

      14

      ensure training capacity development to know the needs and limitations of stakeholders

      .752**

      .000

      Common Factor Analysis (CFA) for requirements of stakeholder

      Reliability Analysis for Research Variables

      Variables

      Cronbach's Alpha

      Number of Statements

      Cronbach's Alpha for Requirement of Stakeholder

      .959

      33

      Statement

      Person Corr.

      Sig.

      15

      Stakeholder groups are involved in the training process to learn the needs and limitations of stakeholders

      .773**

      .000

      16

      There is a coordinated method

      for handling stakeholder complaints so that they are considered

      .704**

      .000

      17

      The initiators, core group, or process managers have sufficient mandate and are trusted by all the stakeholders involved.

      .757**

      .000

      18

      All relevant stakeholders are adequately and appropriately represented in the stakeholder dialogue.

      .468**

      .000

      19

      Decision-making processes are transparent and are jointly decided by all stakeholders. This includes the different backgrounds and cultures of the participating stakeholders and their respective institutions.

      .781**

      .000

      20

      There are tools to anticipate the influence of stakeholders in organizations

      .684**

      .000

      21

      There are tools to anticipate that stakeholders will be affected by changes in the business environment

      .755**

      .000

      22

      Stakeholder groups that are not influential in the process are appropriately involved. The relevant stakeholder dialogue, meetings, and workshops are designed and implemented so that all participating stakeholders speak up and are adequately listened to.

      .803**

      .000

      23

      There is a coordinated way to deal with criticism and complaints. Critical voices are included, and a good relationship with the critics is maintained.

      .790**

      .000

      24

      Influential stakeholders have sufficient interest in the purpose of the stakeholder dialogue and are involved in the dialogue process.

      .786**

      .000

      25

      The relevance of the objectives and outcomes is reviewed on a regular basis with all participating stakeholders.

      .749**

      .000

      26

      All stakeholders have an equal right to include their views, decision-making, or both. As for decisions, they are taken by consensus.

      .778**

      .000

      27

      The core group ensures that the contributions of the various stakeholders are adequately recognized.

      .698**

      .000

      28

      Focusing on implementation and achieving results.

      .739**

      .000

      29

      Stakeholder meetings are designed so that participants can find solutions to problems together, and the meetings conclude with an overview of results and next steps.

      .567**

      .000

      30

      If joint decisions are made, they are implemented by the institutions represented by the participating stakeholders.

      .647**

      .000

      31

      All participants are familiar with the different roles and structures of supervision and implementation.

      .623**

      .000

      32

      The participating stakeholders agree on the form of the workflow reviews and the form of the observation.

      .609**

      .000

      33

      Workflow reviews are conducted regularly.

      .598**

      .000

      Statement

      Person Corr.

      Sig.

      15

      Stakeholder groups are involved in the training process to learn the needs and limitations of stakeholders

      .773**

      .000

      16

      There is a coordinated method

      for handling stakeholder complaints so that they are considered

      .704**

      .000

      17

      The initiators, core group, or process managers have sufficient mandate and are trusted by all the stakeholders involved.

      .757**

      .000

      18

      All relevant stakeholders are adequately and appropriately represented in the stakeholder dialogue.

      .468**

      .000

      19

      Decision-making processes are transparent and are jointly decided by all stakeholders. This includes the different backgrounds and cultures of the participating stakeholders and their respective institutions.

      .781**

      .000

      20

      There are tools to anticipate the influence of stakeholders in organizations

      .684**

      .000

      21

      There are tools to anticipate that stakeholders will be affected by changes in the business environment

      .755**

      .000

      22

      Stakeholder groups that are not influential in the process are appropriately involved. The relevant stakeholder dialogue, meetings, and workshops are designed and implemented so that all participating stakeholders speak up and are adequately listened to.

      .803**

      .000

      23

      There is a coordinated way to deal with criticism and complaints. Critical voices are included, and a good relationship with the critics is maintained.

      .790**

      .000

      24

      Influential stakeholders have sufficient interest in the purpose of the stakeholder dialogue and are involved in the dialogue process.

      .786**

      .000

      25

      The relevance of the objectives and outcomes is reviewed on a regular basis with all participating stakeholders.

      .749**

      .000

      26

      All stakeholders have an equal right to include their views, decision-making, or both. As for decisions, they are taken by consensus.

      .778**

      .000

      27

      The core group ensures that the contributions of the various stakeholders are adequately recognized.

      .698**

      .000

      28

      Focusing on implementation and achieving results.

      .739**

      .000

      29

      Stakeholder meetings are designed so that participants can find solutions to problems together, and the meetings conclude with an overview of results and next steps.

      .567**

      .000

      30

      If joint decisions are made, they are implemented by the institutions represented by the participating stakeholders.

      .647**

      .000

      31

      All participants are familiar with the different roles and structures of supervision and implementation.

      .623**

      .000

      32

      The participating stakeholders agree on the form of the workflow reviews and the form of the observation.

      .609**

      .000

      33

      Workflow reviews are conducted regularly.

      .598**

      .000

      The above table shows the correlation coefficients between each paragraph (all included sentences) for Requirement of stakeholder, where the value of the correlation coefficient between (0.399 0.819) which is a positive correlation. The value of each paragraph level is less than 0.05 and thus considered to be honest and intended to measure.

    6. Descriptive statistics analysis This analysis involves reporting descriptive statistics so that the researcher is familiar with the data and understands the relationships between variables.

      In summary, a descriptive analysis of a respondent profile in terms of age, gender, and educational level have been presented. Summary statistics of the frequencies, percentages, mean, and standard deviation for each of the variables in the model are reported in this section.

      Table III.

      Descriptive statistics for Demographic Data

      Variable

      Frequency

      Percentage

      Gender

      Male

      45

      72.6

      Female

      17

      27.4

      Age

      Under 30 years old

      29

      46.8

      From 30 years to 40 years

      22

      35.5

      Over 40 years

      11

      17.7

      Educational level

      Bachelor

      46

      74.2

      Postgraduate degree

      16

      25.8

      Work experience

      Less than 5 years

      24

      38.7

      From 5 years to 10 years

      20

      32.3

      From 10 years to 15 years

      13

      21.0

      More than 15 years

      5

      8.1

      Type of institution

      Local

      42

      67.7

      International

      20

      32.3

      1. The gender variable included 45 males and 17 females to study the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait as shown in Table 3.

      2. The age variable consisted of 29 respondents who were less than 30 years old; 22 were from 30 years to 40 years; and 11 were over 40, as seen in Table 3.

      3. The educational level variable in Table 3 shows that 46 of the respondents had bachelors degrees and 16 had postgraduate degrees

      4. The work experience variable consisted of 24 participants who had less than 5 years experience; 20 had from 5 years to 10 years; 13 had from 10 years to 15years; and 5 had more than 15 years.

      5. The type of institution variable in Table 3 shows that 42 of the sample chose to work for local institutions, while 20 worked for international organizations.

    7. Findings

Table V.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

5

Stakeholders have sufficient time to build relationships among themselves. In so doing, the people

involved meet each other with mutual respect and acceptance.

4.06

0.77

81.29

2

6

There is a communicative and inspiring exchange.

4.13

0.59

82.58

1

7

Sufficient attention is paid to the relationships between the participating stakeholders and the institutions they represent.

4.00

0.75

80.00

3

The main average of interdependence and relationship management

4.06

0.55

81.29

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

5

Stakeholders have sufficient time to build relationships among themselves. In so doing, the people

involved meet each other with mutual respect and acceptance.

4.06

0.77

81.29

2

6

There is a communicative and inspiring exchange.

4.13

0.59

82.58

1

7

Sufficient attention is paid to the relationships between the participating stakeholders and the institutions they represent.

4.00

0.75

80.00

3

The main average of interdependence and relationship management

4.06

0.55

81.29

shows the mean, standard deviation and relative importance of interdependence and relationship management.

Table IV.

shows the mean, standard deviation and relative importance of high-level

leadership and support.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

1

There is a strong core group with strong commitment and representation of the participating stakeholders.

4.00

0.75

80.00

4

2

There are high-level and influential people who support the stakeholder dialogue.

4.10

0.74

81.94

1

3

Besides the primary group, there are enough participants who challenge the goals.

4.00

0.65

80.00

3

4

Management at the highest level of the participating institutions unite with the goal.

4.02

0.80

80.32

2

The main average of high-level leadership and support

4.03

0.60

80.56

The main average of high-level leadership and support variables was 4.03, Standard. Deviation 0.6, and relative importance 80.56% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

The main average of the interdependence and relationship management variable was 4.06; standard deviation, 0.55; and relative importance 81.29% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on stalled projects in Kuwait.

Table VI.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

8

The stakeholder dialogues contribution to achieving a common goal is known to all the stakeholders involved.

4.05

0.66

80.97

2

9

There is adequate

4.13

0.64

82.58

1

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

8

The stakeholder dialogues contribution to achieving a common goal is known to all the stakeholders involved.

4.05

0.66

80.97

2

9

There is adequate

4.13

0.64

82.58

1

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance of clarity regarding purpose and processes.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

skill

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

coordination between the involved stakeholders around the objective.

10

The process structure and methods used are transparent and reliable.

3.85

0.83

77.10

3

The main average of clarity regarding purpose and processes

4.01

0.56

80.22

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

coordination between the involved stakeholders around the objective.

10

The process structure and methods used are transparent and reliable.

3.85

0.83

77.10

3

The main average of clarity regarding purpose and processes

4.01

0.56

80.22

The main average of the knowledge and skill variable was 4.09; standard deviation, 0.57; and relative importance, 81.72% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

The mai average of the clarity of purpose and processes variable was 4.01; standard deviation, 0.56; and relative importance 80.22% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

Table VII.

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance for

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

11

All participants have the necessary knowledge and skills.

3.90

0.84

78.06

3

12

The process architecture includes capacity development to implement stakeholder dialogues.

4.06

0.65

81.29

2

13

Sufficient resources exist to conduct and implement the stakeholder dialogue.

4.29

0.71

85.81

1

The main average of knowledge and

4.09

0.57

81.72

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

11

All participants have the necessary knowledge and skills.

3.90

0.84

78.06

3

12

The process architecture includes capacity development to implement stakeholder dialogues.

4.06

0.65

81.29

2

13

Sufficient resources exist to conduct and implement the stakeholder dialogue.

4.29

0.71

85.81

1

The main average of knowledge and

4.09

0.57

81.72

knowledge and skill.

Table VIII.

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance for knowing the needs and limitations of the stakeholders.

No.

Statement

Me an

Standa rd Deviati on

Relative Importa nce

Ra nk

14

ensure training capacity development to know the needs and limitations of stakeholders

4.03

0.72

80.65

2

15

Stakeholder groups are involved in the training process to learn the needs and limitations of stakeholders

4.06

0.70

81.29

1

16

There is a coordinated method

for handling stakeholder com plaints so that they are taken into account

3.89

0.75

77.74

3

The main average of knowing the needs and limitations of the stakeholders.

3.99

0.67

79.89

The main average of knowing the needs and limitations of the stakeholder's variable was 3.99; standard deviation, 0.67; and relative importance, 79.89% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

Table IX. shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance for

credibility.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

17

The initiators, core group, or process managers have sufficient mandate and are trusted by all

3.92

0.75

78.39

3

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

The main average of anticipating the impact and influence of stakeholders.

4.02

0.64

80.32

The main average of the credibility variable was 4.09; standard deviation, 0.58; and relative importance, 81.83% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

The main average of anticipating the impact and influence of the stakeholder's variable was 4.02; standard deviation, 0.64; and relative importance, 80.32% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

the stakeholders involved.

18

All relevant stakeholders are adequately and appropriately represented in the stakeholder dialogue.

4.24

0.76

84.84

1

19

Decision-making processes are transparent and are jointly decided by all stakeholders. This includes the different backgrounds and cultures of the participating stakeholders and their respective institutions.

4.11

0.58

82.26

2

The main average of credibility

4.09

0.58

81.83

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

the stakeholders involved.

18

All relevant stakeholders are adequately and appropriately represented in the stakeholder dialogue.

4.24

0.76

84.84

1

19

Decision-making processes are transparent and are jointly decided by all stakeholders. This includes the different backgrounds and cultures of the participating stakeholders and their respective institutions.

4.11

0.58

82.26

2

The main average of credibility

4.09

0.58

81.83

Table XI.

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance for involving

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

22

Stakeholder groups that are not influential in the process are appropriately involved. The relevant stakeholder dialogue, meetings, and workshops are designed and implemented so that all participating stakeholders speak up and are adequately listened to.

4.11

0.58

82.26

1

23

There is a coordinated way to deal with criticism and

complaints. Critical voices are included, but a good relationship with the critics is maintained.

4.02

0.64

80.32

2

24

Influential stakeholders have sufficient interest in the purpose of the stakeholder dialogue

3.89

0.87

77.74

3

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

22

Stakeholder groups that are not influential in the process are appropriately involved. The relevant stakeholder dialogue, meetings, and workshops are designed and implemented so that all participating stakeholders speak up and are adequately listened to.

4.11

0.58

82.26

1

23

There is a coordinated way to deal with criticism and

complaints. Critical voices are included, but a good relationship with the critics is maintained.

4.02

0.64

80.32

2

24

Influential stakeholders have sufficient interest in the purpose of the stakeholder dialogue

3.89

0.87

77.74

3

others.

Table X.

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance for anticipating the impact and influence of stakeholders.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

20

There are tools to anticipate

the influence of stakeholders in organizations.

4.10

0.59

81.94

1

21

There are tools to anticipate that stakeholders will be affected by changes in the business environment.

3.94

0.85

78.71

2

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

and are involved in the dialogue process.

The main average of involving others

4.01

0.62

80.11

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

together, and the meetings conclude with an overview of results and next steps.

30

If joint decisions are taken, they are implemented by the institutions represented by the participating stakeholders.

3.94

0.94

78.71

8

31

All participants are familiar with the different roles and structures of supervision and implementation.

4.15

0.65

82.90

1

32

The participating stakeholders agree on the form of the workflow reviews and the form of the observation.

4.11

0.73

82.26

3

33

Workflow reviews are conducted regularly.

4.08

0.68

81.61

5

The main average of ownership

4.04

0.52

80.82

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

together, and the meetings conclude with an overview of results and next steps.

30

If joint decisions are taken, they are implemented by the institutions represented by the participating stakeholders.

3.94

0.94

78.71

8

31

All participants are familiar with the different roles and structures of supervision and implementation.

4.15

0.65

82.90

1

32

The participating stakeholders agree on the form of the workflow reviews and the form of the observation.

4.11

0.73

82.26

3

33

Workflow reviews are conducted regularly.

4.08

0.68

81.61

5

The main average of ownership

4.04

0.52

80.82

The main average of involving others variable was 4.01; standard deviation, 0.62; and relative importance, 80.11% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

Table XII.

shows the mean, standard deviation, and relative importance of

ownership.

No.

Statement

Mean

Standard Deviation

Relative Importance

Rank

25

The relevance of the objectives and outcomes is reviewed on a regular basis with all participating stakeholders.

4.13

0.59

82.58

2

26

All stakeholders have an equal right to include their views, decision- making, or both. As for decisions, they are taken by consensus.

3.89

0.91

77.74

9

27

The core group ensures that the contributions of the various stakeholders are adequately recognized.

3.95

0.73

79.03

7

28

Focusing on implementation and achieving results

4.03

0.63

80.65

6

29

Stakeholder meetings are designed so that participants can find solutions to problems

4.10

0.67

81.94

4

The main average of ownership variable was 4.04; standard deviation, 0.52; and relative importance 80.82% to test the impact of stakeholders' requirements on the stalled projects in Kuwait.

V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results of this research indicate that project leaders

should ensure there is effective management during the construction process which aids in the success of construction projects. In addition, efforts should be made to identify all categories and classes of stakeholder groups to highlight and distinguish all requirements, interests, and issues concerning each party involved in the construction project. In construction practice, the Kuwait Accounting Office has revealed that there were delays in construction projects costing hundreds of

millions of dollars due to errors in management, planning, and design. In addition, the actual implementation ratio construction project reached 67.6% with a decrease of 32.4% which contributed to the delay in completing the construction projects.

REFERENCES

  1. M. Hossein et al., Analysis of stakeholders concerns at different time of construction project using social network analysis, 2019.

  2. C Amoatey and Mawuena Vincent Kodzo Hayibor, Critical success factors for local government project stakeholder management, 2017.

  3. G. Farias, C. Farias, I. Krysa, J. Harmon, Sustainability mindsets for strategic management: lifting the yoke of the neo-classical economic perspective, 2020.

  4. B. Squires, N. Elnahla, The roles played by boards of directors: an integration of the agency and stakeholder theories, 2020.

  5. S. Roscoe, N. Subramanian, R. Prifti, L. Wu, Stakeholder engagement in a sustainable sales and operations planning process, 2020.

  6. J. Hörisch, S. Schaltegger, R. Freeman, Integrating stakeholder theory and sustainability accounting: a conceptual synthesis, 2020.

  7. R.H. Clough, G.A. Sears & S.K. Sears, Construction project management, 2000.

  8. S. Kurnia, S. Kotusev, G. Shanks, R. Dilnutt, S. Milton, Stakeholder engagement in enterprise architecture practice: What inhibitors are there?, 2021.

  9. F.M. Nzri, Transforming the nation for a sustainable tomorrow, 2020.

  10. N.P. Srinivasan, A. Rangaraj, Study on factors influencing risk management in construction projects, 2020.

  11. B. Franz, J. Messner, Evaluating the impact of building information modeling on project performance, 2019.

  12. O. Muizz, Sanni-Anibire, R.M. Zin & S.O. Olatunji, Causes of delay in the global construction industry: a meta-analytical review, 2020.

  13. N. P Srinevasam, S. Dhwya, An empirical study on stakeholder management in construction projects, 2020.

  14. F. Al Shamari et al., Project manager's skills for improving the performance of complex projects in Kuwait construction industry, 2020.

  15. O.O. Yapo et al., Factors inhibiting stakeholders management of mega construction project, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 2019.

  16. O. Elwakeel & B. Anderson, Stakeholder evaluation: a study of stakeholder dynamics in 12 Norwegian projects, 2019.

  17. P. Kotler, and K. Keller, Marketing Management. 13th ed, London: Person Education Ltd., 2009.

  18. A. Field, Discovering statistics using SPSS: introducing statistical method, 2009.

  19. A. Bhattacherjee, Social science research: principles, methods, and practices, 2012.

  20. U. Sekaran, Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. New York: Wiley, 2003.

  21. N. Malhotra, J. Hall, M. Shaw, and M. Crisp, Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, Sydney: Prentice-Hall Australia, 1996.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *