The construction industry is vital to national development, yet it often faces inefficiencies due to time and cost overruns, largely stemming from a variety of factors. These delays lead to project disruptions, disputes, and claims. Various delay analysis methods—categorized as prospective and retrospective—are employed to manage and mitigate such delays. However, the success of these methods highly relies on the quality of the project schedule. While general schedule quality parameters exist, there has been limited focus on parameters specific to delay analysis. This study investigates preferred delay analysis approaches and identifies challenges in their application. A survey and focus group study involving real-time projects established key schedule quality parameters for delay analysis. These include: Sequencing of Activities, Inclusion of All Activities, Use of Lags, Use of Non-Finish-to-Start Relationships, Date Constraints, and Float Colour Coding. Among these, “Inclusion of All Activities” emerged as the most critical, while the “Use of Lags” was found to be the least sensitive parameter. By highlighting these parameters, the study provides valuable insights for practitioners to enhance schedule robustness. A well-structured schedule allows for accurate prospective delay analysis, helping mitigate potential time as well as cost overruns and improving overall project performance.
Baskar et al. (Wed,) studied this question.