Case Study for Contruction Management

Case Study for Contruction Management
Introduction:
Construction projects are complicated and involve various parties. It is very difficult to strike a balance between the interests of stakeholders and thus project management is very crucial to maintain a smooth project in terms of time, cost and quality. Disputes and conflicts are commonly seen when there is lack of management. The following scenario is a typical case in construction projects. Please read the case carefully and answer the questions. Being a project coordinator, Jeff Chan was a very hardworking staff and He came to site before eight o’clock every morning. The project was a public housing estate with five tower blocks in it. In the site formation stage, the soil level was about 2 metres higher than the designed formation level. There was a network of underground water drainage pipes and manholes below the designed ground level. The last manhole was positioned near to a corner of the site. The site agent, Albert Cheung, decided to construct it
before other site formation work. There was a connection pipe bridging the public manhole to the last manhole. So, there would be evacuation work on the road outside the site. This road, called L113G, was a private road during the time of construction but would be delivered to the public two months later. Jeff had been asked to monitor this part of work. He called upon a sub-contractor and toured around the scene with the subcontractor's representative, Simon Tsang, in asking him to estimate the price of the work.
Jeff was not informed about the expected completion date. Jeff, together with Simon, had a meeting with Albert on 5th May morning. In the meeting, they found that Albert was very busy with other works and always engaged in the phone. Albert just said, “It's very simple. You must finish the part of pipe between the public manhole and the site boundary before 5th June.” “But, there is lack of information on the facilities underground. Under such circumstances, I cannot give you an exact time and price.” Simon replied. In fact, Albert had got no information on hand but in order to exert pressure, he said, “OK, will you do this job? Or you need me to call your boss.”
“OK, OK…”, Simon replied.
Two days later, the evacuation work began. Jeff received a daily report from Simon, which records the number of workers for the job. Jeff believed Simon would use this data to claim the daily labour cost later, so he refused to sign the report.
Jeff had checked the number of workers everyday and he found that the number was smaller than that shown on the daily reports. He tried to contact Simon but failed.
On the 3rd day, Simon reported that there was a high-tension cable below the ground. The original evacuation area needs to be changed to avoid the obstacles. The job was hanged up. Jeff asked Albert to see the situation. The Architect, Tam, was called to the site. All agreed to change the position of the pipe. The new design began in the following day.
Four days later, Simon began to the next part of the evacuation work that lies between the site boundary and the designed last manhole within the site. Unfortunately, there were four old underground pipes (including town gas) in the area. The job was hanged up again. This was again followed with design change and re-excavation. At the end of the work, Simon has submitted a claim that far exceeds the budget!
Albert blamed Jeff for the delay and the cost.
Questions :
1. What are the reasons for the delay and escalated costs? Please analyze under the functions of management to explain the scenario.
2. Who should take the responsibility for the above? Please explain with suitable allocation of organizing, authority and delegation.
3. How can the delay and escalated costs be avoided? Please apply management skills to improve the situation.
More Details on How to Work on this Paper......
Need a Professional Writer to Work on this Paper?  Get this Paper Done ………