The Sultanate of Oman: Public and Private Projects

Subject: Design
Pages: 35
Words: 9603
Reading time:
39 min
Study level: College


Unscheduled changes in construction contracts cannot be ruled out and they often cause additional work than planned. Such extra works are likely to cause additional cost and time to complete the construction project (Civitello, 1987). Understanding of the terms of the contract by the parties is bound to vary, which may give rise to changes in the scope of work. However, since the parties to the construction contract have diverse viewpoints chances for disputes to arise between owners, contractors and subcontractors are more. Moreover, in the present day’s context, because of the fact that construction schedules are compressed for faster completion, building activity starts even before the final design is completed (Chen & Hsu, 2007).

This might lead to the following of inaccurate design. Because of the changes in the needs and preferences of the industry, changes in the employers’ needs from the contractors are inevitable. All these factors have led to significant increase in the change orders in construction projects, often leading to disputes among various parties involved in the project. It is to be accepted that owners and design professionals must have the liberty to provide change orders, so that appropriate changes can be made in the construction projects to suit particular needs of the employers. Any construction project is subject to change orders and change is defined t o include any modification in the original scope of the construction contract. Such changes may have significant implications on time, cost and quality of construction. If the contractor is unable to manage the changes swiftly, it might lead to serious issues in project completion giving rise to claims (Assaf et al 1996).

The contractors must also be willing to carry out these change orders; but they must be compensated properly for the additional time and cost involved in executing the changes. Although the owners realize that change orders are likely to have an effect on specific tasks, they fail to appreciate the ripple effects such changes might bring to the entire project schedule. Coffman (1996) observe that in mechanical construction, because of the interconnection between different activities, changes in one activity are likely cause changes throughout the entire project.

The additional cost of change orders to the contractors will reflect in the form of requirement of additional materials, conflicts in the schedule of existing project activities, occasions of rework of work already executed, stoppage in the momentum of the project progress and reduced labor efficiency (Hanna et al., 1999). Financial impact of change order on most of the items affected by the change orders can be measured. However, it is difficult to precisely measure the effect of change orders on labor efficiency. Change orders thus might seriously impede the progress of the construction projects. Because change orders present a risk for both the contractor and the employer, they must be accepted and managed properly. In this context, this research attempts to find out from the all the project stakeholders such as clients, consultants, contractors and subcontractors, the impact of variation orders, the problems encountered because of the variation orders and the possible resolution to the problems and issues resulting from variation orders. Variations in the construction industry in Oman appear to be a common phenomenon as the working in the industry is affected by several factors such as weather conditions, lack of cost data, shortage of resources, lack of experienced contractors and frequent design changes by employers.

Variation Order – a Background

A variation order or change order as it is sometimes called, can be defined as a “written authorization provided to a contractor approving a change from the original plans, specifications, or other contract documents, as well as a change in the cost” (Means, 1991). For the purpose of this research a variation order is a modification provided in writing after the construction contract has been signed. Therefore, some of the variation orders can occur before the commencement of construction activity. The variation order includes “(1) additional or modified scope of work; (2) errors and omissions in plans and specifications; (3) changes required by governmental entities; (4) design changes; (5) overruns or underruns in quantities; and (6) conditions impacting on schedule, the time of completion or the method or manner of performance of the work,” (Libor, n.d).

Most of the construction contracts provide for such variations by including a “changes” clause. Such a “Changes” clause is beneficial to both the contractor and owner as in increases the flexibility of construction contracts by providing for the variations without the necessity for a new contract for incorporating any addition, deletion or modification of a project requirement. The “Changes” clause allows suitable modifications to be made to plans and specifications, which would precisely reflect the intended project outcomes of design personnel and the employer. These modifications can be carried out without breaking contractual requirements, when the “changes” is present in the construction contract (Libor, n.d). The clause provides the procedure for assessing the impact of changes to compensate the contractor for the additional work in respect of the variation orders. Another advantage of including the changes clause is that it enables the contractor to highlight modifications that will improve the project performance, as he is sure of receiving the differential cost for the extra tasks, which he is expected to perform following the variation orders. However, there are limitations on the employer to issue variation orders. For instance, the employer may not issue variation order which has the effect of brining fundamental changes in the scope of the contract. In view of the significant impact of variation orders on the project outcomes and the financial implications they have on the stakeholders, this paper attempts to explore the causes and effects and the likely remedies for the impact of variation orders.

Rationale and Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the current research is to explore the impact of variation orders on construction projects from the purview of clients, consultants, contractors and subcontractors, who are the major stakeholders of a construction contract. The impact is explored to ascertain the problems encountered by the stakeholders and the eventual resolution to the issues.

Engineer has the power to make any variation orders of the form, quality or quantity of the Works or part thereof subject to the approval of the Employer. Such order would result in increase or decrease the quantity of any work included in the contract. There are instances of omissions of work from the scope. Further the Engineer is empowered to change the character or quality or kind of any such work. This may result in change the levels, lines position and dimensions of any part of the works. At times it becomes compulsory, on the part of the Engineer to order for additional work of any kind necessary for the completion of the work. Further the faulty designs although the consultant fails to accept causes more concern, conflicts, cost and time over run. There are cases of interferences by the client results in variations. This state of affairs makes the consultant and contractor at tacit unease. Because of the misunderstanding created on account of variation orders, disputes and claims become a constant affair in the construction industry. In this context, the results of the current study are expected to add to the existing knowledge on the ways to resolve the problems encountered because of variation orders in construction contracts.

It is to be emphasized that such variation orders shall in anyway vitiate or invalidate the contract. The law provides the contractor to get compensated in a manner that valuation of such variations shall be taken into account when ascertaining the contract price. It’s being provided that orders for variations to be in writing but confirmation of verbal instructions considered as an order in writing. The basis of prices for variations shall be the rates and prices set out in the contract as decided by the Engineer who shall agree a suitable rate with the contractor, failing which the rates shall be fixed by the Engineer. Contractor’s prices at times found to be below the market prices. Contractors may at a loss if such prices are fixed for the variations. In such cases a controversy occurs between all parties concerned. The law is impartial by compensating the contractor on variations exceeding ten percent on certified completion of the works.

Though the procedures look simple but in reality a disagreement prevails between all the parties directly involved as to the agreement on time, money and quality. Though the consultancy agreement emphasizes the Consultant to obtain three or more quotations; in majority of the cases this activity is performed by the contractor who takes time until favorable quotations as to money and time are received at his hand before submitting to Engineer.

In Oman interdepartmental differences exist on payment issues. It takes more than three months to get the formal approval of such variation orders. Certain departmental circulars prevent the contractor from claiming this money through interim payment applications. Contractor’s long wait make them to seek various means; including and not limited to negotiating the quality or inflating the prices. This in turn leads to time over run and the contract price going beyond the budget. In case no savings on re-measurements or contingency is available, contractors again compelled to wait for longer period. This state of affairs prevents the client to establish a supply chain management. The delay of payment makes the other contractors refrain from actively participating in the future tenders too.


The main objectives of the study can be summarized as follows:

  1. To verify the type of variations issued.
  2. To verify the circumstances under which such variations are ordered.
  3. Pricing policies carried out under usual circumstances
  4. Problem confronted by clients, consultants, contractors and subcontractors
  5. Analyzing the problems and means of resolving them.


This study hypothesizes that variation orders in construction contracts have significant impact on the progress of construction contracts in the Sultanate of Oman and have been the major cause of delays in completing the project resulting in disputes and claims among the parties to the contracts.

Structure of the Dissertation

To present a comprehensive research report this dissertation is structured to have seven chapters. Chapter One introduces the research topic, provides the rational for the research and establishes aims and objectives and hypotheses to conduct the research. Chapter Two outlines the generic review of variation orders in construction contracts. In Chapter Three the reasons behind variation orders in construction projects are explored through a literature review. Chapter Four presents a description of the impacts of variation orders on construction contracts. Chapter Five restates the research objectives and illustrates the methodology that was used to achieve these objectives. The justification of using the questionnaire is stated. This chapter also describes the questionnaire design, survey sample scoring system and methods of analysis. Chapter Six contains data collected through the questionnaire and the analysis of the results from the questionnaire. The results are illustrated using bar charts and graphs. This chapter includes results interpretation and discussion on the results. Chapter Seven summarizes the research findings and based on the results of the research a relevant conclusion is drawn. Recommendations to avoid problems relating to variation orders and recommendations for further research in the area form part of this concluding chapter.

Variation Orders in the context of Oman Construction Industry


Several studies have been conducted on the impact of change orders on the productivity and efficiency of construction projects. Alnuaimi et al (2010) studied the causes and effects of change orders on public construction projects in Oman. The research undertook case studies of four large projects. The study found that altering owner requirements is the most important cause of changes in the construction projects in Oman and the study also found that such changes led to delays in completion of the projects and cost overruns. Moselhi et al (2005) studied the effect of variation orders on labor productivity and presented a model to measure the losses on variation orders.

This model identified several factors affecting the productivity and highlighted the timing of change orders to have a large impact on project completion within schedule. Keane et al (2010) presented the several suggestions to avoid or to minimize the number of change orders in construction projects. Min-Jae Lee et al (2003) worked on the impact of multiple change orders on productivity and suggested methods for quantification of loss of productivity resulting from the influence of change orders. Work of Hanna and Swanson (2007) focused on the type of changes on different construction projects and suggested compensation that might payable to contractors for each type of change. The results of all these studies have relevance to the functioning of the construction industry in Oman, where the number of change orders is more because of frequent changes in the owners’ requirements.

Prior Studies on Variations in Construction Projects

Literature on construction project management has identified that variation orders are common to all types of construction activities (Thomas et al. 2002, Oladapo, 2007). According to Ssegawa et al (2002) because of the presence of variation clauses in all types of construction contracts, it can be inferred that every project will have some type of variation or other. Change orders are most likely to have negative impact on both completion time as well as cost of projects. Design changes will eventually result in both cost and time overruns. Because designs in construction contracts have never been perfect, owners often need the flexibility for making revision in the plans and take benefit from the adoption of better technological advancements. Alternatively, in certain instances the owner might want the contractor to take of the risk of unanticipated events

Hanna & Swanson (2007) observed three types of changes – actual or directed changes, which are requested by the owner or his representation and which have the consent of all parties, constructive changes which arise because of different interpretation by the owner and the contractor about the scope of the contract, whether they are included in the contract document or not and cardinal changes, which are considered breach of contractual terms. Cardinal changes may occur when the contractor is authorized by the owner to undertake tasks which are beyond the scope of the contract and when the owner requests a number of changes which might lead to comprehensive changes from the original terms of the contract agreed between the parties. Alnuaimi et al (2010) observe that the causes for issuing variation orders may vary from one country to another. The authors found that the number of change orders issued in developing countries generally is more than those issued in developed countries.

Al-Momani (2000) found that changes initiated by the owners are one of the major reasons that led to delayed completion of projects in 130 cases studied. Goudreau (2001) found that delayed payments to contractors, change orders initiated and discrepancy in contract documents were among the important elements that increase cost and time of completion of construction projects. According to Acharya et al (2006) change orders were the third important factor identified for the occurrence of conflicts in construction projects. Out of the studies conducted on 76 projects in Saudi Arabia Assaf and Al-Heiji (2006) most common reason for project delays as reported by clients, consultants and contractors was “change order.” The results of all these prior studies confirm the impact of change orders on the construction projects in Oman. However the reasons for change orders may vary from country to country and between one project and another.

Causes for Variation Orders in Oman

Many reasons can be attributed for requesting changes in a construction contract. These changes become necessary for continuing with the projects after modification instead of terminating the projects. Hanna & Swanson (2007) define change to include any “activity that lead to modification in the original scope of the work, in the completion time of project, and in the cost of project and become part of most construction project due to limited resources.” Fisk & Reynolds (2009) define change order as “formal document that alters some conditions in the contract documents, such as changing in: the cost of project plans and specifications, project payments schedule.”

Keane et al. (2010) listed causes such as budgetary constraints of owners, improper determination of project goals, hard and tough nature of the owner, changes in scope and specifications by the owner and the quality of obstructing effective decisions, as related to owner-related causes for variations. Hanna et al (2002) identified the addition or deletion requested by the owner may lead to variations. Alnuaimi et al (2010) observed that not meeting the responsibility of the owner in supplying the materials and/or equipments, which are to be supplied by him, will also lead to changes to be requested by the owner at a later date.

Alnuaimi et al (2010) identified design errors and changes made to designs and failure of the consultant to suggest the best alternative design for project during the feasibility study as the changes relating to consultant’s acts. Keane et al (2010) found conflicts in contract documents and lack of information on the availability of materials and equipments are consultant-related causes for variations in construction agreements. Keane et al (2010) also identified lack of coordination among the parties as one of the most important causes for change requests relating to consultant. Change in specification suggested by the consultant and insufficient details in drawing leading to poor understanding of the parties are also consultant-related causes for variation orders.

In this context, Alnuaimi et al (2010) out of their case study of a water transmission project identified the issuance of four change orders for different reasons. They are (i) first one was issued to include the cost of rerouting a pipeline. This was necessitated because the project had to provide a right-of-way for a main highway. The change was necessary to change the water storage foundations adopting piles instead of raft footing; (ii) second change order was to be issued because of the delay caused by the first change order. This order included the cost of leveling some area of land and the construction of additional facilities which were not covered by the original contract scope; (iii) third change order was issued to provide for the cost of delay in providing various facilities at the inception of the project; and (iv) fourth change order was issues for rerouting the pipelines to pass through a different route away from the lands and houses of private parties. The total cost of these changes was US $ 7,539,216, which was 14% of the originally estimated cost of the project.

On an analysis of these four change orders, it may be inferred that the variations can be grouped under two types – consultant-related and client-related. The consultant-related variation orders include the changes requested because of design errors. The second group of variations has been necessitated because of additional scope requirements. In addition to the cost overrun, the project was granted additional time of 8.57% more than the scheduled time. Alnuaimi et al. (2010) observe that the first group of variations could have been avoided by undertaking soil investigation in a proper way, with precise knowledge of local regulations and proper coordination with other government departments. The authors are of the opinion that the second category of variations could have been reduced by proper planning and phasing of the projects.


Factors or causes of variations are not cognate at every project but these vary from project to project according to the nature, location and complexity. Variations in the construction industry are common and one of the most important issues. The timely completion of a construction project right from inception has always has a great importance in the construction industry. Variations and the resultant delays in completion of the projects cause financial losses to the project owner. Because of the financial losses incurred by the project, the project owner may find it difficult to settle the payments to the suppliers as well as wages and salaries to the project team members. Consequent to the liquidity issues, the delayed completion of the project affects the economy of the country.

It rarely happened that the construction project completed within time as specified. Most of the time construction schedules have been revised due to various delay factors including variations. “Completing projects on time is an indicator of efficiency, but the construction process is subject to many variables and unpredictable factors, which result from various sources” (Assaf and Al-Heiji, 2005), which cause the initiation of change orders.

Project delays caused by variations result from the poor performance of parties connected with the project. For example, delay in supply of materials by the suppliers will lead to delay. Similarly non-availability of resources like men and materials at the required time will also impede the progress of the project. Environmental conditions affect the progress of the project and lead to delays in the completion. Above all, lack of coordination among project stakeholders including contractors is the main cause of delays in completing the projects.

Globalization, research and use of IT in production industry have reduced the risk of delay but construction industry due its volatile nature still suffers delays. These delays are normally related to the project planning, owner’s decision making (variations), manpower, supervision, late issue of drawing, slow decision making by government authorities and lack of coordination. In recent years due to global recession, many projects were abandoned or delayed due to lack of finance. Today’s construction project has become a very complex, high-risk, and multiparty endeavor. Construction projects are composed of many interrelated elements of labor, cost, material, schedule, other resources, and lot of coordination, making it difficult to define, which factors were the main causes for delay on a given project. Identifying the main causes of delay in large construction projects is very difficult and often initiates disputes about responsibility for the delay

Reasons behind Variations

Variations become an inevitable element in almost all construction projects (Ibbs et al. 2001). Owner may prefer to change the scope of the contract at any time during the progress of the project to meet his various needs. Similarly market conditions may necessitate some changes in the parameters of the project. Based on the latest technological developments the engineer might decide to alter the design or construction method, which will also lead to variations in the construction project.

“The engineer’s review of the design may bring about changes to improve or optimize the design and hence the operations of the project. Furthermore, errors and omissions in engineering or construction may force a change. All these factors and many others necessitate changes that are costly and generally un-welcomed by all parties” (Arain & Pheng, 2010).

Thus, variations may be the result of a number of factors. This chapter presents a discussion on different factors that are likely to cause variations in construction projects.


Based on the purposes, changes can be classified in different ways. Changes in a construction project can be classified depending on the cause that necessitated the change (Burati et al.1992; Thomas and Napolitan, 1994). Classification of changes based on originator facilitates better calculation of the cost impact of changes and hence are considered ideal. Number of causes has been identified, which lead to issue of change orders. Design changes, which are the major source of variation orders, have been found to cause more than 52% of the variations (Burati et al. 1992). Design changes can be categorized into (i) variations resulting from improvements in design process – changes necessitated based on review of designs, advancement in technologies or review of activities from constructability aspects are some of the examples of this type. (ii) Owner initiated changes, which include changes in the scope of the contract and (iii) process changes introduced by the architect or consultant based on his expertise – this type include changes like addition of instrumentation that might have an impact on the facility.

A classification of changes can be made based on the net effect of such variations on the scope of the contract (CII Publication, 1990; Fisk 1988). They are (i) additive change involving additional work to the scope, (ii) deductive change eliminating some activity and thus reducing the scope of the contract, (iii) rework caused by deficiency in quality of work already executed, (iv) changes necessitated by force majeure – these changes entitle the contractor a revision in the project schedule in addition to cost adjustments subject however to the conditions of the contract.

A third way of classifying the changes is based on the procedure followed to effect the respective changes (CII Publication, 1990; Fisk, 1988; Cox, 1995). This type of categorization of the changes is considered important from a legal purview. The changes are (i) formal or directed change – when the owner or his representation introduces the change by operation of a change clause under the contract, (ii) Constructive change necessitated by the acts or omission to do certain acts by the owner or his representative. Normally, the changes effected by the acts or failure of the owner are not regarded as changes and hence are potential sources of disputes and resultant claims. Fisk (1988) identifies mistakes in the contract documents or wrong understanding of the clauses by the stakeholders result because of lack of attention of the employers. (iii) cardinal changes are changes that take place in a construction project, which are outside the scope of the contract. These changes are executed only after the entire contract is renegotiated or the complete scope of the contract is redefined. The following sections contain discussions on variations resulting from the actions of or to facilitate the requests of various stakeholders to a construction contract.

Variations resulting from Additions

The construction process is subject to the influence of changes in various events, the course of which is difficult to predict. These variables may emanate from various sources. “These sources include the performance of construction parties, availability of resources, environmental conditions, involvement of other parties and contractual relations,” (Furaih, n.d). Interestingly some of these factors give rise to opportunities for making additions to the existing construction works. This section discusses the variations resulting from additions to the construction works.

Change orders have been found to be a regular affair in almost every construction works (Thomas et al. 2002; Oladapo, 2007). Harbans, (2003) point out that even if careful planning has been done in respect of a project, it is possible that some variations might become necessary as the construction progresses. Therefore, construction contracts provide for possible variations considering the nature of the works involved (Finsen, 2005; Wainwright and Wood, 1983). Variations can occur because of number of reasons including improvements in constructions (Hanna et al., 2002; Ssegawa et al., 2002; Harbans, 2003; Uyun, 2007). Additions normally are suggested by the owners so that the construction project meets his expectations. Owners are likely to change the plans or scope of the work because of insufficient planning at the stage where the project scope is defined. Addition to works may also be caused by the reason of the lack of involvement of the owner in the planning and designing phase of the project. Under normal conditions the cost of additions will have to be bear by the owner if the additions are introduced in the works to facilitate the owner. There may be instances where the contractor might suggest some additions to improve the performance of the project so that the project can be completed before schedule. Even in such instances variation orders issued by the owner for effecting such improvement may have to be carried out by the contractor at the expense of the owner as the owner will become the ultimate beneficiary of such additions to the contract works.

Additions may also result because of changes in health and safety consideration of workers. For example, it might be necessary to add health centers or children crèches in an industrial building on the consideration that number of employees is likely to increase and such provisions are mandated by the applicable labor laws.

Variations resulting from Omissions

Omissions to include certain requirements of the owner in the contract documents or the design specifications will lead to the necessity of issuing variation orders (Hanna et al. 2002). It may so happen that the design team has omitted to consider peculiar ground conditions or the neighborhood considerations while planning the construction project. Some of these factors may lead to variations in construction contracts. The omissions may also relate to some of the health and safety conditions overlooked by the design team. Although most contracts provide for the possible variations of these omissions in the form of a variation clause included in the construction clause, certain omissions are likely to have significant impact on the work schedule and cost. In these cases the variations on account of omissions are to be discussed among the parties to agree on the cost and time before a variation order is issued amending the existing contract conditions (Finsen, 1999; Wainwright and Wood, 1983).

Variations resulting from Alterations

Alterations in construction works are common. The alterations may be suggested to facilitate either the owner or the contractor. In some instances the alterations may be needed to carry out the construction activities in an efficient manner. These alterations may be in the construction method or in the work already executed. In any case the cost impact of the variations because of the alterations suggested is an important factor to consider for fixing the responsibility on a particular party. In case the alterations are suggested to facilitate the contractor the variation orders have to be executed at the cost of the contractor. A mutual agreement may be arrived in sharing the cost and in providing additional time in cases where the alterations need to be undertaken for efficient performance of the project (Finsen, 1999).

Variations resulting from Change of Lines and Levels

Specific forms of construction contracts have a standard clause providing for a “change in the levels, lines, position of dimensions of any part of the work under the contract” (Topic 8). This clause implies that the owner retains the right to issue a variation order in respect of changes in the levels or lines representing the scope of providing for the execution of additional work in the construction contract using variation orders. Variations may occur because of insufficient investigation of the site by the design team. In some cases additional improvements in underground may be needed to ensure proper construction. Situations like need for enhancement of underground monitoring or seepage found after excavation may also cause issuance of variance orders in some of the construction projects. Changes in ground levels are a significant issue that may give rise to variations.

Variations to facilitate the Client

Variation in a construction contract may be classified as “one of the following: an unavoidable variation; a variation for the convenience of the client; or a variation for the convenience of the Contractor (or Consultant),” (New South Wales Government, 2008). Variations to facilitate the client include those changes requested by the owner because of a change in his expectations. These changes do not represent unavoidable variations, because it is possible to continue and complete the project even without carrying out the proposed changes. The variations initiated for the convenience of the clients are most likely to change the scope of the contract and almost in all instances will lead to additional costs. Even the variations suggested to reduce the scope of the work may entail some additional cost. “This is because variations are valued by adding the cost of the extra work, plus a margin and subtracting the contractual value of the work taken out of the contract. The actual cost of the added work can often be greater than the contractual value of the work taken out of the contract,” (New South Wales Government, 2008). Reworks suggested under the variation and the delay and disruptions caused by variations ordered to facilitate the client will have associated costs increasing the total outlay on the project.

It is essential to provide the required money and to approve the variations, before any variations to facilitate the clients are ordered to be carried out. The money provided should be adequate to cover the additional cost needed to carry out the changes. The cost in the case of variations may include the actual expenses and losses of the contractor and other additional amounts of fees if any.

Al-Moumani (2000) studied the impact of change order in public construction projects undertaken in the Sultanate of Oman. The study included case studies and field survey and found that alterations in owner requirements is the most frequent cause of changes in the construction projects. The research also concluded that changes in requirements lead to delays in completion and cost overruns and consequent claims on parties to the contract.

Variations to facilitate the Contractor

Variations requested by the contractor are the ones which are issued for the convenience of the contractors. These variations represent “unavoidable variations”. It is not obligatory on the part of the owner to agree for a variation which is intended to facilitate the contractor. However, the variation may add to the value of the project. Whenever a contractor makes a variation request to facilitate himself, the owner may consider the request just to keep better relations with the contractor. It is important that the contractor provides sufficient details to the owner to make proper evaluation of the variation request of the contractor. The owner may choose not to authorize the variation to facilitate the contractor, until he evaluates the variation request and agrees for the full impact of such variation. The owner may also insist that the contractor takes full responsibility to ensure that the proposed variation does not affect the remainder of the activities of the project.

Variations due to Unavoidable Events

Unavoidable variations are ordered to reduce the adverse impact of events or circumstances, which are unexpected. These variations are initiated to eliminate health, safety or security issues and these variations normally do not affect the scope of the work. Cases of unavoidable variations include

  • “a variation to minimise the increase in cost or other adverse impact of a latent condition (for example unanticipated ground conditions, hazardous materials or existing services); or
  • a variation to overcome a fault (for example an error, ambiguity or inconsistency other than an omission or lack of completeness which may be the responsibility of the Contractor) in the Principal’s design or documentation which, unless it is remedied, could result in health, safety or security problems or prevent work from continuing; or
  • a variation to overcome a change in statutory requirements that has occurred since tenders closed,” (New South Wales Government, 2008).

If the owner does not issue any direction covering the above situations, the contract is most likely to remain incomplete. In the event of such failure, the owner shall be deemed to have committed a breach of the contract. It is important that the client be aware of the consequences, if he fails to react to the above situations immediately and initiate actions to mitigate the problem by issuing unavoidable variation orders. If the owner does not provide proper instructions to take care of the above situations giving rise to unavoidable variations, there is the likelihood of the owner incurring extra costs say for example covering delay in completion or rework of works already completed.

Variations resulting from Design Factors

Variations in a construction contract may arise because of a number of factors including design factors. Normally a construction project started before the completion of the design aspects is likely to face more number of variation requests (Finsen, 2005). The variations in works contracts may occur because of defects, errors or omissions in designing or in planning. These errors and omissions include mistaken quantity estimates, mistakes in planning, lack of adequate arrangement of contract interfaces, lack of consistency between drawings and site conditions, improper citation of specifications in the contract documents. The responsibility for variations because of design factors will fall on the planning and design department.

Variations due to Miscellaneous Reasons

Variations may be requested by either the owner or the contractor to ensure health and safety of workers.

“In certain construction processes, there are unforeseeable situations where the contractor needs to do whatever it takes to maintain the work schedule by making certain changes without violating safety regulations. Such changes can be either as minor as to lead the construction to clearing out an unplanned site path or vehicle route, or so overwhelming as to have to reschedule project activities or even adopt a new construction method,” (Hseih et al., 2004).

Where there is the need to change the construction method, it is necessary to issue a variation order.

Natural incidents such as typhoons and torrential rains affecting the safe progress of the construction work. In these instances and in other instances such as landslides, flooding it may become necessary to change the original schedule of the project by issuing necessary variation orders. Change of work rules is another significant cause of variation, especially when the project runs for a longer duration. The work rules and regulations which were effect at the planning and design stage might be changed by the governing authority later at the construction stage necessitating the issue of requests for variations. Similarly, changes in decision-making authority during the period the project continues give room for variations in construction contracts. With the change in decision-making authorities, the interpretation of regulations might vary and the risk to the continuance of the project because of changes that are not within the control of both the contractor and the owner must be mitigated by issuing variation orders. It is usual that in any construction project the neighborhood concerns are taken into account at the planning and design stage to avoid expensive variations at a later stage of construction. However, in some instances factors like “lack of experience, absence of proper authorization or simple shortage of time” the neighborhood considerations might have been omitted to be considered and some of them might arise at a later stage leading to variations in contract terms.


In practice, a number of factors lead to the generation of variation orders in construction contracts. This chapter contained a discussion on some of the major causes for the variations to arise. Owners might decide to change the scope of the construction work to meet any change in their expectations from the contract outcomes. Under such circumstances the owners might add new works to the scope of the contract which is an important cause of variation. Omissions by the planning and design team also are a factor that leads to large number of variations in construction projects. Apart from additions and omissions, there may be instances where the consultant, the contractor or the owner might suggest some alterations to the existing working methods or work completed. The alterations may be suggested for an effective improvement in the project performance. Change of lines and levels may also be an element brining in variations. Variations in construction contracts may be categorized to include variations because of unavoidable events, variations to facilitate either the client or the contractor. Changes in designs may also lead to variations and the chapter also cited a number of other reasons for variations to arise. The next chapter presents a discussion on the impact of variations.

Impact of Variation Orders on Contracts


Impact of variation orders has been the subject matter of several research works (CII 1996, CII, 1990a 1990b; Clough and Sears, 1994; CII 1994a 1994b; Thomas and Napolitan, 1995, Fisk, 1997; Ibbs et al. 1998). This chapter presents a discussion on the impact of variation orders on the construction projects.

According to CII publication 6-10 (1990), “The impacts of a variation are classified as follows:

  • Direct cost impact
  • Direct schedules impact
  • Indirect or Consequential impact” (Jawad, et al., 2009).

The direct cost effects are limited to the construction activities in which the variations are to be applied. The owner may experience a positive or negative impact of the change, which in turn will be the opposite for the contractor. In some instances, the changes may not have any effect for both the contractor and the owner. Direct cost impact comprises of two elements – labor cost and material cost. It is always easier to determine the material cost impact with certain level of accuracy. On the other hand, it is not easy to calculate the effect of labor charges precisely because of the impact of variations on labor productivity and the uncertainty on the scope of the changes on the works. Impact of labor cost may lead to degradation in productivity, delays in completion and demolition of already constructed portions and rework of them.

Direct impact of changes on the schedule of construction activity can be documented easily after the change is effected, because one could get all the necessary data for estimating the effect. However, such estimation is not possible before carrying out the variations because of unexpected changes in labor productivity, accessibility of required materials and schedule changes. When there is a penal provision in the contract, the loss on account of changes in schedule may become very expensive. Zeitoun and Oberlender (1993) observed a 9% change in the time schedule of original time allotted in respect of 71 contracts, which were the subject of their study. Ibbs et al. (1998) remarked on the impact of changes requiring schedule acceleration as “a high level of fast tracking generally does not result in any more changes than non-fast tracking projects.” The study by Ibbs et al (1998) found that more variations in the activities tend to take place towards the completion of the project, which might lead to high labor intensity and more rushed finishing operations.

It is the normal tendency of the project stakeholders to overlook the indirect or consequential impacts of changes in construction contracts. Indirect or consequential impact may affect the progress of other associated works at a later date and thus will lead to delay in the completion of the total project. Therefore, it becomes important that the owner and the contractor take into account the direct and indirect impact of variations, while incorporating a change clause in the construction contract.

Thus variations in construction contracts lead to consequences that significantly affect the progress of different work packages and thus causing delay in the entire project. This situation is referred to as “Ripple Effect.” According to Thomas and Napolitan (1994), “while much has been said about the ripple effect, there have been no quantitative studies showing the magnitude of these effects.” Zeitoun and Oberlender (1993) made a failed to attempt the ripple effect. The following sections present a detailed discussion on various impacts of variation orders on construction projects. The discussion formed the basis for the development of the questionnaire as the survey instrument.

Cost Overrun as a Result of Variations

When the contracts are supported by proper planning and schedules, they will be completed smoothly and in time and with the expected quality of construction. However, seldom construction projects are completed in time to meet the original time table because of the influence of several factors including design slippage and amendments (Al-Hakim, 2005). Frequent incidence of variation orders has a negative effect on the progress of construction projects (Thomas et al. 2002). According to Ibbs (1997a, 1997b), by adversely affecting productivity and project costs, variation orders impede project performance largely. Arain and Pheng (2005) observe that variation requests, though undesirable cannot be eliminated altogether. Hanna et al (2002) are of the opinion that projects with many variation orders affect productivity and thus lead to delay in execution of the contracts. Variation orders affect the project performance in terms of cost overruns.

Variations may be categorized as beneficial and detrimental variations. Beneficial variations include those variations which help improving quality of construction and reduction of cost overruns. They also help in improving project performance by better scheduling and reduce the degree of difficulty in executing the project. Ibbs et al (2001) find detrimental variations will affect the project performance negatively and will result in a reduction in the value to the client. Variations involving cost of the project may be beneficial or detrimental depending on their impact on the total project cost. Because the need to order for changes in the construction contract is a matter of practical reality, the owner has to be careful in requesting variation orders resulting in additional costs to the project. On the other hand the project team may be able to take advantage of beneficial variations which work to reduce the cost of the project. Variations in construction contracts may result in significant variations in direct and indirect cost of the project. The variations and variation orders involving changes in costs may be detrimental to all the parties.

Kaming et al (1997) studied the influence of various factors on construction contracts causing escalation of time and expenses. They found that material costs are a major cause of escalation of costs in construction projects. Construction projects involve two major phases – preconstruction phase and construction phase, with the construction phase consuming more resources than the preconstruction phase. Therefore, in the construction phase more attention is focused on cost planning. The employers are keen to know the total cost of completion of the project in advance and they also prefer to have the cost of completion equal their original estimate as per the tender.

Nevertheless, many of the construction projects are subject to cost overruns. It is to be noted that all variation orders do not result in cost overruns. Variation orders that cause deletion of works lead to reduction in costs, while on the other hand variation orders involving additional works lead to escalation of project expenditure (Ssegawa et al. 2002; Arain and Pheng, 2006). Arain and Pheng (2005a) found that change orders issued during institutional building constructions have led to considerable escalation of construction expenses. Mohamed (2001), based on the study of the impact of change orders in different sewer overflow projects found that expenses increased up to 7% of the estimated costs. Bower (2000) identified the following direct costs, as being associated with change orders.

“Bower (2000) identified the following direct costs associated with variation orders: Time and material charges related to immediately affected tasks; Recalculation of network, increased time-related charges and overheads; Reworks and standing time; Timing effects for example winter time; Inflation, change to cash flow and loss of earnings; and Management time, head office and site charges. While the direct costs associated with a variation order can be easily calculated, Bower (2000) argued that indirect costs are more difficult to quantify,” (Ndihokubwayo, 2008).

Any change or alteration in the design of a project is most likely to result in increased project cost (Clough and Sears, 1994). In order to protect against the cost impact of variations involving additional cost because of unexpected events, every construction contract provides for a contingency sum at a certain percentage of total project cost. The purpose of the contingency amount is to ensure that the project progresses without difficulty even in case of the occurrence of any detrimental variations. Increase in indirect cost results from the necessity to supply additional materials to take care of reworks or additional works taken up as a result of the change order initiated. Loss of productivity because of change order may also have an effect on the direct and indirect cost of the project. When the productivity of labor is affected because of variations the contractor may have to employ additional workers to complete the work within the agreed schedule. Loss of productivity however cannot be measured precisely to arrive at the addition to the project cost because of variation orders issued. Change in scope of work is the most significant variation that is likely to have an adverse impact on the project cost. Change in the scope of work is again within the decision of the owner. Therefore, the owner has a significant role to play in preventing the occurrence of any cost variation in the project.

Time Overrun as a Result of Variations

It is the wish of the clients that their construction projects are completed within the scheduled time and they expect to achieve monetary gains, when the project is completed within the shortest time possible. The employers apply heavy penalties to the contractors when they exceed the original project schedule and prolong the delivery period. The contractor is made to make good the losses incurred by the client because of delays in completion. Variation orders have been found to be one of the causes of time overruns in many construction projects (Chan & Yeong, 1995; Mohamed, 2001). Change orders issued at different stages of construction projects result in time overruns and lead to delays in completion (Koushki, 2005). Hanna et al (2002) found that frequent change orders lead to considerable reduction in productivity. Reduced productivity leads to time overruns and consequent delays in completion. Yogeswaran et al (1997) have categorized time overruns into excusable and non-excusable. Excusable delays, “relieves the contractor of liability for liquidated damages and the latter is due to the contractor’s culpable delay,” (Ndihokubwayo, 2008). Non-excusable delays arise because of the culpability of the contractor.

Quality Factors resulting from Variations

Patrick and Toler (n.d) observe that in contracts with considerable degree of risk for unexpected events, in the fear of having to pay damages for time overruns, contractors have a tendency to cut corners on quality of materials so that they may be able to maximize their earnings from the contracts. If variation orders occur frequently because of uncertainties, It will affect the quality of the construction. “Quality may be compromised as contractors try to compensate for losses they are not optimistic about recovering” (Ndihokubwayo, 2008). It is observed that the quality of the work may become poor because of frequent variation orders issued, as the contractor may attempt to make good his losses by compromising on the quality of materials and project outcomes (Fisk, 1997). Low productivity caused by variations may also lead to quality issues as the contractor may have to employ new manpower some of whom may not have the required experience.

Health and Safety

Provision of health and safety measures may have to be revisited in case of frequent incidence of change orders. For instance Clause 5.3 (e) of the OHS (2003) prescribes that in the case of variations, the contractors must be provided with sufficient information on health and safety considerations, where there is variation orders issued in respect of construction projects. The contractor must also be provided with appropriate resources for maintaining good health and safety conditions. This requirement becomes valid because variations in construction procedures, supplies and implements may need extra provision of health and safety measures (Arain & Pheng, 2005). Clause 5.14 of the OHS (2003) places an obligation on the contractor to provide adequate information to the principal contractor on the health and safety of workers who might be affected by the variations in the construction works. The principal contractor must be informed about the circumstances which might need a review of health and safety plans because of variations.


A construction project cannot be considered just a business venture; but it leads to the creation of a professional association among the parties to the construction contract. With the completion of each project the experience of the participants go up and their reputation also enhances. However, variation orders lead to disputes and claims among the parties, as a result of which misunderstandings may arise. Opportunities for misunderstandings may arise because of the dissatisfaction of the contractor with the valuation process of the variation orders by the consultant. Variation orders give rise to arguments over the cost, time for completion and payment of compensation under variation orders (Bower, 2000). “Possibly because contractors are not confident about the outcome of such negotiations, they usually request higher values for variation orders than the actual cost incurred. Bower (2000) opined that consequently there is tension between parties as the contractor continually pushes the client to settle claims for additional costs while invariably feeling that the reimbursement has been insufficient,” (Ndihokubwayo, 2008). This misunderstanding affects the relationship between the parties (Bower, 2000). Mismanagement of variation orders is most likely to lead to disputes between the owner and the contractor (Charoenngam et al. 2003).

Loss of Credibility

Variations in construction projects arise mainly because of misinterpretations of the clauses of the contract, as it is always not possible that the employer can precisely express the project objectives and his expectations by incorporating them in the clauses of the construction contracts. The ambiguity in some of the provisions will lead to misunderstanding among the parties (Sun & Meng, 2009). In cases where the parties are unable to reach an amicable resolution of the issue, disputes arise necessitating the submission to arbitration for settlement. Some of the issues may have to be decided by the courts if they cannot be resolved through arbitration.

When the dispute as a result of variation orders is submitted to courts for settlement, such instances create negative publicity for both the contractor and the owner. Any supplier or other counterparties transacting with the owner or creditor may consider the transaction with either of them undesirable and therefore would become cautious in dealing with the parties under dispute. This represents loss of credibility to the contractor and the owner. Similarly, when the contractor or owner is not successful in executing his claim and recover damages from the other party, financial constraints may ensue affecting the progress of the construction activities. This may result in withholding the payments to others including its employees and suppliers. The withholding of the payments by the contractor or owner will be viewed as the step leading to the insolvency of the parties and will act to reduce the credibility of the parties acting under the construction contract.

Loss of Chain Management

Variation orders in construction projects are likely to cause serious disruptions in construction supply chain management. Impact of these change orders will have serious impact resulting in team effect of claims, which eventually will result in extension of time and productivity degradation including quality issues (Construction Industry Institute, 1995). Reduced work pace in some schedules of the construction project, because of variations is most likely to affect the progress of work in the other project activities. Consequently there will be disruption in the chain management, which is likely to impede the progress of the construction project. (Hanna et al. 2005).

Harmful Impact on Project

Li et al (2001) observe that significant increase in the project costs and delays in the completion of the projects are the most frequent effects of variations in the construction industry. In many construction projects, the cost and time overruns have a combined effect to result in reduced earnings to the owner. Because variations might significantly affect the productivity adversely, the contractor may find it difficult to meet his financial obligations (Aibinu & Jagaboro, 2002; Bower, 2000). Earlier research has found negative correlation between variations in contracts and the productivity. Variations in construction projects, while affecting the present working schedule of the projects are likely to impede the future schedules leading to delays in completion. Because project completion will be delayed by variation orders issued by different project stakeholders, the contractor may be inclined to proceed with certain project activities in an accelerated phase affecting the quality of work completed.

This may in some cases lead to rework. The owner and the contractor are most likely to lose the floats available in the different project activities because of the time lost in the process of claiming and settling the disputes among them (Josephson et al. 2002; Love et al. 1999). Such instances lead to further delays in the completion of the project. The major harmful effect is the strain on the relationship between the contractor and the employer. Since claims arise from changes in the contractual terms, which define such relationship, any claim is bound to affect the normal and cordial relationship between the two parties. Differences in understanding the reasons for variations in contractual terms lead to claims and counter claims (Goodacre and Hunter, 1990). Variations in construction contracts make the contractor face financial issues, which in turn may lead to use of inferior quality materials in the construction affecting the quality of final outcome of the project.


Variation orders leading to disputes and resultant claims in the construction industry impede the progress of the construction project largely. The impact of variations may lead to strained relationship among people resulting in slow pace of work. Variations also affect the quality of construction and lead to lesser lower employee morale and higher staff turnover. Cost-related issues such as extra payments to the contractors and problems in cash flows, extra funds required to replace the materials and equipments are the result of frequent variation orders. Besides creating strained relationships among the participants to the construction project, Variations may also result in loss of reputation in the market and health and safety issues concerning the workers involved in the construction project.


Acharya, P. Pfrommer, C. and Zirbel, C. 1995. Think value engineering, Journal of Management in Engineering.

Acharya N. K., Lee Y. D., and Im H. M. 2006. “Conflicting factors in construction projects: Korean perspective.” Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 13_6_, 543–566.

Aibinu AA, Jagboro GO. 2002. The effects of construction delays on project delivery in Nigerian construction industry. Int J Project Management, 20(8):593–9.

Al-Hakim, L. 2005. Identification of Waste Zones Associated with Supply Chain Integration, SAPICS 27th Annual Conference and Exhibition, Sun City, South Africa. Web.

Al-Moumani, H.A. 2000. Construction delay: a quantitative analysis. International Journal of Project Management 18, pp. 51–59.

Alnuaimi, A & Taha, R & Almohsen, M & Al-Harthi, A 2010,’Causes, Effects, Benefits and Remedies of change orders on public construction project in Oman’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 136, no. 5.

Arain, F.M., Assaf, S.A. & Low, S.P. 2004. Causes of discrepancies between design and construction. Architectural Science Review, 47(3), pp.237-249.

Arain, F.M. and Pheng, L.S. 2005, “The potential effects of variation orders on institutional building projects”, Facilities, vol. 23, no. 11/12, pp. 496-510.

Arain, F.M. and Pheng, L.S. 2005a, “The potential effects of variation orders on institutional building projects”, Facilities, vol. 23, no. 11/12, pp. 496-510.

Arain, F.M. & Pheng, L.S. 2006. Developers’ views of potential causes of variation orders for institutional buildings in Singapore, Architectural Science Review, 49(1). p. 59-74.

Arain, F.M. & Pheng, L.S. 2010.Effective Management of Contract Variations using a Knowledge Based Decision Support, CEBE Working Paper 10. System.

Assaf SA, Al-Hejji S. 2006. Causes of delay in large construction projects. Int J Project Management, 24(4):349–57.

Bennett J. 1985. Construction project management, UK: Butterworths.

Bower, D. 2000. A Systematic Approach to the Evaluation of Indirect Costs of Contract Variations, Construction Management and Economics, 18(3). p. 263-268.

Burati, J.L., Farrington, J.J. & Ledbetter, W.B. 1992. Causes of quality deviations in design and construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(1), pp. 34-49.

Chan, A. & Yeong, C. 1995. A comparison of strategies for reducing variations. Construction Management and Economics, 13(6), pp. 467-473.

Charoenngam, C., Coquinco, S.T. and Hadikusumo, B.H.W. 2003, ‘ Web-Based Application for Managing Change Orders in Construction Projects’, Construction Innovation, vol. 3, pp 197-215.

Chen Jieh-Haur and Hsu S.C. 2007. ANN-CBR Model for Disputed Change Orders in Construction Projects, Automation in Construction, 17 pp 56-64.

CII, 1986. Constructability: A Primer. Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

CII Publication, 1990. The Impact of Changes on Construction Cost and Schedule. Publication 6-10, Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

CII, 1990a, The Impact of Changes on Construction Cost and Schedule. Publication 6-10, Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

CII, 1990b, Scope Definition and Control. Publication 6-2, Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

CII, 1994a, Pre-project Planning: Beginning a Project the Right Way. Publication 39-1, Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

CII, 1994b, Project Change Management. Special Publication 43-1, Construction Industry Institute, University of Texas at Austin, TX.

Civitello, A.M. 1987. Contractor’s Guide to Change Orders, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice–Hall, Inc.,

Clough, R.H. and Sears, G.A. 1994, Construction Contracting, 6th ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, NY.

Coffman, G.M. 1996. Impacts impacts impacts impacts: construction management, Lecture on 23 April 1996 at the University of Wisconsin.

Cox, S. & Hamilton, A. 1995 Architect’s Job Book. (6th Edition) RIBA Publications, Royal Institute of British Architects, UK.

Finsen, E. 1999. The Building Contract – A Commentary on the JBCC Agreements, 1st ed., Cape Town: Juta & Co, Ltd.

Finsen, E. 2005, “The Building Contract – A Commentary on the JBCC Agreements”, 2nd ed., Kenwyn: Juta and Co, Ltd

Fisk, E.R. 1997, Construction Project Administration, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Fisk, E & Reynolds, W 2009, ‘Construction Project Administration’, 9th Ed, Prentice Hall, Boston Columbus, Upper Saddle River, N.J.

Furaih Talal, n.d, Causes of Delay of Construction Projects in Saudi Arabia, Web.

Goudreau, H. 2001. “The five key elements of a construction contract—Forget them and you are in trouble.” Web.

Hanna S. Awad, Russell S Jeffrey, Gotzion W Timothy, and Nordheim, V Erik, 1999. Impact Of Change Orders On Labor Efficiency For Mechanical Construction, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, pp 176-184.

Hanna, A & Camlic, R& Peterson, P & Nordheim, E 2002, ‘Quantitative Definition of Projects Impacted by Change Orders’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 128, no. 1.

Hanna AS, Taylor CS, Sullivan KT. 2005. Impact of extended overtime on construction labor productivity. J Constr Eng Management, 131(6):734–9.

Hanna, A & Swanson, J 2007, ‘Risk Allocation by Law—Cumulative Impact of Change Orders’, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, vol. 133, no. 1.

Harbans, S.K.S. 2003, “Valuation of Varied Work: A Commentary”, In: Bulletin Ingénieur, The Board of Engineers Malaysia, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 32-42.

Hester, W., Kuprenas, J.A. & Chang T.C. 1991. Construction Changes and Change Orders: Their Magnitude and Impact. CII Source Document 66, University of California- Berkeley.

Hsieh T, Lu S, Wu C. 2004. Statistical analysis of causes for change orders in metropolitan public works. Int J Project Management, 22(8):679–86.

Ibbs, C.W. 1997a, Change’s impact on construction productivity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 123(1), pp. 89-97.

Ibbs, C.W. 1997b, Quantitative impacts of project change: size issues. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 123(3), pp. 308-311.

Ibbs, C.W., Lee, S.A. & Li, M.I. 1998. Fast tracking’s impact on project change. Project Management Journal, 29(4), pp. 35-41.

Ibbs, C.W., Wong, C.K. and Kwak, Y.H. 2001, “Project change management system”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 159-65.

Jawad et al. (2009). Variation Orders in Construction Projects, Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 4 Issue 3 pp 170-176.

Josephson P, Larsson B, Li H. 2002. Illustrative benchmarking rework and rework costs in Swedish construction industry. J Manage Eng, 18(2):76–83.

Kaming, P.F., Olomolaiye, P.O., Holt, G.D. & Harris, F.C. 1997. Factors influencing construction time and cost overruns on high rise projects in Indonesia. Construction Management and Economics, 15(1), pp 83-94.

Keane, P & Sertyesilisik, B & Ross, A 2010, ‘Variations and Change Orders on Construction Projects’, Journal of Legal affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction.

Koushki, P.A., Al-Rashid K and Kartam, N. 2005, “Delays and Cost Increases in the Construction of Private Residential Projects in Kuwait”, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 23, pp. 285-294.

Levy M.S, 2002. Project Management in Construction, London: Mc-Graw Hill.

Li H, Love PED, Drew DS. 2001. Effects of overtime work and additional resources on project cost and quality. Eng, Constr Archit Management, 7(3):211–20.

Libor R Michael. n.d. Changes, changed conditions and scope changes Affecting payment, Web.

Means, 1991, Means Illustrated Construction Dictionary, R.S. Means Company, Inc., Construction Consultants & Publishers, Kingston, MA.

Mohamed, A.A. 2001. Analysis and Management of Change Orders for combined Sewer over flow construction projects, Dissertation, Wayne State University.

Moselhi, O & Assem, E & El-Rayes, K 2005,’Change Orders Impact on Labor Productivity’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 131, no. 3.

Ndihokubwayo Ruben, 2008, An analysis of the impact of variation orders on project performance, Thesis submitted to Cape Peninsula University.

New South Wales Government, 2008, Procurement System for Construction, Web.

O’Brien, J.J. 1998, Construction Change Orders, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.

OHS, 2003, Occupational Health and Safety Act No 85 of 1993, 2003, “Construction regulation”. Web.

Oladapo, A.A. 2007, “A Quantitative Assessment of the Cost and Time Impact of Variation Orders on Construction Projects”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 35-48.

Scott, PG, Pandey, SK, 2000. The influence of Red Tape on Bureaucratic Behaviour: An Experimental Simulation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19(4).

Ssegawa, J.K., Mfolwe, K.M., Makuke, B. and Kutua, B. 2002, “Construction Variations: A Scourge or a Necessity?”, Proceedings of the First International Conference of CIB W107, 11-13 Nov. 2002, Cape Town, South Africa, pp. 87-96.

Sun, M & Meng X. 2009, Taxonomy for change causes and effects in construction projects, International Journal of Project Management 27,560–572.

Sweeney, Neal J. 1998, “Who pays for defective design?” Journal of Management in Engineering, 65-68.

Thomas, H.R., Horman, M.J., De Souza, U.E.L. and Zavřski, I. 2002, “Reducing Variability to Improve Performance as a Lean Construction Principle”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 128, no. 2, pp. 144-154.

Thomas, H.R. and Napolitan, C.L. 1995. Quantitative effects of construction changes on labor productivity, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 121(3), 290± 6.

Topic 8, n. d, Variations, Web.

Uyun, N.M.Y. 2007, ‘Variation Control Affecting Construction Works for Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah Persekutuan (Felda)”, Thesis, University Technologi Malaysia

Wainwright, W.H. and Wood, A.A.B. 1983, “Variation and Final Account Procedure”, 4th ed. London: Hutchinson

Zeitoun, A. & Oberlender, G. 1993, Early Warning Signs of Project Changes. CII Source Document 91, Oklahoma State University, USA.

Appendix I Questionnaire

Dear respondent

As you know, construction industry is prone to variations requested by owners, architects and contractors for various reasons. My current research focuses on the reasons, problems related impacts and resolution of variations in the construction industry in the context of Sultanate of Oman. This survey is a part of my research leading to the award of …Degree from the University ….. I request your cooperation to answer the questions included in this questionnaire based on your experience in the industry. I am sure the answers backed by your knowledge and expertise in the construction industry will add value to my research. Your answers will be treated as confidential and only summary information will be presented in my research report. I thank you for your time and attention.

Section 1 Profile of Respondents

  1. Please indicate the nature of your organization
  • Government
  • Private sector
  • Public-private
  • Partnership
  • Others (please specify)
  1. Please indicate the Nature of business of your organization
  • Owner organization
  • Contractor
  • Subcontractor
  • Consultant firm
  • Design organization
  • Other type (please mention)
  1. Please indicate the approximate turnover of your organization
  • Less than R.O 5,000,000
  • Between R.O 5,000,000 and R.O 10,000,000
  • More than R.O 10,000,000
  • Not Applicable (e.g. consultant organization)
  1. Please indicate your position in the organization:
  • General Manager
  • Project manager
  • Executive
  • Other (please specify) _______________________________________
  1. Please indicate the number of years of experience you have:
  • Less than 5 years
  • Between 6 and 10 years
  • Between 11 and 15 years
  • More than 15 years
  1. Please indicate your educational qualification
  • Diploma
  • College Degree
  • Post Graduation
  • Other
  1. Please indicate the highest cost of the projects you are/have been involved in Oman
  • Less than R.O 500,000
  • Between R.O 500,000 – 10,000,000 million
  • More than R.O 10,000,000

Section 2 Construction Industry Related Questions

1. Please indicate the procurement method followed by your organization.

  • General Contracting
  • Cost Plus contracts
  • Design and Build
  • Management contract
  • Others (Please specify) _____________________

2. What is the important consideration that your organization takes into account while finalizing construction contract? Please mention the order of importance in the Likert scale of 1 to 5 where “1” is least important and “5” is the most important.

  • Terms of price
  • Owner’s involvement
  • Agreement on time
  • Chances for design changes
  • Chances of variations
  • Clear contract documents
  • Degree of complexity

3. What according to you are the most important factor causing variations? Please mention the order of importance in the Likert scale of 1 to 5 where “1” is least common and “5” is the most common.

  • Lack of construction materials
  • Change in design by consultant
  • Errors in Design
  • Conflicts in contract documents
  • Lack of coordination among parties
  • Change in specification by owner
  • Problems in contractor’s company
  • Lack of Supervision

4. What is the most important impact of variations in construction contracts in the context of Oman? Please mention the order of importance in the Likert scale of 1 to 5 where “1” is least probable and “5” is the most probable.

  • Cost Escalation
  • Disputes among parties
  • Delays in completion
  • Quality issues in construction
  • Time overrun
  • Issues of claims
  • Loss of productivity

5. From the following list of circumstances, which may result in variations, please rank the circumstances in order of priority.

  • Originated by Client:
    • Increase in scope
    • Change in mind out of choice
    • Changes forced
    • Poor brief by client
    • Inadequate preparation of contract document
    • Shortage of funds
  • Originated by consultant
    • Change in design
    • Defects in design
    • Inadequate consideration of design
    • Incorrect assessment of brief
    • Defects in Bill of quantities
    • Shortcomings in contract documents
    • Inadequate site investigation
  • Originated by unforeseen events
    • Restrictions due to neighbourhood demands
    • Natural causes
    • Land acquisition problems

6. Please specify any other reason for variation not included in the above lists.



8. Based on your experience please mention the ways to avoid major variations in the construction projects in Oman



Thank you very much for your cooperation