THE IMPACT OF VARIATION ORDERS ON

PERFORMANCE OF RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION

The Case of Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Construction Project, in Tanzania.

Tulinagwe Solomon Msomba

Follow the udsm standard

Master of Engineering Management – Project Management

University of Dar es Salaam

May 2024
 THE IMPACT OF VARIATION ORDERS ON PERFORMANCE
OF RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

The Case of Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Construction Project, in Tanzania.

Tulinagwe Solomon Msomba

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree

of Master of Engineering Management with specialization in Project
Management of the University of Dar es Salaam

2024
 CERTIFICATION

This dissertation, "The Impact of Variation Orders on Performance of Railway

Construction," is part of the Master of Engineering Management in Project
Management program at the University of Dar es Salaam, and the undersigned
confirms that he has read it and now recommends it for acceptance.

……………………………………………..

Dr. John Kafuku

(Supervisor)

Date: ………………………………………

i
 DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT

I, Tulinagwe Solomon Msomba, declare that this study is my original work and that
it has not been presented and will not be presented to any other University for a
similar or any other degree award.

Signature…………………………….

This study is a copyright material protected under the Berne Convention, the
Copyright Act 1999, and other International and national enactments, on that behalf,
on Intellectual Property. It may not be reproduced by any means, in full or part,
except for the short extracts in fair dealings, for research or private study, critical
scholarly review or discourse with acknowledgment, without a written permission of
the Director of Postgraduate Studies, on behalf of both the author and the University
of Dar es Salaam.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First, I would like to thank the Almighty God for keeping me well, from the start of
this journey, preparation of research work to date, it is by His grace I am alive.

May I express my deepest appreciation to Dr. John Kafuku, my study supervisor, for
invaluable guidance, support, and mentorship throughout the study journey. His
expertise and supervision have been instrumental in shaping this research work.

I am also grateful to members of my dissertation committee, for their constructive

criticism and valuable comments, all these have greatly enriched my research work.
Indeed, I wish to extend my heartfelt recognitions to individuals including course
mates, for their time, cooperation, and contributions, without which this research
work would not have been possible.

I would also like to deeply express my appreciation to my family and friends for their
unwavering encouragement, understanding, and trust in me, especially during the
challenging times. Final but not least, I would like to acknowledge the support of the
Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) for providing resources and funding of this
research work. This dissertation would not have been possible without the collective
support and contributions of these individuals and the organizations.

iii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATION

SGR Standard Gauge Railway

MGR Metre-gauge railway

FIDIC Fédération Internationale des Ingénieurs - Conseils'

SPC Statistical process control

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

PAS Personal Access System

LAN Local area network

DSM –MDM Dar es Salaam – Morogoro, Dodoma, Makutopora (Lot 1)

TPS Transaction processing systems

TAZAMA Tanzania Zambia Mafuta

MORUWASA Morogoro Water Supply and Sanitation Authority

TTCL Tanzania Telecommunications Company Limited

ATS Automatic transfer switch

DAWASA Dar es Salaam Water Supply and Sewerage Authority

VO Variation Order

iv
 ABSTRACT
The construction industry plays a crucial role in global development, yet the sector is
often overwhelmed by changes in project requirements. Variation orders are common
occurrences in all construction projects, including railway construction. This study
presents the findings on the impact of variation orders on performance of railway
construction projects, a case of SGR Construction project in Tanzania. Specifically was
to: examine the sources and frequency of variation orders (VOs), factors contributing to
variation orders and tools for management. The study employed both qualitative and
quantitative approaches. The study adopted a cross – sectional research design where the
checklist questionnaire were used to collect data through the desk review and key
informant interviews. Also, the descriptive and content analysis was done. From the
review of the SGR project, it was revealed that by May 2024 the client, the Tanzania
Railway Corporation (TRC) had issued a total of 113 approvals of Variations. The client
was the most frequently originating agent of variation orders by 67%. Additional work
was most frequent, especially in the client-driven changes (46.5%). The findings also
noticed that nine (9) factors were more vivid in causing variation orders during the SGR
construction. It was further identified that the effects of variation orders had much effect
on time (time overrun) during the SGR construction, therefore caused the project fail to
take off according to schedule. For instance, the construction of the SGR Lot 1
commenced on 2nd May 2017, with a stipulated contract duration of 30 months, the
projected completion initial timeline by 1 st November 2019, but it started to operate on
May 2024. Also, the VOs impacted on the increase of project costs. An analysis of the
SGR project revealed a substantial contract cost of USD 1,215,282,000.00. The approved
VOs initially amounted to a requested sum of USD 155,899,516.44. A Fishbone Diagram
analysis revealed how various client-related factors negatively impacted the progress of
the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project. To minimize the VOs and their effects the
client provided in detail the requirements and the documents related to construction
projects to be built before the design stage of implementation. Practical change
management is recommended in order to identify and forecast the potential changes and
develop solutions before the change occurs.

v
Keywords:* Variation Orders, impact, Railway Construction Projects, Standard Gauge
Railway (SGR) Project, Tanzania

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATION...............................................................................................................
DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT..............................................................................
ACKNOWLEDGMENT...................................................................................................
LIST OF ABBREVIATION..............................................................................................
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................
TABLE OF CONTENTS...................................................................................................
LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................

CHAPTER ONE...............................................................................................................
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................
1.1 Background................................................................................................................
1.2 Statement of the problem..................................................................................................
1.3 Objectives of the Study.....................................................................................................
1.3.1 Main Objective...............................................................................................................
1.3.2 Specific Objectives.............................................................................................4
1.4 Research Questions...........................................................................................................
1.5 The significance of the study............................................................................................
1.6 The Scope of the Study.....................................................................................................

CHAPTER TWO..............................................................................................................
LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................
2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................
2.2 The Meaning of Variation Orders..................................................................................
2.3 Nature of Variation Orders.............................................................................................
2.3.1 Benefits of variation orders.............................................................................8
2.3.2 Detrimental of variation orders...................................................................................
2.4 The Legal Aspects of contractions of different projects................................................

vi
 2.5 The FIDIC books in detail..............................................................................................
2.5.1 Variation Orders............................................................................................11
2.5.2 Contract for Consultancy Service in the SGR Project..................................13
2.5.3 Contractual Requirement for Construction of the SGR Project....................13
2.6 Source and Frequency of Variation Orders in the Implementation within the
Construction Industry................................................................................................
2.7 Factors Contributing to Occurrence of Variation Orders during the
Construction Projects................................................................................................
2.7.1 Nature of Works............................................................................................18
2.7.2 Complexity of the Project.............................................................................19
2.7.3 Procurement Method.................................................................................................
2.9 Managing and Controlling Variation Orders in the Construction Projects..................
2.9.1 Responsibilities in Controlling Variation Orders in a Project......................26
2.9.2 Project Variation Order Control Tools in Scope...........................................27
2.9.4 Management Tools for Controlling Variation Orders...................................29
2.9.5 Project Variation Order Control Tools in Cost.............................................36
2.10 Literature Review Summary......................................................................................
2.11 Conceptual Framework..............................................................................................

CHAPTER THREE........................................................................................................
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY..................................................................................
3.1 Overview...............................................................................................................
3.2 Location of the study....................................................................................................
3.3 Research Design...........................................................................................................
3.4 Target Population.........................................................................................................
3.5 The Sample and Sampling Procedure..........................................................................
3.5.1 Sample size....................................................................................................43
3.5.2 Sampling Technique..................................................................................................
3.6 Data Collection.............................................................................................................
3.6.1 Desk Review.................................................................................................44
3.6.2 Key Informant Interview...............................................................................45
3.7 Data analysis................................................................................................................
vii
 3.7.1 Data collected from desk Review.................................................................45
3.7.2 Data from in-depth Interviews with Key informants....................................46
CHAPTER FOUR...........................................................................................................
RESULT AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................................
4.1 Introduction to Results and Discussion........................................................................
4.2. Types and Source of Variation Orders and Their Frequency.....................................
4.2.1 Source of Variation Orders...........................................................................49
4.2.2 The Association between Type and Source of Variation Orders in SGR
Construction.....................................................................................................51
4.3 Factors contributing to occurrence of variation orders during the
implementation of the SGR construction projects.......................................................
4.3.1 Factors contributing to occurrence of variation............................................52
4.3.1.1 Insufficient Planning..............................................................................................
4.3.1.2 The Design Modifications......................................................................................
4.3.1.3 Difference in Site Conditions.................................................................................
4.3.1.4 Ineffective Site Management.................................................................................
4.3.1.5 The Change in Specifications.................................................................................
4.3.1.6 Unrealistic Contract...............................................................................................
4.3.1.7 Lack of Coordination among Involved Parties in the Project Management
......................................................................................................................................
4.3.1.8 Lack of Judgment and Experience from the Consultants.......................................
4.3.2 Impact of Variation Orders (VO)..................................................................63
4.3.2.1 Time effect (Time overrun)....................................................................................
4.3.2.2 Increase in Overhead expenses..............................................................................
4.3.2.3 Unplanned Site meeting.........................................................................................
4.3.2.4 Rework Time Cost.................................................................................................
4.3.2.5 Increase in Time management...............................................................................
4.3.2.6 Increase of Project Cost.........................................................................................
4.3.2.7 Cost for Re-designing............................................................................................
4.3.2.8 Cost of Administration of the Variation Order......................................................
4.3.2.9 Expenses of Idle Plan Machine..............................................................................

viii
 4.4 Tools for Management of Variation Orders in the SGR Construction Projects
......................................................................................................................................
4.4.1 Management Tools used in Managing Variation Orders in the SGR
Construction Project.....................................................................................................
4.4.2 Developed causes and effects diagram in SGR construction Project...........75

CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................
6.1 Conclusion......................................................................................................................
6.2 Recommendations..........................................................................................................
6.3 Further Research.............................................................................................................

REFERENCES................................................................................................................
ANNEXES.......................................................................................................................
Appendix No.1: Checklist Tool for Data Collection During the Desk Review.................
Appendix NO. 2: Checklist questions for guiding Key Informant Interviews...........
Appendix NO.3: Reviewed Additional Works from the Desk Study................................

ix
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Factors causing variations orders...................................................................20

Table 2: Tools, Including the Reason and the Time to Apply Them...........................36
Table 3: Summary of Data Collection Method and Analysis Tools............................47
Table 4: Source (origin) of Orders of Variation Orders...............................................50
Table 5: The Association between Type and Source of Variation Orders in SGR
Construction Project....................................................................................51
Table 7: Identified Type of variations, causes and the impact from Objectives I and II
.....................................................................................................................75

LIST OF FIGURES

x
Figure 1: Generic cause-and-effect diagram of design changes..................................30
Figure 2: Example of Pareto Chart Document Complaint...........................................31
Figure 3: Example of Check Sheet...............................................................................32
Figure 4: Control Chart: Out-of-Control Signals.........................................................33
Figure 5: Example of Histogram..................................................................................34
Figure 6: A structured Approach to the Application of qualitative tools.....................35
Figure 7: Conceptual Framework of the Study............................................................40
Figure 8: Types of Variation Orders............................................................................49
Figure 9: Factors contributing to occurrence of VO....................................................53
Figure 10: Management Tools Used in Managing Variation Order in SGR
Construction Project...................................................................................74
Figure 11: Fishbone (Ishikawa) model for analysis between an event (effect) and its
multiple causes...........................................................................................76

xi
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background

Worldwide the construction industry is one of the key sectors contributing to

development (Osman et al., 2009). The construction industry is frequently affected by
changes in the construction market, in turn this affects the client needs and
requirements during construction. Variations are common in all types of construction
projects, thus are inevitable (Majeed et al., 2020). Any instruction to change the
original contract is written down and given to the contractor by the client or client
representative. Such instructions become part of the project documents (Mohammed
et al., 2017). Changes to project goals and scope of work, such as adding or taking
away tasks, or making other changes, are described as "variation orders" (VO). This is
regardless of whether it will increase or decrease project cost or change the schedule
(Mhando et al., 2018, Ismail et al., 2012). Most of the variations can be caused by
various sources such as scarcity of resources, environmental conditions, involvement
of other parties, and contractual relations (Msiska and Mashwama, 2022).

These changes occur after the award of the initial contract or after the commencement
of work at the construction site (s). The changes may be due to various reasons such
as modification of scope, costs, schedule, or methods. Variation orders affect how
well a project does as a whole (Ruben, 2008). This is because variations can make
significant changes to total direct and indirect costs, the length of contract or both.
Variation in orders are the reasons why most contractors fail to meet the specified
time for completion of most contract works (Pourrostam and Ismail, 2011). The
situation is even worse in most of the developing countries because their growing
economies delay the completion of many construction projects (Pourrostam et al.,
2012).

Variations may have a negative or positive impact on project construction (Osman et

al., 2009). According to Memon et al., (2014), “Variation order" can be a tool used to
improve project results. Variation Order can affect the construction project budget,

1
schedule, quality, and overall productivity. When setting a project into action,
variation orders are used to fix any noted problem. Engineers need to use best
judgment to finish building the project on time and without exceeding the planned
budget or time.

According to Reuben (2008), variation orders may have an impact on budget and time
overruns, as well as disputes between stakeholders. Ten of the twenty-six reasons for
variation in orders were noted by Ismail and Pourrostam (2013). They included
changes to employer’s plan or scope, design defects and omissions, site
circumstances, and contractor financial concerns. In Tanzania, such an issue has been
noted where the majority of the road projects have gone over budget because of
change in orders issued (Saki and Yeom, 2022). Matimbe and Lema (1997) evaluated
the cost and schedule performance of integrated road projects in Tanzania and found
that the costs of these projects sometimes significantly deviated from the original
contract terms. The surveyed projects indicated that time and money deviations
occurred by 70%, some projects ranged from 5% to 73% of the projected timeline,
while the other from 19% to 216% of the original valued contracts. Further, it was
reported that many early integrated road projects ended up costing more than expected
(Kimambo n.d as cited from Saki and Yeom, 2022). Variation orders are not often
awarded to railway roads while under construction (Manzoor and Pheng, 2005).
When a contractor faces a variation, they often have to add to the estimated costs
that were already planned and approved to cover the extra work. Similarly, Variations
in the railway construction can also lead to schedule changes, cost overruns, and a
drop in the quality of the project.

The Global Mobility Report (2017) has predicted that the annual passenger traffic will
increase to 80 trillion by 2030, signifying a 50% surge from the recorded figures in
2015. It is highly likely that the aforementioned outcomes could be attributed to
advancement and innovations in technology. Specifically, railroads have
demonstrated enhancements in safety, time management, and cost-effectiveness.

In the course of the implementation of this initiative, Tanzania has initiated the SGR
project. The objective is to establish a connection between Dar es Salaam port and

2
most of the landlocked neighbouring nations of Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi and the
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The primary objective in Tanzania is to
convert the meter-gauge railway (MGR) to the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) as a
component of ongoing railway infrastructure development. Currently, the project is in
progress and has been structured into five distinct phases. The initial stage of the
project has been executed between 2017 and 2022. Therefore, the objective of the
present study was to examine the effects of variation orders on the performance of
construction projects for the SGR in Tanzania.

1.2 Statement of the problem

According to Lamprou and Vagiona (2022), for a project to be successful, it requires

an effective and efficient performance that fulfils the overall objective by attaining the
three critical success factors, that is meeting the cost, time and quality requirements
within the defined scope. Any variations from these objectives in most cases cause
delay in projects and additional costs to the project implementing agent and project
owner (Majeed et al., 2020). Mhando et al., (2018) enlightened that changes and
variation orders are pointed out as one of the major reasons that construction project
performance suffers from, as it is expected to result in scope creep, extended time,
increased cost and disputes among the parties.

According to Al-Btoosh (2021) changes in the construction projects are very

common, unwanted and mostly occur during the execution phase of a project from
different sources and different causes. This leads to variation orders, and added that it
has considerable negative impacts on the performance of the project on costs, time
and quality resulting in costs and time overruns, quality degradation, and loss in
productivity on construction projects.

Previous studies have been conducted on the cause of variations orders, the impact,
and how to manage such challenges on construction projects. Wang et al., (2021)
studied the causes and effects of variation orders in railway projects, focused on the
existence of variation, its cause and effect. In another study, Majeed et al., (2020)
analysed the cause of variation orders and their effects on cost and time spent on
Government projects. Amiruddin and Towhid, (2012) analysed factors causing

3
Variation Orders and their effects on Roadway Construction Projects. Mohammed
(2021) investigated the cause of variation orders in the governmental construction
projects in Jordan. ‌ Mhando et al., (2018) came up with the Variation Mitigation
Model to enhance the Construction Performance on the Public Building Projects in
Tanzania.

All the conducted studies on variation and variation orders recommended that further
studies on this issue were needed. In addition, there are scanty-reported studies on
variation orders in the railway construction industry. Therefore, this study attempts to
identify the factors causing variations leading to variation orders and their effects on
the overall SGR railway construction project performance in Tanzania and understand
the tools that can effectively be used to manage these variation Orders, with a view of
making recommendations that could develop effective variation order management.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 Main Objective

To study the impact of variation orders on the overall project performance of railway
construction projects in Tanzania.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of this study were to;

i. Examine the source and frequency of variation orders in the construction of
SGR projects.
ii. Identify factors contributing to occurrence of variation orders during the SGR
construction project.
iii. Determine tools and validations for management of variation orders in the
SGR construction projects.

1.4 Research Questions

The following questions were used to address the above research objectives;

4
 i. What are the sources and frequency of variation orders in the implementation
of SGR projects within the construction industry?
ii. What are the contributing factors to occurrence of variation orders during the
implementation of SGR projects?
iii. What are the most effective tools to manage the Project Variation Orders
during the implementation of the SGR construction projects?

1.5 The significance of the study

Since variation orders can have numerous negative impacts to project costs and
schedule performance, it is important to identify the major cause that contributes to
variation orders and study the effect of variation orders and possible strategies to
minimize during the implementation of railway construction project

Through studying the current practice of variation orders, reviewing related literature
and collecting data from reports and key stakeholders in the SGR construction
projects, the findings of this study identified the major causes and effects of variation
orders and forwards possible recommendations that will assist contract administration
of the implementing agent and railway construction stakeholders in general. It will
contribute to improvement of construction variation orders management and minimize
the adverse impact of variation orders on the SGR construction projects.

The study will also help the government in general and most technical departments
dealing with different construction projects in assessing and taking remedial
measures to reduce the impact of variation orders . The results of the study will
provide additional knowledge required by clients/financiers, project managers,
architects, engineers, quantity surveyors, contractors and other stakeholders in the
management of variation orders in railway construction projects.

1.6 The Scope of the Study

The scope of this study was to cover the SGR railway construction project that spans
from Dar es Salaam to Mwanza region. The researcher sought approval from the
railway management for a permit that allowed them to utilize the project for data
collection. Several factors were considered, including the budget for project

5
implementation, the financial situation of clients, and the existing relationships
between the project working parties. Highlighting the inherent challenges pertaining
to variation orders will constitute a pivotal element in ensuring the successful
culmination of a project.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the reviewed literature for the study. The focus was on a
literature search that aimed to identify any current gap, including the findings from
the previous similar studies on the impact of variation orders during the execution of
construction projects. This involved comprehensive discussions on the concept of
variation orders, their significance in the construction of projects, types of variation
orders, their impact on project performance, and strategies to manage variation orders
in construction projects.

2.2 The Meaning of Variation Orders

According to Desyardi et al., (2019), Variation Orders have the potential to modify
the quantity, type, or technical specifications of a contract in the construction projects.
The existence of such disparities can result in project delays and increased costs.
Modification orders are frequently issued in the field of building and civil
construction. Based on recent data (FIDIC, 2017), variations may encompass
modifications to quantities of any item of work that is part of the Contract, alterations
resulting from quality and other attributes of any item, adjustments to levels,
positions, and/or dimensions of any portion of works, exclusion of any work except if
it is to be executed by other parties, and any supplementary work, equipment,
materials, or services that are essential for permanent works, along with any related
tests.

An alteration to the initial scope of outlined work in the contract, which may involve
inclusion, exclusion, or replacement of certain components of the project or a shift in
the approach to executing the project, is commonly known as variation. Variation

6
Orders (VO) refers to change in quantities of work items that fall within the overall
scope of the project as originally proposed and approved. These modifications may
include the addition of new work items or re-classification of existing ones, which
may be necessitated by changes in plans, design, or alignment. Change in Orders
pertaining to modifications in the original work quantities as specified in the contract,
whether in an increasing or decreasing manner. On the other hand, Extra Work Orders
(EWO) refer to inclusion of new work that is deemed necessary for project
completion, improvement, or protection.

Therefore, the distinction between a variation and a variation order in the construction
project is that any deviation from the agreed-upon work scope constitutes a variation.
On the other hand, a variation order is a written agreement to modify, add to, or
otherwise alter work beyond what was specified in the original contract.

According to Mhando et al., (2017), variation is explained as a combination of any or

all of the following: variation in construction projects refers to potential adjustments
or changes made to design, quality, or quantity of the construction works as depicted
in the contract drawings and described or referenced in the contract bills. This
encompasses the addition, omission, or substitution of any work, modification of the
type or standard of materials used in the works, and the removal from the site of any
work materials or goods that were executed or brought by the contractor for purposes
other than those specified in the contract, provided that such work, material, or goods
do not conform to terms of the contract. Variations in construction projects involve
instructions pertaining to characteristics of work that are not explicitly referred to as
variations in the contractual documentation. In the field of law, a variation of contract
refers to a situation where both parties involved in a contractual agreement mutually
modify the terms or conditions of the original contract subsequent to its execution.
The price clause variation allows for the contract sum to be modified in response to
the fluctuation in cost of labour or materials.

7
2.3 Nature of Variation Orders

According to Reuben and Haupt (2008), identification of variation orders can be

achieved through analysis of cause and effect and resultant effects. The definition of
variation orders can be established by considering both causative factors and resultant
impact. Arain and Pheng (2005) classified variation orders into two categories:
beneficial and detrimental.

2.3.1 Benefits of variation orders

According to Bello et al., (2021), advantageous variations can lead to a reduction in

expenses, duration, or complexity of a project. According to Arain and Pheng (2005),
an effective variation order has the potential to enhance quality, reduce costs, expedite
timelines, or address complexity. According to Reuben and Haupt (2008), value
assessments employ beneficial change orders to achieve a balance between costs,
functionality, and durability, to satisfy the clients by minimizing unnecessary project
expenses.

The implementation of variation orders that enhance customer value is advantageous.

According to Kelly and Duerk (2002), the client places importance on various factors
including time, capital costs, operating costs, environmental impact, exchange or
resale value, aesthetics, and respect, as well as purposefulness. The utilization of
favourable variance results in reduction of project costs.

Zimmerman and Hart (1982), noted that all designs incorporate superfluous expenses.
Therefore, a variation order that results in the removal of unnecessary expenses is
advantageous as it maximizes client benefits relative to resource input. The
aforementioned advantages fulfil the prerequisites of social, economic, and
commercial development initiatives.

2.3.2 Detrimental of variation orders

According to Arain and Pheng (2005), detrimental change orders can hurt both
customer value and the project performance. The occurrence of variation orders with
a negative impact has the potential to decrease the perceived value of clients. A

8
consumer experiencing financial constraints may seek to purchase parts that are
affordable, but of lower quality. In their study on variation orders in different
construction projects, (Manzoor et al., 2005), identified the following potential
impacts of the detrimental variations; cost overruns, time overruns, disputes between
parties of the contract, adverse effect on the professional reputation of one or more
parties, additional specialist equipment/personnel, additional health and safety
equipment/measure, degradation of health and safety, degradation of work quality.
2.4 The Legal Aspects of contractions of different projects

Throughout its history, FIDIC has developed standardized contract forms to regulate
relationships between different entities in the construction industry. The FIDIC (2017)
has also established guidelines to promote best practices within the field. The
International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) introduced a revised set of
contracts in 1999, widely used globally to foster positive relationships between
employers and contractors. Employers can benefit from utilizing FIDIC's globally
recognized conditions in plant maintenance, especially for international tenders.

The scope of the FIDIC suite of contracts has expanded to cover a wide range of
projects and procurement methodologies, making it common for international
contracts or consultants operating outside the United Kingdom to encounter FIDIC
conditions. Similarly, sub-contractors engaging in international operations are subject
to derived contract conditions from FIDIC. Additionally, employers may choose to
use FIDIC conditions when standard local contract conditions are unsuitable for the
procurement route and there is a desire to mitigate risks and costs associated with
creating a customized contract. The various contract forms within the FIDIC suite are
structured based on the degree of design and other obligations undertaken by the
employer and contractor, aligned with prevailing procurement strategies rather than
tailored to specific construction project characteristics. These considerations are
crucial for plant maintenance or refurbishment activities.

In 1999, FIDIC released four contract forms that required assessment to determine the
most suitable option for infrastructure rehabilitation: the Red Book, Yellow Book,
Silver Book, and Green Book. The primary aim of these publications is to establish

9
consistency in technical and administrative aspects, facilitating the effective
implementation of commercial projects. The choice of the most suitable contract for
power infrastructure rehabilitation depends on the specific nature of the project under
consideration.

2.5 The FIDIC books in detail

Utilization of Conditions of Contract for Construction, commonly referred to as the

FIDIC Red Book, is advised for construction projects involving the construction or
engineering of structures that have been conceptualized by the employer or their
designated representative, known as the engineer. In accordance with customary
provisions of this contractual agreement, the contractor is responsible for constructing
the designated works in alignment with the design specifications provided by the
employer.

The utilization of the Conditions of Contract for Plant and Design-Build, commonly
known as the FIDIC Yellow Book, is highly advised for the procurement of electrical
and/or mechanical equipment, as well as for the planning and implementation of
construction or engineering projects. The contractor is responsible for the design and
provision of plant and/or other works, as per the employer's specifications. These
works may encompass a variety of disciplines, such as civil, mechanical, electrical,
and construction.

The utilization of the EPC Turnkey Contract, also known as the FIDIC Silver Book, is
advised in cases where a single entity assumes complete accountability for both the
design and implementation of an engineering project. In this contractual arrangement,
the entity assumes responsibility for the engineering, procurement, and construction
processes, resulting in the delivery of a fully-equipped facility that is prepared for
operation, commonly referred to as a "turnkey" solution.

The FIDIC Green Book – Short Form of Contract is commonly suggested for
engineering and construction projects with relatively modest capital value. Based on
the guidelines provided by FIDIC, the Green Book's accompanying guidance notes
suggest that it is generally not advisable to employ this particular resource for projects

10
exceeding a contract value of $500,000. The Green Book is primarily suitable for
tasks that are relatively uncomplicated or repetitive in nature, or for projects that have
a short duration and do not require the involvement of specialized subcontractors.

During the initial project phase, it is advisable to assess procurement alternatives in

collaboration with a consulting engineer, and subsequently determine the most
suitable option. This phase in the procurement process for each project entails the
identification and selection of the most suitable procurement strategy. During this
stage, decisions are made regarding the following aspects: The tasks to be performed
within each contractual agreement, commonly referred to as 'contract packaging’; The
scope of design to be furnished to, or to be executed by the contractor; The final
contract price can be determined using various methods such as lump-sum, measure-
and-value, cost-plus, or other bases. The primary focus of this inquiry pertains to
ascertaining the party responsible for undertaking the majority of the design work,
namely the employer or the engineer. The scenario pertains to an infrastructure
project, encompassing various types such as roads, rail links, bridges, water or sewage
treatment plants, transmission lines, dams, or hydropower plants. In this context, the
employer, responsible for financing the project, intends to execute it on a fixed-price
turnkey basis.

2.5.1 Variation Orders

According to FIDIC (1999) guidelines, the term "variations" encompasses
modifications, additions, and exclusions. Variation encompasses modifications in the
quantities, quality, and other inherent attributes of any given item. Modifications to
levels, positions, and/or dimensions of any component. Any supplementary labour,
vegetation, resources, or provisions required for the establishment of the permanent
infrastructure. Alteration in the arrangement or scheduling of artistic or literary
creations. The assessment of variations in value is one essential prerequisite for the
adjustment of the rate, price, or quantity of any item is the provision of a notice
indicating such changes. The entity responsible for issuing this notice is a matter of
consideration. Within which time frame should this notice be provided, if the notice is
provided after the specified period, would the party receiving the notice still be
eligible for compensation.

11
According to Sub-clause 52.1 of the FIDIC red book 4 th edition, any modifications
mentioned in Clause 51 and any additional costs to the Contract price that need to be
determined in accordance with Clause 52 (referred to as "varied work" in this
context), should be assessed based on the rates and prices specified in the Contract. If,
according to the Engineer's perspective, the same is deemed applicable. If the
Contract does not include any rates or prices for the changed work, the rates and
prices specified in the Contract will be used to determine the value, to the extent that
it is reasonable. If this is not possible, the Engineer will consult with the Employer
and the Contractor to establish appropriate rates or prices. In case of any
disagreement, the Engineer will determine and communicate the rates or prices that he
deems suitable, notifying the Contractor accordingly and providing a copy of the
notification to the Employer. The Engineer will establish provisional rates or prices to
facilitate the inclusion of on-account payment in certificates issued in accordance with
Clause 60, until such time as agreed or fixed rates or prices are determined.

According to Odabasi et al. (2003), it is of utmost importance for project managers in

the construction industry to make a critical and timely decision regarding the
methodology to be utilized in the design and implementation of the project. Various
project delivery methods have been formulated to cater to the specific demands and
preferences of projects and owners, in response to constraints related to financial
resources, organizational capabilities, and time restrictions.

Based on the research conducted by Levy (2006), it was observed that the proprietor
establishes a contractual arrangement with a specialized team in the field of database
management. The team may consist of a collaborative arrangement between a
contractor and a designer, a contractor engaging a designer as a sub-consultant, a team
led by a designer with a contractor serving as a subcontracted entity, or a single firm
possessing the capacity to undertake both design and construction responsibilities.
Contractors commonly bear the primary responsibility for assuming corporate risk
during project execution, thus often assuming leadership roles within these teams. A
variant of the traditional database team structure, known as the fee-paid developer
model, involves the owner hiring a developer who then selects their own team
members, including designers and contractors. The team tasked with database

12
management engages in thorough planning and development of the infrastructure,
typically based on an initial project scope or design proposed by the owner.

In the preliminary phases, the database team will employ a pre-established

methodology to ascertain a fixed cost for the complete design and development of the
facility. Following the commencement stage, the team responsible for overseeing
database management assumes responsibility for project development and ensuring
smooth coordination between the design and construction stages.

The obtained findings were consistent with the previous study by Konchar and
Sanvido in 1998. In their study, Ibbs et al. (2003) found that alterations made to the
project schedule had consequences not only to total duration of the project, but also
on the design, bid, and build delivery system, with the latter being particularly
affected.

2.5.2 Contract for Consultancy Service in the SGR Project

The SGR Project is executed through a Lump-Sum Contract for consultancy services,
where a fixed and unchangeable price is agreed upon. Clearly defining responsibilities
is vital in project management, covering factors like general conditions, payments,
site conditions, change orders, dispute resolution, and other relevant aspects. The
contract specifies a set schedule for progress payment disbursement, with contractors
required to request payments at regular intervals. Variations in orders are common,
with owners often setting aside a specific percentage above the agreed cost to
accommodate modifications.

2.5.3 Contractual Requirement for Construction of the SGR Project

The present requirements seek to improve the utilization of engineering expertise and
industry standards. It is important to note that a requirement should not be seen as a
directive to the contractor. The contractor is expected to use their discretion and
engineering knowledge to carefully assess the requirement. If the contractor chooses
to depart from or disregard the requirement, they must give the employer a

13
recommendation justifying the reasons for the deviation. Permission from the
employer is necessary for any deviations from the established norms or guidelines.

2.6 Source and Frequency of Variation Orders in the Implementation within the
Construction Industry

Variations encompass changes, additions, and removals in the construction activities

(Reuben, 2008; FIDIC, 1999). Variations may involve modifications to quantities of
any item, adjustments to the quality and other attributes of any item, as well as
alterations to levels, positions, and/or dimensions of any part. Additionally, they may
include any extra work, equipment, materials, or services needed for the permanent
works, changes in the sequence or timing of the works, and the valuation of variations
(Yadeta, 2017; Khalifa and Mahamid, 2019).

A construction contract is a commercial agreement that is susceptible to change.

Provisions within the contract related to alterations allow the parties involved to
initiate variation orders within the scope of the works without amending the original
contract. Variation orders encompass additions, removals, modifications, and
substitutions in terms of quality, quantity, and work schedule.

An initial requirement for considering an increase or decrease in the rate, price, or

amount of any item is the provision of notice, including who should give the notice
and within what timeframe, after which the party receiving the notice is still entitled
to compensation.

In various research studies, it has been observed that variations are a common
occurrence in all types of construction projects. An industry study revealed that
around 40% of construction projects experience changes of more than 10%, as
indicated by the ratio of final project costs to estimated project costs (Thomas et al.,
2002; Oladapo, 2007). According to Memon et al. (2014), variation orders are
frequently encountered in construction projects, involving amendments to the original
scope of work outlined in the contract. There are several factors contributing to the
prevalence of variations in the construction projects. Sunday (2010) claimed that the
complexities of construction often lead to situations such as variations and their

14
associated impacts. Hanna et al. (2002) also noted that variations are common in
construction projects due to the unique nature of each project. Each building project is
inherently unique, even if the designs and construction methods appear similar.
Variability in soil and site conditions, unpredictable market prices of building
materials and goods, contribute to the distinctiveness of otherwise similar projects.

Ibbs et. al. (2007) outlined that there are generally five categories of changes: change
in scope, differing site conditions, delays, suspensions, and acceleration. Hibberd
(1986) defined variation as any alteration in the quality or quantity of works as
specified in a contractual document. The nature of variation orders can be discerned
by examining the cause of occurrence and its consequences (Reuben and Haupt,
2008). Arain and Low (2005) identified two types of variation orders: beneficial and
detrimental. Beneficial variation orders are those that result in cost reduction,
schedule improvement, or decreased project complexity (Arain and Low, 2005). They
are initiated for the purpose of value analysis to achieve a balance between cost,
functionality, and durability, satisfying the client by removing unnecessary costs from
the project (Reuben and Haupt, 2008). On the other hand, a detrimental variation
order can be defined as one that has a negative impact on client value or project
performance (Arain and Low, 2005). Detrimental variations are those that diminish
the owner's value or adversely affect the project (Reuben and Haupt, 2008).

Variation orders are inevitable in building projects due to their inherent complexity,
making it challenging to predict outcomes with absolute certainty. Some argue that
change orders are a natural part of the construction process and cannot be entirely
avoided (Mohamed, 2001). Ssegawa et al., (2002) suggest that including "variation
clauses" in contracts acknowledges the likelihood of project modifications during the
course of work. Even with comprehensive planning, the scope of a contract may
evolve as work progresses (Harbans, 2003). Hanna et al. (2002) pointed out that
variations occur because each project is unique, and there are limitations in both time
and budget for planning. Various authors, such as Thomas et al., (2002) and Arain
and Pheng (2005), have observed that change orders are prevalent across different
project types. Ssegawa et al. (2002) also emphasized that given the intricate nature of
construction activities, completing a building project without adjustments to plans or

15
processes is nearly impossible. Reasons for change orders can include financial
considerations, design modifications, aesthetic preferences, geological factors,
weather conditions, construction feasibility, legal requirements, product
enhancements, and discrepancies within the contract documents (Hanna et al., 2002;
Ssegawa et al., 2002). Additionally, the behaviours and decisions of individuals
involved in the project can influence the occurrence of change orders, which may
originate from either the client or the contractor.

Owing to the nature of building construction, most contracts nowadays need to

anticipate potential changes. Finsen (2005) suggests that clients may find it difficult to
envision the final outcome, hence some level of change should be anticipated.
Unforeseen events may require outlined actions in the contract (Finsen, 2005).
However, the drawback of incorporating a variation clause is that architects often do
not finalize their plans before the contract is signed, relying on the provision to
modify their plans during the contract period. Arain and Pheng (2005) noted that the
benefit of the variation clause is that it allows the builder or other designers to defer
certain decisions until the last minute. Unfortunately, one of the negative aspects of
the variation clause is its tendency to prompt clients to make hasty decisions and
embark on building projects without thoroughly considering their requirements
(Finsen, 2005). Typically, clients prioritize functionality, durability, and optimization,
and engage a team of consultants to assist with planning and resource utilization.
Conversely, contractors are primarily concerned with construction costs and methods
to reduce them. Clients or their representatives may contribute to higher building
costs, but this aspect is seldom taken into consideration. Clients and consultants often
overlook the fact that issuing numerous change orders drives up building costs. For
example, a client eager to have the project completed by a specific date may push for
onsite work to commence while the design is still in its early stages. In some cases,
construction may begin before the design is finalized, leading to the contractor
needing to await the detailed design. As a result, certain tasks may be put on hold,
while others may be halted or dismantled.

16
Some argue that the expenses incurred from abandoned projects represent a misuse of
resources, ultimately burdening clients with increased costs for project completion.
According to Khalifa and Mahamid (2019), a lack of expertise is identified as a
contributing factor to elevated costs beyond what is necessary. The construction
industry fails to recognize that minimizing the occurrence of errors could lead to a
reduction in overall construction expenditures. Yandeta's (2014) research in Ethiopia
revealed that an increase in alterations adversely impacts both the final outcomes and
the financial aspects of a project.

There are numerous sources of variation orders, some of which can be anticipated,
while others cannot. Ismail et al., (2012) conducted a study in which they identified
26 significant factors related to variance ordering (Table 1). These factors were
attributed to either the contractor, consultant, or employer/client, or they had an
influence on the stated factors.

a. Client/employer

As per Reuben (2008), the client plays a crucial role as the instigator throughout the
entire construction project, thus exerting influence on the occurrence of variation
orders. The stakeholders of a project hold expectations regarding goals, objectives,
scope of work, and desired quality level. Clients often initiate change orders for
various reasons during the construction phase. According to Uyun (2007), customers
most commonly request variation orders due to changes in requirements, which may
involve reassessing needs or revising anticipated future usage of completed
deliverables. Saki and Yeom (2022) have identified additional sources of change
orders.

b. Consultant

Clients often depend on consultants to utilize their expertise in implementing the

design and supervising construction activities at the site. In today's environment,
projects have become more intricate, the integration of new technologies is
widespread, and the necessity for financial transparency requires a consulting team

17
with a diverse range of skills, rather than a single entity representing the client. The
consulting team comprises various professionals such as architects, designers,
specialized engineers, project managers, and cost consultants. According to Reuben
(2008), the consulting team's implementation of variation orders relies on the
authorization given by the client or their authorized representative.

c. Contractor

Variation requests from contractors are a common scenario. Sweeney (1998)

suggested that project participants should proactively prepare to address potential
difficulties. It is crucial for parties involved in a contract to understand that the
information provided by the consultant may not always be entirely accurate.
Contractors must promptly communicate any technical challenges related to
modification orders to the consultant. According to Levy (2002), it is typical in
construction projects for general contractors or their subcontractors to engage
consultants to review contract documents in cases of apparent discrepancies,
omissions, errors, or conflicts. The consultant is responsible for evaluating additional
costs required to address the issue, negotiating a mutually agreeable price, and
proceeding accordingly. Various factors such as work characteristics, project
complexity, and procurement method influence the occurrence of variation orders.

2.7 Factors Contributing to Occurrence of Variation Orders during the

Construction Projects

From different literature, the following are some of the factors contributing to the
occurrence of variation orders during construction projects (Table I);

2.7.1 Nature of Works

Based on Yandeta (2007) findings, construction practice involves constructing various

structures using building, civil, and specialized works. These activities encompass a
range of constructions like residential homes, commercial buildings, and office
spaces. Civil engineering projects focus on developing transportation systems and
critical infrastructure such as roads and related facilities. Construction projects with
significant unforeseen challenges often lead to changes in directives. It is challenging

18
to accurately predict the scope of civil works involving extensive earth excavation and
specialized building works beyond the designer's expertise before commencing on-
site activities. Uyun (2007) argues that site conditions and initial investigations are
not always accurately represented in drawings and specifications.

The inclusion of estimated amounts or numbers in a contract signals the likely

occurrence of modification requests during a project. Smith and Merritt (2020)
identified four sources of uncertainty in project management, which are: insufficiently
detailed specifications for project activities, lack of familiarity with project inputs and
surroundings by management, inconsistency in materials, teams, or responsibilities
across different locations and timeframes, and environmental unpredictability such as
weather influences and renovation of old structures without documented plans.

2.7.2 Complexity of the Project

The intricate nature of construction projects arises from several factors, including the
need for timely completion, management of costs and quality, ensuring workplace
safety, minimizing disputes, embracing technological advancements, adapting to
economic changes, responding to globalization, addressing environmental issues, and
dealing with the segmented construction industry (Nady and Hosny, 2022). Baccarin
(1996) highlighted that project complexity involves a multitude of interconnected
elements. Ireland (2007) defines complexity as the presence of multiple components
or variables within an object or concept. Baccarini (1996) and Ireland (2007)
categorized project complexity into two main types: management or organizational
complexity and technical or technological complexity.

19
Table 1: Factors causing variations orders
Consultant Contractor

1. Change of plan of scope 1. Lack of consultant involvement

in the design
2. Change of schedule
2. Unavailability of equipment
3. Client’s Financial Problems
design
4. Inadequate Project Objectives
3. Unavailability of skills
5. Replacement of Materials or procedures
4. Contractor’s desired
6. Impediment of prompt decision making profitability

7. Obstinate nature of the client 5. Differing site conditions

8. Change in specifications 6. Defective workmanship

9. Obstinate nature of the client 7. Unfamiliarity with local

conditions
10. Change in specifications
8. Lack of a specialized
11. Change in design by the consultant construction manager
12. Errors and omissions in design 9. Fast-track construction
13. Conflicts between contract documents 10. Poor procurement process
14. Inadequate scope of work for a 11. Absence of communication
contractor
12. Long lead procurement
15. Technology change
13. Honest wrong beliefs of
16. Value engineering contractor
17. Lack of coordination 14. Honest wrong beliefs of
18. Design complexity contractor

19. Inadequate working for drawing details 15. Lack of strategic planning

20. Inadequate shop drawing details 16. Contractor's lack of required

data
21. Lack of consultant’s knowledge of
available materials and equipment 17. Client’s Financial Problems

22. Consultant lack of judgment and 18. Consultant’s lack of

experience judgment and experience

23. Design discrepancies

20
24. Honest wrong beliefs of consultant
25. Consultant’s lack of required data

Client Other factors

1. Change of plan of scope 1. Weather conditions
2. Change of schedule 2. Health and safety considerations
3. Client’s Financial Problems 3. Change in government
regulations
4. Inadequate Project Objectives
4. Change in economic conditions
5. Replacement of Materials or procedures
5. Socio-cultural factors
6. Impediment of prompt decision making
6. Unforeseen problems
7. Obstinate nature of the client
8. Change in specifications

Source: Adapted from Arain and Pheng (2006).

21
The term "technological complexity" refers to the challenges and intricacies
encountered when transforming raw materials into finished products. This process
involves the application of various tools, techniques, and expertise required for the
successful completion of a construction project. Nady and Hosny (2022) outlined the
components that determine manufacturing complexity as follows: product structure,
shop or plant layout, planning and scheduling functions, information flow (internal,
interpolate, external), environmental dynamics, variability, and uncertainty, and other
organizational functions like training and political considerations.

Ireland (2007) proposed that project complexity can be categorized into three levels:
low, medium, and high. There is a direct link between project complexity and the
likelihood of variation order occurrence. When a variation order is issued due to the
intricate design, it may require the design team to take time to understand the
necessary changes and undergo a redesign process, leading to a temporary halt in on-
site operations.

In Ireland's (2007) study, a complex project involved the collaboration of an

electronic engineer from one contracting company and a computer scientist from
another. This collaboration resulted in a costly mistake that required the redesign and
reconstruction of connectors, with costs amounting to $600,000. The error occurred
due to the misalignment of 256 connectors by one position, leading to a discrepancy
in the sequencing approach used by the electronic engineer and the computer scientist.
The engineer started the sequence from 1 to 256, while the scientist initiated it from 0
to 255. The issuance of the variation order in this case aimed to address the issue
stemming from the project's complexity.

2.7.3 Procurement Method

Procurement methods sometimes may lead to variation during construction. During

construction it is important to have good procurement and resource plan (Majeed,
2020).

A construction project usually comprises a variety of organizations, including a client,

designers, specialized consultants, project managers, and constructors. The method

22
used to carry out a project differs based on the particular project. This procurement
method typically outlines the contractual agreement among the parties involved. It is
logical to expect that a specific procurement approach may result in a greater number
of variation orders compared to others. Love (2002) found that unconventional
procurement methods are more susceptible to errors, omissions, and changes
compared to traditional methods.

i. Traditional method

In the past, it was common for a client beginning a construction project to hire a
designer or team of designers to develop plans for the proposed project. For larger
projects, the client would also bring in a quantity surveyor to create necessary
documentation, such as bills of quantities, to help the contractor establish a bid price
(Ashworth, 1998). With the construction process starting after the design was
finalized, there was a decreased occurrence of change orders in this specific
arrangement.

According to Koushki et al. (2005), clients who dedicated more time and financial
resources to the design phase generally issued fewer variation orders compared to
those who did not allocate enough resources to this phase. The more time spent
preparing contract documents before construction begins, the higher the likelihood of
reducing inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and omissions in the design, resulting in a
decrease in variation orders. Turner (1990) argues that with sufficient pre-
construction design, variations should not occur as clients and their consultants have
control over the causes of such variations.

ii. Non-Traditional method

In recent years, new procurement approaches, known as non-traditional methods,

have emerged. Ashworth (1998) notes that changes in procurement practices are
linked to a shift from traditional handcrafting to the incorporation of off-site
manufacturing, use of industrial components, increased use of machinery, better
understanding of production methods, and recognition that involving contractors in
both design and on-site operations can lead to better outcomes. Methods where

23
contractors are responsible for both design and construction have been proposed as a
way to reduce variation order occurrences. By involving contractors in the design
stage, they can apply their expertise and construction methods, resulting in fewer
deviations compared to the traditional design and build approach (Ashworth, 1998).

Halwatura and Ranasinghe (2013) found that a Taiwanese road-building project

experienced significant variation orders due to factors such as inadequate estimates,
unanticipated site conditions, political pressures during construction, insufficient
research, and alterations initiated by the client. The study further indicated that
engineering features during embankments, motorways, and tunnels have a significant
impact on the evaluation and resolution of geological issues.

The study by Al-Btoosh (2021) noted that the primary reason behind modification
orders in building construction projects in Jordan was attributed to customer requests.
Clients initiate the majority of alteration requests in the construction industry. The
data acquired within the domain can be leveraged to enhance temporal efficiency and
enhance the comprehension of change orders in Jordanian construction projects.

Andualem et al., (2016) found that the largest variation orders among the five public
building projects were due to design revisions. Three professionals in the field of
public building construction and design modifications have been reported as the
primary cause of change requests. The findings of this research demonstrated that
public construction projects experience significant change orders due to various
factors such as delays in decision-making, consultant design adjustments, inadequate
working drawing details, changing needs, and defective procurement processes. The
reported primary reasons for modification orders in public construction projects in
Addis Ababa were design modifications, inadequate contract documentation, delays
in decision-making, insufficient working drawing information, and additional
demands.

Teshome et al., (2022) identified several factors that were found to have a significant
influence on the observed variations at the construction site of Woleaian Sodo
University. These factors included consultant design modifications, decision-making

24
challenges, insufficient details in working drawings, changes in the specifications,
design errors and omissions, inadequate communication with stakeholders, and
alterations in the scope of work. Allergan et al., (2014) also reported that the primary
factors that led to the occurrence of change orders were design defects and omissions,
as well as inadequate working details. This becomes the case when change orders are
frequently initiated by the owner’s change in plans, project scope adjustments, site
difficulties, and poor design.

Saki1 and Yeom (2022) identified several factors that contribute to variation orders in
road construction projects in Tanzania. They include budgetary constraints, weather
conditions, site-specific challenges, design modifications, inadequate scheduling, lack
of coordination, delays in the approval process, lack of equipment, and
communication issues.

On the causes of variations in public building projects in Tanzania, the primary

factors contributing to such variations were client-initiated changes to plans or scope,
design discrepancies by consultants, contractor misinterpretation of contract
documents, and weather conditions, Mhando et al., (2017). The variation variables
were ranked and scored by the majority of the respondents. Conducting a thorough
analysis of project feasibility, allocating sufficient time for design, implementing an
inclusive design approach, and establishing a robust change control system, could
possibly lead to minimizing the deviations.

2.9 Managing and Controlling Variation Orders in the Construction Projects

Managing the variation order costs of projects is a challenge in most countries around
the world. Each year, there is a huge amount paid in variation orders, which has
burdened approved budgets with extra costs (Rubaiei, 2022). If workable processes
are clearly described, the consequences of variation orders could be minimized.
Variations may be controlled by paying careful attention throughout the design
process (Arain, 2005). Furthermore, it would be easier for experts to take proactive
measures to reduce the number of modification orders for construction projects if
ideas are well provided. For the benefit of owners, a control system should be created
to reduce variant orders.

25
According to Baharuddin (2005), variation orders may be limited if involved
individuals in the project are aware that the preparatory work, such as comprehensive
site and soil assessments, must be completed prior to bidding. Even though mistakes
and omissions in designs cannot be entirely eliminated, they may be reduced if
designers evaluate their workloads prior to accepting new positions (Ruben, 2008).
All parties should be prepared before work starts at the site. Saki and Yeom (2022),
also suggested conducting thorough site investigations. They also highlighted
measures that might be used to reduce the number of modification orders. Consulting
firms need to guarantee that the design and necessary budget are followed. All
participants must devote adequate time to the pre-tender planning phase. Research and
accurate documentation of the procedures, supplies, and plants employed in the
procurement process are the last steps.

Ruben (2008) proposed the reduction in quantity of variation orders. Baharuddin

(2005) also noted the solutions for reducing frequency of variation orders. According
to Yandete, (2017), several studies, have suggested means to reduce the effects of
variance orders including techniques such as; The consultant must produce a
concluding design and contract document; Drawings must be completed at the time of
tender; Enough time must be spent on pre-tender planning; Clients must provide a
clear brief of the scope of work; All parties must forecast to account for unforeseen
circumstances; and Closer consultant coordination is required. A knowledgeable and
committed supervisor should be in charge of the work; The consultant must guarantee
that the design and specifications adhere to established budget, and the budget team
must be included throughout the design stage; Obtain accurate information and
conduct thorough research regarding the procurement process, the material, and the
plant; Conduct thorough site investigation, including a thorough soil investigation,
and take that information into consideration during the tendering stage; and Site
latitude and longitude should be available during the tendering stage.

26
2.9.1 Responsibilities in Controlling Variation Orders in a Project

Every member of the project team is accountable for actively participating in the
change control process and notifying project management about potential variations.
A thorough understanding of each team member's specific area of responsibility is
crucial to accurately identifying all changes. Additionally, it is the responsibility of
every team member to comprehend and recognize the significance of this procedure in
safeguarding company interests and maintaining project performance targets (Rubaiei
et al., 2022; Msallam et al., 2015; Faiq et al., 2018). This is in line with the various
responsibilities outlined by Red Bag (2023).

▪ Lead Engineers are accountable for assessing the effect of a project change
on both their labor hours and the materials and equipment related to their area
of expertise. Having solid technical support is essential for ensuring
comprehensive comprehension and prompt approval of any changes.

▪ The Project Manager holds primary accountability for enforcing this policy,
including making decisions on how to manage any (possible) project changes,
providing guidance to the involved parties, and ensuring that no unauthorized
work is carried out in response to a variation. Additionally, they are
responsible for promptly resolving any variations with the client, obtaining
appropriate authorization levels for approving cost-related changes, and
designating a team member to serve as the project’s change order coordinator.

▪ The Change Order Coordinator is accountable for ensuring that all project
changes are consistently scoped, priced, and managed throughout the entire
process. This involves accurately documenting and distributing information to
keep all parties informed of the current status.

▪ The Project Controls Manager is in charge of creating a change control

procedure tailored to the project's needs and in accordance with contract
obligations. Additionally, they will supervise the entire process and ensure that

27
 necessary support services such as estimating, cost management, and planning
are readily available.

▪ The Project Cost Engineer is accountable for accurately integrating the

effects of project changes into the budgets and projections outlined in cost
reports.

▪ The Project Construction Manager, Project Engineering Manager, and

Project Procurement Manager are accountable for supervising the process
within their respective areas, making initial assessments regarding additions or
removals from the approved project scope, expediting all necessary input from
their teams, and supporting the work of the change order Coordinator to
improve the efficiency and promptness of the entire process.

The Contracts Manager will assess all change notices and change orders in
terms of their contractual impact. Additionally, he will be included in all
project communication that may have contractual implications.

2.9.2 Project Variation Order Control Tools in Scope

Rubie et al., (2022) outlined a fundamental process for identifying, initiating,

evaluating, implementing, controlling, and properly managing/reporting variations to
a project's scope. Scope variation refers to any alteration in the project's scope of work
or deliverables that impacts its cost or schedule. These variations generally fall into
two categories: design/construction philosophy changes affecting existing contracts or
requested by the client, and project oversights or internal changes unrelated to
design/construction philosophy or existing contracts. Both categories require effective
control.

According to Red Bag (2023), a clear scope definition in contractual documents and
its proper communication are crucial prerequisites for successful change control in a
project. To ensure proper control of project variations, it is essential to establish
mechanisms allowing project personnel to readily bring potential variations to the
attention of project management, a decision process authorizing, holding, or stopping

28
the implementation of any variation before work begins, a client decision process for
authorizing, holding, or stopping implementation, an efficient system for scoping,
pricing, and administering variations, a cost control and reporting procedure
systematically incorporating changes into project budgets and forecasts, and an
individual with overall responsibility for ensuring that variations are properly
followed through and administered (a project change order coordinator for large
projects or combined project controls functions for smaller projects).

Msallam et al., (2015) introduced a management system aimed at minimizing

variation orders and mitigating their impacts within all phases of a project
(conceptual, design, and construction). The Conceptual Stage, which marks the
project's outset and involves conceptualizing project ideas and deliverables, is crucial
in setting a solid foundation for subsequent stages. To prevent changes in later stages,
they recommended the following steps: clear scope definition by the owner, collection
of potential options, thorough study of these options, and careful selection of the most
suitable option with a complete job scope definition. Additionally, they emphasized
the need for a meticulously prepared engineering service agreement and its careful
acceptance before entering the tendering stage.

The Design Stage: primarily involves design activities and the creation of contract
documents. Msallam et al., (2015) emphasized the shared responsibility between the
design consultant and the owner, with the design consultant being tasked with
preparing the design works and the owner having the duty to review them.

The Construction Stage, the third phase in the project lifecycle, primarily focuses on
implementing the job drawings. This process involves the owner, the consultant
(Technologist), and the contractor. The recommended management control system for
handling variation orders includes conducting a thorough review of all contract
documents, comparing them with on-site conditions, making immediate dec isions on
issuing variations, preparing or updating the work schedule, resolving any
discrepancies between records and site conditions, requesting a list of anticipated
changes in activity execution, and continuing with the project works (Duff, 2015).

29
2.9.4 Management Tools for Controlling Variation Orders

Statistical Process Control (SPC) plays a major role in the reduction of variations in
any construction and service enterprise. The problem-solving tools used in SPC called
the “management seven” (Memon et al., 2019), are traditional management tools,
namely check sheets, histograms, Pareto charts, cause and effect diagrams, scatter
diagrams, and control charts. These tools are very popular and are commonly called
the 7 QC tools. Their applications for quality improvement are found in almost all
construction and service organizations. According to McQuirter et al., (1995), tools
and techniques are practical methods, skills, and mechanisms that can be applied to
particular tasks. They are used to facilitate positive change and improvements.

Using a combination of tools it is possible to highlight complex data in a simple,

visually powerful way; evaluate areas that cause the most problems; give direction for
areas to be prioritized; show relationships between variables; establish causes for
failure; show distribution of data; and determine whether the process is acting in a
state of statistical control; and highlight the effect of special causes of variation where
present (Neyestani, 2017). The key message is that without effective employment and
a mix of tools, it is difficult to solve problems as explained by the detailed use of
these tools and its application.

i. Cause-and-Effect Diagrams

Professor Kaoru Ishikawa, a quality management expert, developed a method for

analysing causes and effects in the 1960s. This method, later presented in his 1990
book "Introduction to Quality Control", utilizes diagrams known as "Ishikawa
diagrams" or "fishbone diagrams" due to their resemblance to a fish skeleton (Duff,
2015). These diagrams are particularly helpful for identifying potential causes of
problems, especially when brainstorming gets stuck (Abdel-Hamid and Abdelhaleem,
2019).

30
One example of using a fishbone diagram is in the construction industry, where Faiq
et al. (2018) applied it to diagnose the root causes of project failures. Figure 1
demonstrates how this technique can be used to identify and manage variations during
construction.

Figure 1: Generic cause-and-effect diagram of design changes

(Source: Yap et al., 2016).

ii. Pareto Diagram.

According to the findings of Yap et al. (2016), Duff (2015), and Tague (2005), Pareto
Diagrams are graphical representations in the form of vertical bar charts utilized in the
identification of key causative factors contributing to the consequences of a problem.
These diagrams visually illustrate a distribution pattern based on probability,
showcasing various categories along the horizontal axis with decreasing frequencies,
culminating in an aggregated category labelled as "other" to encompass unspecified
causes. The application of Pareto analysis serves as a strategic methodology aimed at
concentrating efforts on pivotal areas of concern. Rooted in the Pareto principle,
attributed to the renowned Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto from the nineteenth
century, this concept underscores the notion that a select number of factors typically
account for a substantial proportion of overall occurrences, such as complaints,
defects, and issues.

31
The utilization of a Pareto chart proves beneficial when examining data pertaining to
the prevalence of issues or causes within a process, especially in scenarios where
numerous issues exist, necessitating focus on the most critical elements. Furthermore,
it facilitates the detailed analysis of overarching causes by delineating their individual
components and aids in effective communication of data to stakeholders. In their
research, Yap et al. (2016) employed a Pareto Chart as part of a framework
development to enhance the management of design alterations in the realm of building
construction.

Figure 2: Example of Pareto Chart Document Complaint.

iii. Check sheets

Check sheets, also referred to as tally sheets, serve as tools for data collection and
analysis to assess potential quality concerns. The utilization of Pareto diagrams aids in
structuring information and facilitates scrutiny by pinpointing deficiencies (Duff,
2015). Check sheets are applicable in scenarios where data can be consistently
observed and gathered by the same individual or within a specific location. They are
particularly useful when gathering data related to the frequency or patterns of
occurrences, issues, defects, defect locations, causes of defects, or comparable
aspects, especially in the context of production processes. As illustrated in the
following figure 3, a check sheet was employed to document data.

32
 Figure 3: Example of Check Sheet.

iv. Control chart

The control chart serves as a graphical tool employed to analyse the evolution of a
process over time. Data points are graphed in chronological sequence on the chart.
Integral components of a control chart include a central line denoting the mean, an
upper boundary representing the upper control limit, and a lower boundary signifying
the lower control limit. These benchmark lines are established based on historical data
trends. By juxtaposing current data against these demarcations, insights can be
gleaned regarding the consistency of process variation, distinguishing between
controlled variability and erratic fluctuations induced by unique sources (Duff, 2015).
Control charts for continuous data are utilized in tandem. The upper chart supervises
the mean or the central tendency of the data distribution from the process, while the
lower chart oversees the range or the dispersion of the data set. Analogous to a
scenario of target shooting, the average corresponds to the clustering of shots,
whereas the range reflects the tightness of this clustering pattern. Conversely, control
charts for categorical data are employed individually to monitor quality attributes.

Control charts are applied in various contexts, such as the continuous monitoring and
rectification of issues within ongoing processes, the anticipation of anticipated
outcome ranges stemming from a process, the assessment of process stability in

33
statistical terms, the examination of distinctive patterns of process variation arising
from exceptional influences (non-routine occurrences) or intrinsic factors (inherent to
the process), and the determination of whether quality enhancement initiatives should
prioritize the prevention of specific issues or fundamental alterations to the process
(Duff, 2015). Furthermore, Figure 4 serves as an illustrative instance of a control
chart.

Figure 4: Control Chart: Out-of-Control Signals.

v. Scatter diagram

Scatter diagrams, also referred to as correlation charts, present pairs of ordered values
(X, Y) to visually represent fluctuations in the connection between the independent
variable X and the dependent variable Y. This relationship may exhibit positive,
negative, or neutral correlations. Determining a correlation facilitates the projection of
changes in the dependent variable by calculating regression lines (Duff, 2015; Tague,
2005).

Scatter diagrams are utilized in scenarios involving paired numerical data, where the
dependent variable exhibits varying values corresponding to each independent

34
variable value. They are beneficial for investigating the relationship between two
variables, such as identifying potential root causes of issues, objectively evaluating
the connection between causes and effects post-brainstorming with a fishbone
diagram, assessing if two seemingly related effects stem from the same cause, and
conducting autocorrelation tests preliminary to constructing a control chart (Faiq et
al., 2018).

vi. Histogram

Histograms are vertical bar charts that depict the central tendency, spread, and pattern
of a statistical distribution, without considering the impact of time. Each bar
represents the relative frequency of a variable (Duff, 2015 and Tague, 2005). They are
suitable when the data are numerical and you want to visualize the distribution's
shape, particularly for assessing whether a process's output follows a normal
distribution, evaluating the capability of a process to meet customer requirements,
examining the output pattern of a supplier's process, detecting changes in a process
over time, comparing the outputs of multiple processes, and conveying the data
distribution effectively to others (Faiq et al., 2018).

Figure 5: Example of Histogram

vii. Stratification

35
Stratification involves categorizing data, individuals, or objects into distinct groups or
layers, serving as a method utilized alongside other data analysis techniques. When
disparate data from various sources or categories are combined, it can obscure the
data's significance. This method of data collection and analysis segregates the data to
unveil underlying patterns (Tague, 2005). Stratification is employed prior to data
collection, when dealing with data originating from different sources or conditions
like shifts, days of the week, suppliers, or diverse population groups, and when data
analysis necessitates distinguishing between various sources or conditions. Figure 6
outlines a systematic approach to applying fundamental Quality Management tools.
Similar structured problem-solving methodologies have been endorsed by numerous
researchers (Tennant, 2001; Dale and McQuirter, 1998; Straker, 1995) and are
prevalent in best practice industrial settings.

Figure 6: A structured Approach to the Application of qualitative tools

Each approach should be used in the right place at the right time. Table 2 represents
more information on the tools and techniques including the reason and the time to
apply them. It seems the Tables provide valuable guidelines for analysers as well as
decision makers to employ most effective approaches.

36
Table 2: Tools, Including the Reason and the Time to Apply Them

2.9.5 Project Variation Order Control Tools in Cost

Cost control in construction is the process by which managers keep expenses under
control by managing labour, material, and overhead costs to ensure that the project
finishes on budget (Taylor, 2022). During the execution of a project, procedures for
project control and record-keeping become indispensable tools to managers and other
participants in the construction process. These tools serve the dual purpose of
recording the financial transactions that occur as well as giving managers an
indication of the progress and problems associated with a project. According to (Watt,
2014), the following are mentioned as tools used to control cost variations.

 Cost Estimate

The cost estimation tool is utilized in the initiation phase, where users are responsible
for evaluating the financial viability of a specific project estimate. In project
management, cost estimation involves predicting the financial and other resources
necessary to complete a project within a defined scope. It encompasses all elements
essential for the project, including materials and labour, and calculates a total amount
that determines the project's budget. Autodesk (2023) outlines three crucial steps for
construction professionals to manage and streamline costs in their projects, which
include addressing the underlying causes of cost overruns, mitigating project risks
through appropriate technology, and selecting suitable cloud software to enhance cost
workflows.

 Budget

The tool is employed in the planning phase, during which users undertake strategic
planning by assessing comprehensive cost estimates and then adapting them into a
budgetary structure for control and monitoring purposes. Typically, the initial detailed
cost estimate is transformed into a project budget, which serves as a management
guide. As noted by Watt (2014), specific components in the detailed cost estimate are
designated as job cost elements.

37
  Cost Monitoring

This is used during the execution phase. At this stage, users monitor their spending to
prevent excessive or unnecessary expenses, ensuring that their spending aligns with
the established budgets (Budgeting and Monitoring of Personnel Costs, 1997).

2.10 Literature Review Summary

This section present s chapter reviewed literature on variation orders and their
implications on project performance. Variation orders can potentially occur in all
construction projects. They occur due to a number of reasons including; finance,
changes in minds of parties involved in the contract, weather conditions and
feasibility of construction, statutory changes, product improvement, and discrepancies
among contract documents. Two types of variation orders were identified namely
beneficial variation orders that lead to value improvement; and detrimental variation
orders that lead to value degradation.

Variation orders are issued in the form of site or contract instructions. However, not
all site instructions constitute variation orders. These included the instruction to vary
the design, quality of works and the instruction to resolve discrepancies between
contract documents. Under contractual conditions, a variation order is only valid if it
is confirmed in writing.

Three original agents for variation orders were identified including; the client, the
consultant and unspecified “others”. A comprehensive list of causes from the three
origin agents was developed. The literature suggested that the nature of works,
complexity of the project and selected procurement methods were factors influencing
the occurrence of variation orders on construction projects. In addition, there are
direct and indirect non value-adding costs or waste associated with variation orders.

The occurrence of variation orders lead to fluctuation of unexpected conditions and

uncertain workflow, hence the likely expansion of non-value-adding costs. The
occurrence of variation orders adversely impacts the performance of construction

38
projects by, for example, contributing to costs and time overruns. The frequent
occurrence of variation orders can affect the overall quality of works.

The literature also reviewed seven management tools developed by Kaoru Ishikawa
which are a set of graphical techniques identified as being very important in problem-
solving and determining the root cause of problems during management. These tools
are noted with many benefits for displaying data visually, helping identify and
prioritize areas that cause most problems, demonstrating relationships between
variables; establishing root causes, and showing the distribution of data. The main
goals of the tools are to increase communication and teamwork and aid detection of
the problems.

2.11 Conceptual Framework

Wiley (2017) defines the conceptual framework as a visual or written representation

that describes, either graphically or narratively, main elements of a new study, such as
key factors, concepts, or variables and their interrelationships. To devise a theoretical,
or descriptive, framework a study needs to identify the main variables, components,
themes and issues and the predicted or presumed relationships between them (Yin,
2014). To achieve the research aim and specific objectives, based on the arguments
and discussions of literature, the researcher generated some aspects related to research
purpose. Thus, this section summarizes the factors that emerged from the literature
review and organizes them into a conceptual framework. This provides the basis for
proceeding further in data collection, and links this research to the existing body of
knowledge and devises a theoretical or descriptive.

The conceptual framework for this study and the relationship between its elements are
shown in Figure 7. Based on the above literature review, the researchers have
identified a good number of factors causing variation orders which may be
responsible for affecting construction projects performance and identified effects of
variation orders that lead to delays, variations, and cost impacts affecting the overall
project performance. Also, a researcher reviewed the seven management tools
developed by Kaoru Ishikawa which are a set of graphical techniques identified as

39
being very important in problem-solving and helping to determine root cause of
problem during management. The main goals of the tools are to increase
communication and teamwork to aid the detection of problems. The fundamental
assumption in the conceptual framework is that the performance of railway
construction projects serves as the dependent variable, contributed by the independent
variables which are factors influencing variation orders which can be controlled and
tools for managing variation orders and intermediate variables, properly used of this
tools if applied during the process of construction can minimize the occurrence
variation orders. This will improve the project performance by reducing costs and
time overruns and improve quality and relationship.

40
Figure 7: Conceptual Framework of the Study

41
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Overview

The chapter presents the processes that were employed in data collection and analysis.
The components in this study include research methodologies, research design and
implementation of the sampling process, identification and measurement of variables,
techniques used for data collection, processing, and data analysis, the expected
results, and ethical considerations.

3.2 Location of the study

Due to nature of the study, data was collected from the relevant stakeholders during
the construction of the SGR projects. The construction of the SGR railway system is
categorized in five distinct phases and will cover a total of 1,219 kilometres. The
initial phase involved the development of a section from Dar es Salaam to Morogoro
(300km). The second phase from Morogoro to Makutopora section (422 km). The
third phase from Makutopora to Tabora (294 km). The fourth phase from Tabora to
Isaka section (130 Km) and the fifth phase, which marks the final section, will involve
the construction from Isaka to Mwanza section, (249 Km). Data was collected from
Phases/lots 1, 2 and 5 of the rail system, which involves the headquarters in Dar es
Salaam, Dodoma and Mwanza, sections, the sites are still under on-going
construction.

3.3 Research Design

Research design is a plan of action for collecting, organizing, and analysing data with
the objective of combining the relevance of the research with the economy in
procedure (Kothari, 2019). The study adopted a cross–sectional design to explore the
Variation Orders on the performance of the Railway Construction Projects. The
design was chosen due to its high degree of accuracy, quickness, ease, and cheap use.
The study involved collection of data at a specific point in time from a singular entity.
The researcher concurrently used the quantitative and qualitative methods in the same
phase of the study process to interact with the respondents. The contact method were
42
used to collect necessary information using an interview guide and documentation.
The design also was useful as it allowed the researcher to analyse the quantitative and
qualitative data separately but interpret the results together.

3.4 Target Population

A population is the entire group that one intends to draw conclusions about. In
research, a population does not always refer to people. It can mean a group containing
elements of anything you want to study, such as objects, events, organizations,
countries, species, organisms (Bhandari, 2020). In the case of the present study a
population included;

(a) Due to nature of this study, the unity of analysis were Monthly Construction
Progressive Reports, generated between May 2017 and August 2023. The reports
were desk reviewed. Contract documents also were reviewed during the study.

Monthly Construction Progress Reports are reports which the Contractor prepares and
submits to the Consultant. The initial report encompasses the time frame until the
conclusion of the initial calendar month following the commencement date. Monthly
reports are then submitted, with each report being due within 7 days following the
conclusion of the corresponding period. The reporting process continues until the
Contractor successfully completes all the remaining tasks that were acknowledged to
be incomplete as of the specified completion date shown in the Taking-Over
Certificate for the Works.

The contents in Construction Monthly Progress Reports are (a) Project summary (b)
working location charts and description of work (c) Project overall status d) earned
value analysis (e)interim payment certificate status (f) design status (g) QA/QC status
h)contractor correspondence (i)Material mobilization status (j)manufacturer, supplier
and subcontractor status (k)machinery mobilization status l)personnel status
(m)Variation claims and issues n)Picture from site (o)Weather status and (p) HSSE
report for the month.

(b) Different parties in the SGR construction project professionals working for client,
contractors, and consultants were involved in the study as key informants.

43
 i. Professional working for client; the target client for this study is governmental
organization responsible for the construction of SGR which is the Tanzania
Railway Corporation (TRC).
ii. Professional working for consulting firms. The target consulting firm for this
study are consultants working in the SGR construction project, the firm known
as KORAIL JV. KORAIL JV is a joint venture of eight companies from
different countries i.e. KORAIL, CHEIL, DMEC, UNITEC, MULTITEC,
BARSYL, SSF and RINA.
iii. Professional working for construction companies, these are China Civil
Engineering Construction (CCECC) and China Railway Construction
Corporation (CRCC) and YAPI MERKEZI.

3.5 The Sample and Sampling Procedure

3.5.1 Sample size

A sample size is defined as the representative of the population from a large

population group for a certain research purpose (Patton, 2018). A total of 68 monthly
construction progressive reports from 1, 2 and 5 construction lots were desk reviewed
and analysed. Eighty percentage of the data (46 reports) were collected from lots 1
and 2 during data collection, during this process the construction of the SGR project
was at the completion stage. This made the availability of monthly reports narrating
variation orders during constructions of projects were available. From lot 5, 20% of
the data (22 reports) were collected, while the implementation of the project was at
the mid-stage of implementation so the monthly report narrating variation orders was
relatively limited. Reports were intensively reviewed to generate quantifiable data
during the study.

Morse (2000) and Blaikie (2018), recommends a sample of 30 - 150 respondents for
in-depth interviews. However, ten (10) respondents are also accepted in case similar
segments are being built within the population. In this case there were three parties
involved i.e. the client, consultant and contractor. Data were collected from 12
respondents as key informants, 3 respondents from each part (this includes senior
project managers, consultants, quantity surveyors and civil engineers). Their status as

44
key informants was based on their skilled knowledge or high level of technical-know-
how on the variation changes during the construction.

3.5.2 Sampling Technique

In this study, purposive sampling was done to select the study area and study
population. According to Kumar (2019) and Kothari (2019) the purposive sampling
technique provides opportunities for the researcher to obtain subjects of desired
characteristics. The purpose of sampling is to provide a practical method for carrying
out data collection and processing components of research and ensuring the sample is
representative of the entire population (Kothari, 2019). A purposive sampling method
were adopted to select the respondents for in-depth interviews and the mentioned
reports to be reviewed.

3.6 Data Collection

The study collected both primary and secondary data. Most of the primary data was
qualitative which was gathered through interviewing key respondents. With regards to
secondary data, much emphasis was on generating quantitative data through
previously documented railway construction reports.

3.6.1 Desk Review

Desk review is a process where an individual examines the existing documents or data
related to a specific topic to gather information, where qualitative and quantitative
research can be conducted (Owa, 2023). In this study, the researcher intensively
reviewed the SGR Monthly Construction Progress Reports for 5 years commencing
May 2017 to date. In addition, contract documents and all other documents related to
study were reviewed. The study focused on the Variation Orders on the performance
of Railway Construction Projects. A total of 68 monthly Construction progressive
reports on the above-mentioned factors were reviewed from the two construction lots.
Checklist tool was used to collect data during the study (Appendix No.1). The
summary of data collection methods and analysis tools for each objective are shown
in table 3.

45
 3.6.2 Key Informant Interview

The interview was conducted using either face-to-face approach or via mobile phone
with the interviewer asking questions to selected individuals. The interview guide
questions used to gather information on the type, Source, contributing factors of
variation orders and tools for management of Variation Orders in the SGR
construction project (Appendix 2). A total of thirty (30) key informants from three
parties involved in the SGR construction were involved for in-depth interviews. The
data was recorded in a notebook when the interview was in progress.

3.7 Data analysis

3.7.1 Data collected from desk Review

Collected data from the desk was reviewed and analysed based on each specific
objective;

I. Specific objective I: Examine the source and frequency of variation orders in the
construction of SGR projects

On this specific objective, collected data was the type of variation orders occurred and
sources of variation. The recorded data was coded and analysed using the Statistical
Product and Service Solution (SPSS), which provided descriptive and inferential
statistics. The descriptive analysis measured the frequencies of variation orders and
sources, while inferential statistics, a simple chi-square was used to determine
associations in some variables, such as type of variation and source and type of
variation and its frequency of occurrence. A chi-square statistic is a measure of the
difference between the observed and expected frequencies of the outcomes of a set of
events or variables. It was also used to test the goodness of fit between an observed
distribution and a theoretical distribution of frequencies.

46
 II. Specific objective two: Identification of factors contributing to occurrence of
variation orders during the implementation of SGR construction projects.

In this specific objective, the data was collected on the causes that contributed to the
occurrence of variation orders. The collected data was analysed using descriptive
statistics (SPSS) which provided descriptive statistics. Factors that contributed to
occurrence of variation orders were identified.

III. Specific objective three: Determination of tools for management of Variation

Orders in the SGR construction projects’

With regards to this specific objective,

To understand the prevalent seven tools used in management of variation

orders in the SGR construction project from the desk review. The management
tools used in management were recorded, scored then ranked to determine
which tools had been used most frequently in managing variation orders at
different stages and those applied at least frequency. The Microsoft excel
software was used to analyse and generate Bar Charts.

During interviews with key informants, the interviewees were asked on their
understanding of the use of these seven management tools and how frequently
they were using and their functions. Also, we were asked on the challenges of
utilizing these tools.

Using collected data from objectives I, II and III the cause and effect diagram
was developed. Then, through brainstorming the solutions were identified. In
addition, together with the response of key informants, the researcher came up
with effective tools in managing variation in the SGR construction project.

3.7.2 Data from in-depth Interviews with Key informants

The collected qualitative data from Key Informants interviews; the specific objective
themes were categorized using different cards based on each specific objective. This
narrative analysis is expected to enrich discussions by combining them with data

47
 generated through the desk review study. This narrative analysis provided the basis
for making a conclusion and recommendations for the study.

Table 3: Summary of Data Collection Method and Analysis Tools

Specific objective Data Type Data Data Data analysis method

collection collection tool and software
method

i). To Examine the Type of Desk review Structured

● Descriptive and
source and variation order and in-depth Checklist and
frequency of occurred and interviews An interview Inferential
variation orders in sources of guide tools. analysis
the construction of variation.
Tools: SPSS
SGR projects.
software.

● Content Analysis.

ii). To analyse Causes and Desk review Structured

● Pareto,
factors contributing Impacts of and in-depth Checklist and
to the occurrence of Variation interviews An interview descriptive
variation orders Orders. guide tools. analysis.
during the SGR
Tools: SPSS software
construction project
and Microsoft Excel
implementation.
software

● Content Analysis.

iii). To establish -Current and Desk review Structured

● Scouring and
tools for proposed tools and in-depth Checklist and
management of for interviews. An interview ranking.
Variation Orders in management guide tools.
Tools: Microsoft
the SGR variation.
Excel software.
construction
projects. - Data type ● Content analysis.
collected in
specific
objectives (i)
and (ii).

48
49
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction to Results and Discussion

This chapter presents results and discusses findings from the desk study and
interviews. The type, source, frequency, factors, impact, tools for management of
variation orders during construction of SGR projects also are discussed.

4.2. Types and Source of Variation Orders and Their Frequency

In review of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project, it revealed that by May
2024, the Client, Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) had issued a total of 113
approvals for Variation Orders (VOs) submitted throughout the project. However, 17
VOs were rejected or cancelled, and 19 were kept under review. The analysed results
from the desk study revealed that higher the frequency for variation orders was
addition work (82.1%), while omission and substitution of work were found to be
relatively small in percentage (Figure 8). Inadequate strategic planning, variation in
site conditions and inadequate scoping or works by the client was found to primarily
be the cause behind additional works.

In the process of conducting the desk review, it was observed that additional works
involved the planning and implementation of DAWASA utility protection at specific
locations along the project route, as well as design and construction of the
Marshalling Yard Workshop and Dry Port Connection. In addition, there was
requirement for constructing a new Water Utility Connection at Soga Station within
Lot 1.

Based on the desk review study, it was noted that according to conditions of contract
for plant and design-build, if the employer wishes to omit any work from the
contractor's scope, they must issue a variation order to instruct the omission. In such
cases, the contractor was entitled to an extension of time and additional payment for
any consequent changes in its costs, as well as other relevant impacts on the project
schedule. It is also the contractor's responsibility to promptly notify the Engineer of

50
any omitted works that affect the contract price or the time for completion. As a
result, it was confirmed that no omissions of work were made during the construction
of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR).

It has been consistently observed that the client frequently issued instructions for
variation orders due to nature of the contract. This trend showcases the dynamic and
evolving nature of the project requirements, which often necessitate changes to the
original scope or specifications. The frequency of these variation orders indicates a
need for enhanced communication and alignment between the client and project
stakeholders to ensure that the project can effectively adapt to changing circumstances
while maintaining the overall coherence and quality. Furthermore, this pattern also
emphasizes the importance of proactive risk management and the ability to swiftly
accommodate modifications in order to deliver a successful project outcome that
aligns with the evolving client's needs and expectations.

90
80
70
Per cent (%)

60
50 82.1
40
30
20 17.9
10 0
0
Addition of works Omission of works Substution of works

Figure 8: Types of Variation Orders

4.2.1 Source of Variation Orders

Following a detailed desk review, it was discovered that the client has the authority to
guide the Engineer on various aspects of the project, including design changes. While
the Engineer can issue Variation Orders in response to these directives, it is ultimately

51
the client's influence that initiates the variation process. Clause 3.5 enables the
Engineer to direct the Contractor to implement Work Variations, and Clause 3.7
allows the Contractor to suggest changes in unforeseen circumstances. However, the
Engineer has the ultimate decision-making power when it comes to approving the
Contractor's proposed Variation Orders.

Following the analysis, the findings showed that the client was most frequently
originating from the agent of variation orders by 67%, this was closely followed by
the consultant by 19.3% and contractor by 12% (Table 5). The client was found to be
the main source of additional works because of failure to provide a clear and
comprehensive briefing on occurred changes during each of the construction stages.
Also, from the review it was noted that additional works were the results of failure of
the consultant to produce complete designs resulting in more required details during
different construction stages.

Table 4: Source (origin) of Orders of Variation Orders

Parameter Frequency Percentage
Client 59 67%
Consultant 17 19.3%
Contractor 12 12%

The interview with one of the senior engineers in one of the consultant company,
when asked on the type and cause of variation the response was that:

The client was primarily responsible for the variation orders due to the inadequate
detailed scope of work in the contract. Certain specifications, typically considered as
Employer's Requirements in the Design and Building Standard Gauge Railway (SGR)
projects, were not clearly outlined in the contract. The project's scope, quality, and
specifications were impacted by these factors. Firstly, the insufficiently defined scope
of work led to the incorporation of new items, expanding the project's complexity and
scope. Secondly, the construction's nature affected the quality of work, requiring
adjustments to meet standards. Finally, the unclear specified specifications presented
challenges in executing the project effectively and meeting requirements. These
findings highlights the need for clearer scope definitions, improved quality control

52
measures, and comprehensive specifications to ensure smooth project execution and
reduce potential variations or deviations. Discuss the percentage from sources and the
type of variations, how do the variation impact performance of contract etc.

4.2.2 The Association between Type and Source of Variation Orders in SGR
Construction

The association between the type and source of variation orders in the SGR
construction project is presented in Table 5. A chi-square analysis was carried out to
determine whether there was significant relationship between the type and source of
variation orders. In the results, the Pearson chi-square statistic was 11.766 and the p-
value = 0.017. Therefore, the results showed highly significant association between
the type and source of variation orders (P<0.05). From the findings it was found that
the client had contributed much to variation orders by addition of work by 46.5% and
substation of work 11.8%. This is also supported by Saki and Chunho (2022). The
study showed that the client contributed to high variation orders issued during the
building project lifecycle which ultimately resulted in the discrepancies between the
initial and final cost of construction.

Table 5: The Association between Type and Source of Variation Orders in SGR
Construction Project
Types of Variation Order
Source of Substitution of P-
Variation Additional work Omission of work work VALUE
Order (SVO) F (%) F (%) F (%)
Client 59 46.5 9 7.10 15 11.8
Consultant 17 13.4 1 0.8 8 6.3 0.017
Contractor 12 9.5 4 3.10 2 1.6

The analysis revealed the distribution patterns of variation orders (VOs) based on
their sources and types within a project context. Among the VOs types, additional
work was most frequent, especially in the client-driven changes (46.5%), indicating
clients' tendency to request scope expansions. Omission of work, though less
common, was often associated with consultants (7.1%), potentially reflecting design

53
optimizations. Substitution of work shows a more balanced distribution, with the
client being the most frequent initiator (11.8%).

In the study it was noted that the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project in Tanzania
encountered various instances necessitating addition works. These included the
construction of the Ilala Goods Shed and Ilala Yard through a Right of Way (ROR)
structure during the SGR Port Link Alignment phase. Additionally, Meter Gauge
Railway (MGR) restoration between Kilometers 0+000 and 0+963 involved platform
and track works. Furthermore, the project entailed designing and constructing
pedestrian crossings at Kilometer 66+450 and within Tushikamane Street in Lukoba
Ward, Morogoro Municipality (Kilometer 196+305). Lastly, the provision of a
standby full load generator at Morogoro Station was another example of an Addition
Work.

4.3 Factors contributing to occurrence of variation orders during the

implementation of the SGR construction projects.

In the second specific objective, the factors that contributed to the occurrence of
variation orders were reviewed and analysed. Also, the review was done on the
impact of variation orders to the project.

4.3.1 Factors contributing to occurrence of variation

Regarding the desk study, the findings showed that thirteen (13) factors of variation
orders were identified as part of answering the second objective. In the analysis, it
was noticed that nine (9) factors were more vivid in causing variation orders during
the SGR construction (Figure 9).

54
 Figure 9: Factors contributing to occurrence of VO

4.3.1.1 Insufficient Planning

Insufficient planning (96.7%) (Figure 9) or lack of critical evaluation of the client’s

briefing at the stage of project introduction was found to be the main cause of VOs
during the SGR construction project. The predominant cause is inadequate
examination of Employer Requirements (ER), leading to substantial adverse effects
on the project. This has resulted in misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the
client's actual needs and expectations, culminating in deliverables that deviate from
their anticipated outcomes. Consequently, this has necessitated re-work, caused
delays, incurred supplementary expenses, and potentially resulted in client
dissatisfaction.

For instance, during the development of the SGR, a variation order for the design
works for connection of Ilala goods shed and Ilala yard was raised on November 26 th,
2022. This variation order was necessitated by the fact that the initial design of the
Port Link alignment, intended for Meter Gauge Railway (MGR) operations, did not
include connecting these elements. Insufficient planning during the project's early
stages resulted in this late variation order, incurring a total additional cost of USD
284,098 (VAT Exclusive), which was subsequently approved by the TRC.

55
On December 23rd, 2022, a Variation Order was submitted for the design works for
restoration of MGR tracks and construction of an MGR platform at Dar es Salaam
station. The initial proposed cost for this variation order was USD 214,154 (VAT
Exclusive). After review, the TRC eventually approved the variation order on June 1 st,
2023, with a revised total cost of USD 266,725.74 (VAT Exclusive).

On August 31st, 2021, a Variation Order was raised for the relocation of the MGR line
and construction of the SGR Port Link Line. The total proposed cost for this variation
order was USD 2,706,410 (VAT Exclusive). The client, TRC, approved a portion of
the request on January 8th, 2022, for USD 1,741,734.89 (VAT Exclusive). Later, on
November 15th, 2021, an additional USD 2,200,000 (VAT exclusive) was approved
by the TRC as a provisional sum.

4.3.1.2 The Design Modifications

Design errors and omissions, necessitating design modifications, were identified as

the second most significant cause (73.3%) of variation orders during the SGR
construction project (Figure 9).The review noted that, Variation Order was submitted
for the enlargement of Dar es Salaam passenger station, including building the station
tower. The total proposed cost for this variation order was USD 34,600,000.00 (VAT
Exclusive). After review, the TRC approved a provisional sum of USD 33,410,941.40
(VAT Exclusive) for the project on August 30th, 2019.

Similarly, to the Dar es Salaam Passenger Station project, the Morogoro station also
necessitated a Variation Order (VO) due to its enlargement. The proposed cost for this
VO was USD 13,390,000.00 (excluding VAT), and after review, the Tanzania
Railway Corporation (TRC) approved a provisional sum of USD 12,462,400.00
(excluding VAT) on May 22nd, 2019.

This enlargement stemmed from a request by the employer and instruction from the
engineer. The initial designated area for the Morogoro Passenger Station, as specified
in point 11.4 of the Employer Requirements (ER), was 367.5 M 2. However, the
revised target area was significantly larger by 4,320 M2.

56
In response, the Contractor submitted a conceptual design for the expanded station,
which received approval from the Engineer. Subsequently, citing Sub-Clause 13.3, the
Engineer requested a Variation Order proposal from the Contractor. This proposal
included architectural layouts based on the approved design and a detailed breakdown
of the "Additional Works" required for the enlargement. These additional works
encompassed design, concrete, infrastructure, finishing, mechanical and electrical
works, facade, roof and steel works, landscaping, and road works.

Also, during the review it was noted that a Variation Order (VO) proposed the
enlargement of several medium-sized passenger stations (Soga, Pugu, Ruvu, and
Ngerengere) at a total cost of USD 13,390,000.00 (excluding VAT). However, the
Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) only approved a significantly lower provisional
sum of USD 1,080,661.86 (excluding VAT) on May 22nd, 2019. This discrepancy
necessitated an amendment to the initial Scope of Works as outlined in the Employer
Requirements (ER). The amendment mandated the Contractor to undertake additional
construction activities to expand the internal areas of these stations. These activities
included clearing and grubbing works, mass earthworks, excavation works,
construction of station buildings with amenities, installation of signal and
telecommunication systems, implementation of a railway management system, and
lastly, the provision of professional services for detailed design, geotechnical studies,
and hydrological studies.

It was revealed that Changes made to the initial plans (specification modifications)
were a common reason for adjustments (Variation Orders or VOs) on the Standard
Gauge Railway (SGR) construction project. These changes had both positive and
negative effects. On the positive side, the updates improved the design and boosted
the overall quality of the project. However, on the negative side, the changes led to
delays, caused costs to go over budget, disrupted construction activities, made it
harder to manage risks, and ultimately created dissatisfaction among those involved in
the project (stakeholders).

Errors and omissions in design were also found to be one of the major causes of
variation orders (Aldiabat et al., 2020) as it lead to delay and loss of productivity. If

57
not rectified during the design phase would eventually be done in the construction
phase and initiate variation to implement corrective measures. In supporting these
findings, Hansen et al., and (2020) found that errors and omission in design was the
third most important cause of variations.

4.3.1.3 Difference in Site Conditions

During review of the SGR construction project, it was determined that differing site
conditions accounted for 61.7% of the variation orders, making it the third most
significant cause (Figure 9). During the study it was found that during construction of
the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project, unforeseen ground conditions
necessitated a deviation from the originally planned design and construction
methodology. To address these discrepancies, the project team implemented Variation
Orders (VOs). These VOs formally documented the required changes, which could
encompass design modifications, utility re-locations, or the adoption of alternative
construction techniques.

Also, it was noted that, on December 13th, 2022, a proposal was submitted for the re-
location of DAWASA's existing utilities at overpasses PO 06-1, OP9-1 and OP11-1.
The total proposed cost for this project was TZS 83,915,498.09 (VAT Exclusive). The
client, TRC, reviewed and approved the proposal on December 23 rd, 2022, allocating
a final budget of TZS 80,798,011.00 (VAT Exclusive).A Variation Order requesting
the re-location of LT Lines at overpasses OP6-1, OP9-1 and OP11-1 connection roads
and Pugu Station Access Roads was submitted on November 24 th, 2022. The proposed
total cost for this variation order was TZS 63,092,124.81 (VAT Exclusive). After
review, the Client, TRC, approved a provisional sum of TZS 49,517,061.42 (VAT
Exclusive) for the project on February 13th, 2023.

Also, unforeseen site conditions during the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project
necessitated Variation Orders (VOs), impacting project delivery both in positive and
negative ways. While, VOs have led to improved design quality and potentially
prevented re-work through proactive adjustments, they also introduce delays, cost
increases, and workflow inefficiencies.

58
The guidelines highlighted the importance of providing sufficient site information as a
major issue in any construction project. This finding is supported by Kusi (2021), who
identified differing site conditions as the third most important cause of variation
orders, and Ismail et al., (2012), who also agreed that differing site conditions were
one of the most important causes of variations.

4.3.1.4 Ineffective Site Management

Ineffective site management was found to be the fourth most important cause of
variation orders during the SGR construction project by 45 % (Figure 9). The review,
identified inefficiencies in site management related to coordination, oversight, and on-
site supervision. The first instance manifests as a communication breakdown between
the Contractor and specific Sub-contractors, stemming from disagreements
concerning both payment terms and performance fulfillment. This highlights a
potential lack of clear contractual agreements or ineffective dispute resolution
mechanisms.

Conversely, the second example underscores a positive aspect - the existence of a

strong partnership between the project stakeholders. This includes the
Client/Contractor and external entities such as DAWASA, TANESCO, RUWASA,
TANROADS, demonstrating a collaborative approach. This effective inter-agency
cooperation is demonstrably crucial for addressing challenges encountered during the
construction projects, as exemplified by the SGR Port Link, Overpass 06.09, and 11.

Also, it was noted inadequate communication and performance issues between the
professional team and the contractor emerged as the primary contributors to
breakdown in site management at SGR construction sites. This lack of effective
collaboration resulted in a cascade of challenges and inefficiencies. One prominent
consequence of insufficient site management was the need for re designing and re-
locating various infrastructure components. This resulted in project delays, heightened
safety risks, and difficulties in resource allocation. These ramifications impacted a
broad spectrum of construction activities, encompassing pipeline installation, utility

59
connections, transmission line re-location, and electrical infrastructure projects across
diverse locations within the railway construction zone.

In their analysis of the consequences of inefficient site management practices, Zain et

al., (2021) discovered that such practices can adversely affect project outcomes,
particularly by causing delays in project completion, cost overruns, sub-par building
quality, and implications for safety and environmental concerns. Tariq and Gardenia
(2023), in their study findings, they identified ineffective site management as a
significant factor contributing to variation orders in construction projects.

4.3.1.5 The Change in Specifications

The fifth most important cause of variation orders in the Standard Gauge Railway
(SGR) construction project was changes in specification (36.7%).

Inadequate project objectives can contribute to a high frequency of specification

changes within construction projects. This association was evident in the current desk
review, where a scrutiny of the Plant and Design-Build contract revealed that
specification changes arise primarily when the employer or engineer mandates
alterations to the originally outlined specifications.

During the construction phase of the Standard Gauge Railway Project (SGR), the
initial specifications underwent substantial revisions across various domains. These
domains included railway works performance design, signalling and
telecommunication performance criteria, passenger station functionality, maintenance
facility requirements, and livestock crossing design. These modifications introduced a
complex array of challenges that hindered project execution. Also, it was noted on
December 8th, 2023, a Variation Order (VO) was submitted by the Contractor for the
hauling of three (3) electric locomotives and twenty-seven (27) passenger coaches
pertaining to Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Lot 1. The total cost associated with this
proposal amounted to USD 1,754,446.04 (excluding VAT). Subsequently, on
December 16th, 2023, the Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) approved USD
1,172,167.88 (excluding VAT) as provisional sums, followed by an additional
approval of USD 1,460,100.12 (excluding VAT) on January 2nd, 2024.

60
Further review noted that in the initial design of the locomotive did not include the
provisions for a front camera. However, at the request of the employer, modifications
were made to the design to allow for the installation of a front camera.

The desk revealed a significant link between unclear project objectives and the
frequency of specification changes, exemplified by the Plant and Design-Build
contract for the SGR. The latter highlighted that changes primarily arose from
alterations mandated by the employer or engineer to the originally outlined
specifications, underscoring the importance of well-defined project objectives. The
SGR project itself experienced extensive specification changes throughout its
construction, resulting in delays, increased costs, disputes, and inefficiencies. For
instance, a Variation Order submitted by the Contractor for the hauling of
locomotives and coaches for Lot 1 of the SGR incurred a cost exceeding USD 1.7
million (excluding VAT) due to the addition of front cameras to locomotives. The far-
reaching consequences of these changes included delays, increased costs, disputes,
and inefficiencies, emphasizing the importance of minimizing specification changes
to ensure optimal project performance.

Building on this observation, Hansen (2020) highlighted those modifications in

project scope, design, or specifications can influence material quantities, labour needs,
and overall project expenses. This finding was further corroborated well by Ermias
and Sujayath (2020), who identified a change of specification as a significant driver of
variation orders, impacting the overall project performance.

4.3.1.6 Unrealistic Contract

During the desk review it was noted unfeasible contracts between Client, Consultant
and Contractor. The existence of unviable agreements in the implementation of the
Standard Gauge Railway project has resulted in the notable consequences, notably
observed from Dar es Salaam – Makutopora (DSM-DMD) segment. These
impracticable contracts, involving the three stakeholders (Client, Consultant, and
Contractor), have resulted in change orders and diverse obstacles. A prominent
concern identified was the inadequacy of details in the Employer’s Requirements

61
(ER), which constituted 28.3% as the sixth most significant factor contributing to
variations in the SGR project (Figure 9).

Section 5.6 of the Employer Requirements for the Standard Gauge Railway Project
stipulates the provision of vehicles for the Engineer, staff, and Employer throughout
the contract period. These vehicles, which must be new, licensed, and insured,
encompassed four categories: 4WD station wagons, heavy-duty pickups, inspection
motor trolleys, and heavy-duty motor trolleys. The Contractor assumes responsibility
for vehicle maintenance and replacement when necessary. However, the document
lacks clarity regarding the ownership and responsibility for the drivers following
project completion.

It was analysed a critical gap existed within the Employer Requirements (ERs)
regarding the procedures for project handover. This includes lack of guidance on the
Employer's Validation and Verification processes, essential for ensuring project
deliverables meet the agreed-upon standards. In addition, the ERs failed to address
product verification and validation, a crucial step in guaranteeing the quality of
supplied materials and equipment. A discrepancy arose concerning the Engineer's and
Employer's residences. The Employer Requirements (ERs) did not specify the precise
number of needed houses. Consequently, the construction of these residences
necessitated Variation Orders (VOs) to address this oversight in the initial project
scope.

A desk review of the Client-Consultant-Contractor contract (GCC 9 FIDIC Yellow

Book) revealed a "Tests on Completion" clause outlining procedures and
requirements for verifying compliance with contractual specifications and
performance criteria. The Contractor typically conducts these tests under the
Engineer's supervision, ensuring adherence to specified tests, standards, timing, and
documentation. Successful completion of these tests is critical in achieving Practical
Completion and initiating the Defects Notification Period. However, deficiencies
were observed in instances where the Consultant receives the work upon completion
by the Contractor. This raises concerns about how the Client can guarantee the work's
quality. It is recommended that the Client outline their quality assurance plan in the

62
Employer Requirements (ERs) to ensure work meets the necessary standards. This
may involve specifying the quality assurance tests they intend to conduct, allowing
the Contractor to factor these requirements into their project bids.

Ambiguities within the Employer Requirements (ERs) for the Tanzania Standard
Gauge Railway (SGR) project contributed to the issuance of Variation Orders (VOs),
potentially affecting project performance. These ambiguities manifested in the lack of
clear guidelines regarding driver responsibility for project vehicles after completion,
procedures for project handover, and processes for quality verification. Furthermore,
the omission of information concerning the number of Engineer's and Employer's
residences necessitated a confirmed VO to address this oversight. It is plausible that
these issues have resulted in increased project costs, schedule delays arising from
negotiations, and potential communication challenges among stakeholders.

Unrealistic contract duration imposed by clients during construction was also found to
be one of the causes of variation order and led to delay in Moroccan construction
projects (Bajjou and Chafi, 2020). Other identified causes were re-work due to
construction errors, excessive sub-contracting, delay in obtaining permits from
governmental agencies, ineffective planning and scheduling, lack of collective
planning, and unskilled workforce.

4.3.1.7 Lack of Coordination among Involved Parties in the Project Management

The seventh most important cause of variation orders in the SGR construction project
was lack of coordination among involved parties in the project construction and
management by 20% (Figure 9). An analysis of the Dar es Salaam passenger terminal
revealed inadequacies in restroom facilities. These facilities were insufficient to
accommodate the diverse needs of passengers traveling to various destinations,
individuals utilizing the terminal for commercial activities, and departmental
personnel. This highlights a potential oversight in the initial planning phase regarding
passenger volume and usage patterns.

Furthermore, the initial project scope for the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR)
development omitted the construction of the Port Link. This omission is particularly

63
noteworthy considering the project's primary objective – the transportation of cargo,
particularly from port, and passengers from diverse locations. This oversight has
likely necessitated significant modifications and potentially impacted project
efficiency.

A similar deficiency in coordination was evident in the establishment of pedestrian

crossings within the Freight and Passenger Yards along the Dar es Salaam-Morogoro
SGR section. Inadequate coordination during the SGR project implementation has
demonstrably resulted in a cascade of challenges and complexities. These include, but
are not limited to, the need for infrastructure relocation, project plan revisions, delays,
utility conflicts, schedule discrepancies, cost escalations, decision-making delays, and
safety concerns. Ultimately, insufficient communication and collaboration among
project stakeholders appear to be the root cause of these implementation hurdles.

According to Ali et al., (2021), the study found that lack of proper coordination can
lead to significant challenges, including budget inaccuracies and cost overruns. If the
design and cost consultancies are not adequately synchronized, the project's estimated
cost can deviate significantly from the actual expenditure. This can result in disputes
between clients and contractors, delays in project delivery, and in extreme cases, even
failure in a project. So, investing in effective coordination from the beginning is
essential.

4.3.1.8 Lack of Judgment and Experience from the Consultants

Lack of judgment and experience from the consultants’ examples in anticipating the
risks may occur during the construction process and failure in making prompt
decisions in some of uncertain conditions, was found to be another important cause of
variation orders by 8.3% (Figure 9). It was found that prevalence of errors during
construction underscores the critical role of consultants in design-build projects.
Ideally, consultants guide employers (Clients) in defining their needs before contracts
are formed. Their responsibilities encompass providing design expertise, cost
estimations, quality assurance benchmarks, project management support, regulatory
compliance advice, risk assessments, and the like. By engaging competent
consultants, Clients can leverage their specialized knowledge throughout the project

64
lifecycle, ensuring that their requirements are met, risks are mitigated, and projects
are delivered successfully within the predetermined parameters.

However, shortcomings have been identified in the preparation of Engineering

Requirements (ERs), where the Consultant plays a vital role in advising on how to
avoid future challenges and minimize Variation Orders (VOs). This has resulted in
weaknesses within the initial contracts between the Client, Consultant, and
Contractor. These contracts lacked crucial details concerning project scope, design
specifications, cost estimates, timelines, quality assurance processes, change order
procedures, payment terms, warranty information, dispute resolution mechanisms, and
health and safety requirements – all of which are essential for smooth Standard Gauge
Railway (SGR) construction.

Lack of significant experience of consultants was ranked as the second significant

factor that was causing variation orders in road and building projects in Egypt (Mittal
et al., 2020), in the study of exploring the significant factors that influence delays in
construction projects.

4.3.2 Impact of Variation Orders (VO)

The study also identified the effects of variation orders on project performance, to
achieve this the study organized the most related effects from the literature, and
through detailed desk review and opinions of professionals it was possible to
determine the most important effect of variation orders (Table 6).
No Parameter Frequency Percent (%)
1. Timing effect 57 95.0
2. Increase in overhead expenses 53 88.3
3. Unplanned site meetings 46 76.7
4. Rework time cost 40 66.7
5. Increase of time management 38 63.3
6. Increased in project cost 37 61.7
7. Cost for redesign 12 20.0
8. Expenses of idle plan machine 4 6.7
9. Cost of administration of the 4 6.7
Variation order

65
Table 6: The Effect of Variation Orders (VO)

4.3.2.1 Time effect (Time overrun)

During the desk review it was found that another factor was time effects (95%) (Table
6). The timing effect, also known as “time overrun”, was identified as one of the
primary impacts of variation orders on the performance of the SGR construction
projects in Tanzania, expressed as a percentage. Customers’ demands that their
construction projects be completed within the shortest possible time frames. Projects
that are completed as quickly as possible are expected to result in cost savings. Tiny
variations may not significantly delay the overall project completion, but they do
impact the progress. However, repeated minor and big variations have a serious
impact on the project, resulting in delays in its completion. For Instance, it was
reviewed that the construction of SGR Lot 1 (Dar es Salaam – Morogoro) commenced
on May 2nd, 2017, with a stipulated contract duration of 30 months. This initial
timeline projected completion by November 1 st, 2019. However, the project
encountered delays, necessitating a series of Extension of Time (EOT) requests. The
first EOT (EOT No. 1) of 36 months was granted, revising the completion date to
April 30th, 2020. Subsequent EOTs followed: EOT No. 3 (42 months), EOT No. 4 (48
months), and EOT No. 5 (55 months granted out of 66 requested), pushing the
completion dates to October 31st, 2020, April 21st, 2021, and November 18th, 2021,
respectively. EOT No. 6 (65 months granted out of 77 requested) extended the
deadline to September 11th, 2022. Similarly, EOT No. 7 (77 months granted out of 85
requested) reset the completion date to September 15 th, 2023. Finally, EOT No. 8 (87
months granted out of 88 requested) established the current anticipated completion
date of July 16th, 2024.

Additionally, The Contractor has presented a comprehensive claim for an eighth

Extension of Time (EOT No. 8) to project completion date. This claim was
substantiated by referencing Sub-Clauses 8.4 and 20.1 of the governing General

66
Conditions of Contract. As of June 30th, 2023, this claim is considered interim,
awaiting your determination in accordance with Sub-Clause 3.5. The Contractor
assures continued dedication to project completion, aiming to achieve it before the
requested extension becomes necessary. It is noteworthy that the revised Programme
of Works does not currently account for the potential impact of several Variation
Orders (VOs) recently proposed by the Employer. These outstanding VOs encompass
the Ilala Good Shed and Yard, MGR Restoration, Pedestrian Crossings at designated
locations, and the provision of a Standby Generator at Morogoro Station. The
Contractor reserves the right to make further revisions to the Programme of Works if
any or all of these proposed VOs are ultimately agreed upon by both parties.

Considering Extension of Time (EOT No.1) interim claim submission dated January
31st, 2019, the Contractor for the Standard Gauge Railway Line from Dar es Salaam to
Morogoro requested a 181-day extension and additional compensation. The request
cited delays caused by the Employer's failure to provide full site access, tardy
decisions and approvals, delayed Engineer's instructions, and utility relocation issues.
While reserving the right for further claims and having been in the process of
evaluating the final compensation amount, the Contractor referenced specific clauses
in the General Conditions of Contract to justify the extension. This resulted in a
proposed revised project completion date of April 30 th, 2020. A separate section
detailing the final compensation amount was to be submitted once the evaluation was
complete.

The Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Lot 1 in Tanzania has experienced significant
delays, with the initial 30-month construction period extended to a projected
completion date of July 16th, 2024. This eight-fold increase in timeframe was an
attribute to a series of Extension of Time (EOT) requests submitted by the Contractor.
While the Contractor remains committed to finishing the project, their claim for the
latest EOT (No. 8) awaits your determination. It is important to note that the impact of
several proposed Variation Orders (VOs) on the schedule was yet accounted for.
These outstanding VOs, if approved, could necessitate further revisions to the
Programme of Works.

67
Time overrun or delay in completion of schedule was also ranked as one of the first
most important effects of variation order by Rubaiei et al., (2022) and Saki and
Chunho, (2022). According to Osman and Mohamud, (2022), their study findings
suggested that time delays had a negative impact on the construction organizations,
resulting in lowering of income and higher project's final costs, meaning that time
delays influenced cost overrun.

4.3.2.2 Increase in Overhead expenses

Direct and indirect cost increase was found to be another most important effect of
variation orders on the SGR construction project by 88.3% (Table 6). It is expected
for the project cost to increase due to some variation in the project that is why every
project allocates a contingency sum of funds to offset for possible variations in the
project while keeping the overall project cost as planned. However, frequent and
major variation leads to cost overrun in the contingency sum of funds. During the
desk review and in support with interviewed professions, it was found that in the SGR
construction has been frequent and major variation orders from the client for example
delaying in meeting project deadlines, which could lead to higher costs associated
with prolonged construction activities, re-scheduling of work, and additional
coordination efforts.

Unforeseen challenges in land acquisition, right-of-way issues, and interruptions in

the flow of construction materials and equipment, and unexpected technical or
logistical complications may also have contributed to increased overhead expenses.
Additionally, the need for additional resources, such as vehicles, equipment, and
manpower, to address these challenges and ensure timely completion of the project
can further drive-up overhead costs. Furthermore, complexities in coordinating
various aspects of the construction, such as utility relocations, infrastructure
modifications, and design changes, May finally resulted in increased administrative
and management expenses.

4.3.2.3 Unplanned Site meeting

During the desk study review it was found that unplanned site meeting was also
another major effect by 76.7% (Table 6), during the construction of SGR. The

68
construction projects related to the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) has experienced
numerous unplanned site meetings due to various factors such as design complexities,
unexpected challenges, changes in the project requirements, and coordination issues
with utility providers, local authorities, and stakeholders. These factors have led to
disruptions in the planned workflow, requiring additional time and resources to
address delays and ensure smooth progress. In addition, technical challenges,
logistical issues, and environmental considerations have also contributed to the
occurrence of unplanned meetings. Consequently, there has been a need for frequent
coordination and communication among stakeholders to address unforeseen
challenges and potential delays. Proactive communication strategies and regular
project updates could have minimized the need for such meetings and their associated
impact on project timelines. In conclusion, effective project management and
proactive communication strategies are essential to address these issues and minimize
their impact on project timelines and operations.

4.3.2.4 Rework Time Cost

In the desk review it was also found that another factor was re-work time cost by 40
% (Table 6). It was noted that the Tanzania Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project
has faced significant challenges due to Variation Orders (VOs), which resulted in
increased costs and potential schedule delays. One of the primary sources of these
challenges has been the need for re-work due to changes in the project scope. For
instance, the VOs for enlarging Dar es Salaam and Morogoro stations, as well as
several medium-sized stations, have required substantial re-work and "Additional
Works" by the Contractor.

These enlargements have necessitated design changes, construction activities, and

professional services, resulting in increased costs. The proposed costs for these
changes are highlighted in the VOs, demonstrating the direct financial impact of re-
work. The significant cost difference between proposed and approved VOs suggests
potential negotiations or disagreements over the additional work required. Moreover,
integrating these changes into the project timeline could lead to schedule delays.

69
The Morogoro station enlargement was a prime example of this issue. A nearly 12-
fold increase in designated station area was required due to an Employer request and
Engineer instruction, leading to substantial re-work in terms of design, construction,
and potentially demolition of existing structures. The VO process, including proposal
submission, review, and approval, could also have added time to the project schedule.

The re-work time costs associated with these VOs most likely had a negative impact
on the overall performance of the SGR project. While the specific cost and schedule
delays are quantified, the substantial changes and rework suggest a potential for
increased project expenses and time overruns.
4.3.2.5 Increase in Time management

In the desk review it was also noted that increase of time management by 38% was
another factor. A review of the data indicated the significant impact of Variation
Orders (VOs) on the Tanzania Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project's time
management. The sheer volume of VOs issued (113 approved, 19 pending) had
resulted in a multitude of challenges that disrupted the project's established schedule
and timeline. These constant changes necessitated additional planning efforts, design
alterations, and construction activities, leading to delays and an increased workload.

Furthermore, the negotiation and approval process for VOs, involving the Contractor,
Engineer, and Client, had introduced a time-consuming element that further extended
the overall project timeline. The significant cost increase associated with approved
VOs had also created financial pressure. With only a portion of the funding formally
secured, the remaining amount introduced financial uncertainty, potentially delaying
the project as stakeholders navigated funding solutions.

Also, it was reviewed that the prevalence of VOs also suggested potential
shortcomings in the initial planning and design phases. Unforeseen issues arising
during construction, likely a consequence of inadequate upfront planning, had
necessitated extensive modifications. Addressing these issues retroactively required
additional time and resources, further burdening the project's time management
requirements.

70
Effective communication amongst stakeholders had been paramount when managing
a high volume of VOs. However, potential misunderstandings or disagreements
during communication processes could have further delayed the approval and
implementation of these changes.

The eight Extension of Time (EOT) requests submitted by the Contractor served as a
tangible indicator of the project's struggle to meet its initial deadline. Each EOT
extension reflected the time required to implement VOs and address the associated
challenges.

In conclusion, the Tanzania SGR project served as a cautionary tale, highlighting the
importance of meticulous upfront planning, clear communication protocols, and well-
defined change management procedures. By implementing such measures,
stakeholders could have minimized disruptions and maintained efficient time
management in construction projects.

4.3.2.6 Increase of Project Cost

During the desk review it was observed that another factor was increase of project
cost by 37 % (Table 6). The review of SGR project revealed a substantial contract
cost of USD 1,215,282,000.00. The approved VOs initially amounted to a requested
sum of USD 155,899,516.44. Following evaluation, the TRC determined a total value
of USD 109,375,453.23 for these approved VOs. It is noteworthy that only a portion
of this amount (USD 88,654,193.87) has been formally approved as provisional sums,
with the remaining approved amount (USD 9,027,997.48) lacking a designated
funding source. A substantial impact, likely negative, can be attributed to the prevalence of
Variation Orders (VOs) issued throughout the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) construction
project in Tanzania. This conclusion is drawn from the sheer volume of submitted VOs: 113
approved, 19 pending, and 17 rejected or cancelled. Such a high number suggests potential
shortcomings in the initial planning and design phases of the project.

Furthermore review showed a significant cost increase associated with approved VOs,
totalling USD 155,899,516.44, emerges as a major concern. This rise in costs raises
the specter of cost overruns, potentially straining the project's allocated budget.
Additionally, the lack of a designated funding source for a portion of the approved
71
VO amount (USD 9,027,997.48) introduces uncertainty, potentially leading to delays
or disruptions in the construction process.

The cumulative effect of these factors – a high number of VOs, substantial cost
increases, and funding uncertainty – likely resulted in a negative impact on the overall
performance of the SGR construction project. This impact could manifest as increased
project costs, schedule delays, and communication challenges amongst stakeholders.

4.3.2.7 Cost for Re-designing

During the same desk review it was found that another factor was Cost for re-design
by 12 % (Table 6). The Tanzania Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project serves as a
cautionary tale, illustrating the detrimental cascade effect triggered by Variation
Orders (VOs). This analysis investigates into how VOs issued for station
enlargements resulted in substantial re-design expenses, ultimately derailing project
performance.

During review it was noted that the project encountered VOs for the expansion of
stations such as Dar es Salaam and Morogoro, which stemmed from modifications
exceeding the initial plans. The Morogoro station, for instance, witnessed a
monumental increase in designated area, expanding from 367.5 square meters to a
sprawling 4,320 square meters. This fundamental alteration in project scope
necessitated a domino effect, requiring the Contractor to re-design the station to
accommodate the new, significantly larger footprint.

Also, it was noted that, the re-design process involved various aspects, including
architectural layouts, infrastructure and finishing works, mechanical and electrical
systems, and additional disciplines such as landscaping design and facade treatments.
Each element of the re-design process translated into additional project costs,
including engineering and design fees, software and technical expertise, and potential
material price fluctuations. The financial burden of re-design was not the only
consequence of VOs for station enlargements. Project performance also suffered due
to project delays, budget overruns, and disrupted construction flow. The re-design

72
process took time, potentially delaying construction activities that were dependent on
the original plans. The cost explosion due to re-design directly translated to budget
overruns, and the project might have struggled to stay within the initial financial
constraints.

In the review, the case of station enlargements in the Tanzania SGR project serves as
a potent illustration of how Variation Orders can trigger a cascade of negative effects.
The need to re-design stations due to scope changes significantly increased project
expenses, likely contributed to delays, and disrupted construction activities. This
underscores the critical importance of meticulous upfront planning, clear
communication protocols amongst all stakeholders, and well-defined change
management procedures. By implementing such measures, the need for VOs and their
associated negative consequences can be minimized, ultimately ensuring successful
project execution.

4.3.2.8 Cost of Administration of the Variation Order

The desk review noticed the cost of administration of the variation orders of 4 %
(Table 6). A substantial body of Variation Orders (VOs) issued during the Tanzania
Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project has demonstrably hindered its performance.
The negative effects extend beyond the direct cost increases associated with these
VOs. This analysis clarifies how the very act of administering VOs incurs hidden
costs that contributes to project's overall challenges.

The review found that processing VOs necessitated the dedication of project staff time
for activities such as reviewing proposals, negotiating terms, and preparing approvals
or rejections. This diversion of resources from core project management tasks
demonstrably led to delays in other areas. With a significant number of VOs issued
(113 approved, 19 under review), the time and resources demanded for administration
became substantial. VOs frequently necessitated complex negotiations amongst the
Client (TRC), the Contractor, and potentially even sub-contractors or consultants.
This inevitably led to a requirement for frequent communication and coordination
efforts, further escalating administrative burdens. Misunderstandings or

73
disagreements arising during VO negotiations further compounded these costs, as
additional time and resources were required to reach resolutions.

Also, noted that, each VO necessitated meticulous documentation, including technical

specifications, cost justifications, approvals, and communication records. Managing
this extensive volume of paperwork demonstrably added to the administrative
workload. Inadequate documentation could have resulted in delays and rework if
clarifications became necessary at later stages of the project.

The VO approval process itself could be time-consuming, especially for complex

changes. This inevitably delayed the implementation of authorized VOs, impacting
the overall project schedule. Delays in VO approvals also created uncertainty for the
Contractor, potentially hindering their ability to efficiently plan and resource
upcoming work. The aforementioned administrative activities–staff time,
communication, documentation – all translated into additional project costs. These
costs were not directly attributable to physical changes outlined in the VOs but were
nonetheless a consequence of managing them. The unfunded portion of approved VOs
(USD 9,027,997.48) further exacerbated the uncertainty regarding how these
administrative costs would be covered, potentially leading to budget shortfalls.

In review also, found that the cost of administering Variation Orders on the Tanzania
SGR project stands as a significant, albeit hidden, factor contributing to the overall
decline in performance. The time, resources, and communication required for VO
management diverted focus from core project activities, demonstrably leading to
delays, budget strains, and inefficiencies. This underscores the critical importance of
minimizing the need for VOs through meticulous upfront planning, clear
communication protocols, and well-defined change management procedures. By
reducing the number of VOs issued, the project could have mitigated not only the
direct cost increases but also the substantial administrative burden they created.

4.3.2.9 Expenses of Idle Plan Machine

The desk study also reviewed another factor was Time Effects by 4 % (Table 6). The
impact of expenses from an idle plan machine on the construction of a Standard

74
Gauge Railway project was substantial, leading to increased operational costs due to
wasted resources such as fuel, maintenance, and depreciation. The idle machinery also
caused project delays, affecting the construction schedule and potentially leading to
inefficiencies and financial strain. Furthermore, the loss of efficiency and impact on
project quality resulted in a negative outcome. To address these issues, proactive
measures such as effective scheduling, maintenance planning, and clear
communication among project stakeholders were implemented to minimize idle time
and associated expenses.

On one of the interview with the construction contractor, when interviewed on the
impact of variation orders on the construction of the SGR projects. The interviewee
responded that:

The cost of the project increased significantly due to the dynamic nature of the project
and lack of clear rate of definitions in the contract. The absence of specific, pre-
agreed rates led the contractor to assign prices at their choice, resulting in ambiguity
and potentially inflated costs. Furthermore, the delay in completing the project within
the specified deadline exacerbated the cost overruns, as prolonged timelines often
resulted in increased resource allocation and extended overhead expenses. To mitigate
such challenges in the near future projects, it is crucial for contracts to include well-
defined rate structures that aligns with the industry standards and accurately reflects
the project scope. In addition, establishing realistic deadlines and implementing
effective project management mechanisms can help to control costs and ensure timely
delivery, ultimately contributing to the overall success of the project.

4.4 Tools for Management of Variation Orders in the SGR Construction Projects

This is a fourth objective of this study , the management tools were recorded and
scored and then ranked to determine which tools had been used mostly in managing
variation orders in the SGR construction projects. Using collected data from objective
I and II, the cause-and-effect diagram was developed.

75
4.4.1 Management Tools used in Managing Variation Orders in the SGR
Construction Project

During the desk review, an assessment of commonly employed tools was conducted,
leading to the identification of the seven fundamental quality control tools. These
tools, including the Check Sheet, Histogram, Pareto Chart, Fishbone Diagram,
Control Chart, Flowchart, and Scatter Diagram, were assessed based on their
utilization (Figure 11). Some of these tools were utilized at various stages of the
process to identify, measure the impact of, uncover root causes of, and resolve issues
in order to ensure the production of defect-free items. The study revealed the extent of
utilization of these seven basic quality tools. However, it was observed that these
tools were not extensively employed in the management of the SGR construction
project. Instead, the study found the prevalent use of standardized templates and
documentation tools, which play a crucial role in providing consistency, efficiency,
compliance, effective communication, quality control, and continuity throughout the
project lifecycle. These tools facilitate the efficient creation of essential project
documentation, ensure adherence to regulations and standards, and foster clear
communication and collaboration among project stakeholders, thereby contributing to
the successful execution of the project.

76
 57.1
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
Per cent (%)

20.0 12.4
7.6 8.6 6.7 7.6
10.0
0.0
ts s ts s ts s
ee am ar am ar a rt
s h r ch r ch ch
ck to
g
to ag ol
is re di tr ow
he H a te
r
on Fl
C P at C
S c

Figure 10: Management Tools Used in Managing Variation Order in SGR

Construction Project.

In the study, 57.1% of participants were noted to predominantly utilize control charts,
with the scatter diagram closely followed by 12.4% (Figure 11). There was no
significant variance in the utilization of five out of the seven tools analysed. The
research highlighted that control charts were the most commonly applied tool, despite
of their statistical complexity in quality management. This tool graphically displayed
process variability over time, offering insights into how the process is impacted. By
employing statistical analyses and historical data, control charts assist in identifying
potential quality issues by establishing a central line for the mean and upper and lower
lines for the limits. Furthermore, the chart defines the thresholds of process quality
and aids in reducing defects and variations. Ultimately, control charts proved highly
advantageous in the construction industry by ensuring quality control and minimizing
costs related to substandard product delivery, ultimately leading to more satisfactory
project outcomes.

4.4.2 Developed causes and effects diagram in SGR construction Project

From data gathered from objectives I and II, a cause-and-effect diagram was
formulated (Table 7). Subsequently, brainstorming sessions were conducted to
identify potential solutions and effective tools for managing variation during the SGR
construction project.

77
Table 7: Identified Type of variations, causes and the impact from Objectives I
and II

Type of Source of Causes of variations Impacts of

Variations Variations orders variations orders
orders Orders

● Addition ● Client ● Insufficient strategic ● Timing Effect

work planning
● Consultant ● Increase In Overhead
● Omission of ● Design modification
Expenses
work ● Contractor
● Differing site condition ● Unplanned site
● Substitution
meetings
of work ● Ineffective site
● Rework Time Cost
management

● Change in specification ● Increase of Time

Management
● Unrealistic contract
● Increased In Project

● Lack of coordination Cost

between parties in ● Cost For Redesign

project management

● Consultant’s having ● Expenses of idle plan

inadequate judgment and machine

Experience
● Cost Of

● Change of plan scope Administration Of

The Variation Orders

Following a comprehensive analysis of the study, it became evident that employing

the Fishbone analysis approach was essential for assessing the root causes and

78
preventing the recurrence of risks. The Fishbone (Ishikawa) diagram (Figure 11)
serves as a visual representation of the relationships between an event (effect) and its
numerous causes. The structured nature of the diagram facilitates systematic thinking,
aids in pinpointing the root cause of a problem or quality characteristic, encourages
group participation, and harnesses the collective knowledge of the process. Causes
and major root causes have been identified for risks occurring in SGR construction
projects by cause effect analysis technique. Through the brainstorming the following
Fishbone (Ishikawa) diagram was developed;

Figure 11: Fishbone (Ishikawa) model for analysis between an event (effect) and
its multiple causes

The analysis of the Fishbone Diagram revealed that the cause-and-effect technique
effectively exposed the root problems (VOs in this case) by systematically examining
indirect implications. This study suggests that Fishbone Diagrams can be a valuable
tool for problem-solving within a corporate management context.

The results implied that addressing the interconnected factors identified through the
Fishbone Diagram could significantly contribute to project progress. By employing

79
cause-and-effect analysis to identify the root causes of delays and formulating
solutions to address them, such delays can potentially be avoided in future projects.

A study examined the impact of design-related challenges on Variation Orders (VOs)

and overall performance in railway construction projects, using the Standard Gauge
Railway (SGR) as a focal point. Utilizing the Fishbone diagram method, it was
revealed that inadequate initial planning, communication gaps, and deficient design
reviews were all factors contributing to frequent modifications (VOs) during the
construction of the SGR. These modifications resulted in project delays and escalated
costs.

i. Client-Related Shortcomings and Project Performance on the Standard Gauge

Railway

A Fishbone Diagram analysis revealed how various client-related factors negatively

impacted the progress of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) project. This analysis
exposed how ambiguous client expectations, limited involvement throughout the
project, and constrained financial resources contributed to a cascade of negative
effects. These included misunderstandings between stakeholders, alterations to the
project scope during construction, and ultimately, project delays.

Furthermore, the Fishbone Diagram identified specific client-driven issues that further
impeded project advancement. Client-initiated expansions of the project scope,
sluggish permitting processes characterized by bureaucratic hurdles, and unclear
contractual terms all contributed to inefficiencies. Additionally, challenges with
resource allocation on the client-side hampered progress. Ineffective communication
between the client and the project team further exacerbated these issues, leading to
errors and delays.

ii. Contractor-Related Shortcomings and Project Performance on the Standard

Gauge Railway

The Fishbone Diagram analysis also pinpointed areas where deficiencies on the part
of the contractors hindered the successful execution of the SGR project. Inadequate

80
experience with large-scale projects, coupled with subpar resource management
practices, resulted in errors, delays, and the need for rework. The report highlighted
insufficient quality control measures implemented by the contractors as another
contributing factor.

Furthermore, the analysis identified issues related to the contractor's adherence to the
contractual agreements. Ineffective risk management strategies employed by the
contractors also played a role in hindering project performance. Challenges with
coordination between sub-contractors and communication breakdowns within the
contractor teams further compounded these issues.

iii. Consultant-Related Shortcomings and Project Performance on the Standard

Gauge Railway

An analysis utilizing the Fishbone diagram technique highlighted how shortcomings

related to the consultants involved in the SGR project contributed to performance
challenges. Factors such as design flaws identified during construction, delayed
deliverables from the consultants, and inadequate quality control measures
implemented by them all played a role in the generation of variation orders. These
variation orders necessitated rework, ultimately leading to project delays and cost
escalations. Communication breakdowns between the consultants and other
stakeholders further exacerbated these issues.

iv. Design-Related Shortcomings and Project Performance on the Standard Gauge

Railway.

A Fishbone Diagram analysis revealed that design shortcomings significantly

contributed to the prevalence of Variation Orders (VOs) on the Tanzania Standard
Gauge Railway (SGR) project. Factors like poor design quality, insufficient details,
and inadequate site investigations led to errors and unforeseen challenges during
construction, necessitating VOs for modifications or rework. New regulations or
client-initiated design changes after the final design also required VOs. These design-
related issues resulted in project delays, increased costs, disputes over cost allocation,
and rework.

81
This finding is well supported by Kaya (2023), in the study of implementation of
Fishbone Diagram by cause-and-effect analysis for construction projects. The results
of their study, use of fishbone diagram technique demonstrated the possible
determination of the cause and effects relations in a construction project. Findings in
their study proved that use of cause-and-effect analysis in construction projects is also
practical to determine the key points on controlling variation orders in construction
projects.

82
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusion

According to the findings of the study, it was observed that the most prevalent type of
variation order in the SGR construction projects was additional works, constituting
71.4% of the total. The primary source of these additional works was identified as the
client, due to lack of clear and comprehensive communication regarding changes
occurring during each stage of the construction process. As a result, the study
concluded that variation orders represents a significant challenge in railway
construction projects.

Based on the desk review results, the research concluded that the top nine major
factors of variation orders in the SGR construction projects, that are insufficient
strategic planning, the design modifications, differing in site conditions, ineffective
site management, change in specifications by the client, ineffective site management,
the change in specifications by client, Unfeasible contracts, lack of coordination
among involved parties in the project management and lack of judgment and
experience from the consultants.

Based on the desk review results the research also concluded that the top six major
effects of variation orders on the SGR construction projects performance were time
extension (time overrun), Increase in overhead expenses (cost overrun), Unplanned
site meetings, Re-work time cost, Increase of time management and Costs for re-
design. This might have been the reason for the project failing to start functioning
according to the schedule.

The study further concluded that several quality management tools were not widely
utilized in the management of the SGR construction projects. Also, using collected
data from objectives I and II, the cause-and-effect diagram was developed through
Brainstorming and key informants interviews. Solutions were identified and came up
with effective tools for managing variation during the SGR construction projects.

83
6.2 Recommendations

Recommendations are a set of proposed remedies to minimize variation orders during

the construction projects and minimize their effect on the SGR construction project
performance in Tanzania. The study showed that variation orders was a big issue for
SGR construction projects, and they have significant impact on how well the project
works. Here are some crucial suggestions for improvement;

i. The client has to provide in detail the requirements and the documents
related to construction projects to be built before the design stage of
implementation. This is to minimize change in the scope of work by the
client. This can be done by conducting a comprehensive feasibility study
before a project is implemented. The client must appoint an experienced
project manager and technical staff who can advise management in the
involved processes during the construction before any decision is taken.
Continuous coordination and direct communication between the project
team as the client and involved consultants in the construction of which
must be implemented to reduce discrepancies in the drawings, contract
documents and errors in the design.

ii. A consultant should produce a complete design as change of design causes

variations in the SGR construction projects. Direct communication among
the project team is a key to eliminate variations occurrence. Consultants
should give sufficient time for planning and design phase; this will assist
in minimizing variation orders due to design changes during the
construction stage. A detailed design would be able to exert control to
unnecessary interference from consultants or other external influences.
This minimizes variation orders occurrence due to change of
specifications.

iii. Contractors should identify and inform varied items of work to the client
before the activity starts to reduce variations. Because the client will have
sufficient time to check the varied items in different perspectives to give
work order at minimum variations.

84
 iv. Use of seven management tools should be much emphasized in the
management of variation orders. Sophisticated technology can be applied
in the use of these tools.

6.3 Further Research

Results from the present study can further be utilized to suggest the direction for the
future research. Therefore, further studies should focus on how to improve the
technological tools for effective management of variation orders in the railway
construction projects.

85
 REFERENCES

Abdel-Hamid, M. and Abdel Haleem, H.M. (2019) Improving the Construction

Industry Quality Using the Seven Basic Quality Control Tools. Journal of
Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering, 7, 412-
420.ttps://doi.org/10.4236/ jmmce.2019.76028 Accessed on 2/3/2023.

Alaryan, A., Emadelbeltagi, A. E., and Dawood, M. (2014). Causes and effects of
change orders on construction projects in Kuwait. International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, 4(7), 1-8.

Aldiabat Al, Ja’far A, - Haron M, and Btoosh, J. (2020). Variation orders

cause in construction
buildings projects in Jordan. Civil Engineering Journal, 6(10),
2014-2020.

Ali, A., Hussain, S., Ali, Z., Hussain, Z., and Murtaza, S. H.(2021) Analysing the
Impact of Coordination Factors on Construction Project Success in Pakistan
Using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348728969. Accessed on
18/2/2024

Al-Momani, A.H. (1996). Construction cost prediction for public school buildings in
Jordan. Construction Management and Economics, 14(4), pp.311–317.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/014461996373386. Accessed on 9/9/2022.

Arain F.M. and Phen L.S. (2005). The Potential Effects of Variation Orders on
Institutional Building Projects, Journal of Facilities, Vol. 23 No 11/12,
2005, pp. 496-510.

Arain, F.M. and Pheng, L.S. (2006). Developers’ Views of Potential Causes of
Variation Orders for Institutional Buildings in Singapore. Architectural
Science Review, 49(1), pp.59–74. doi:10.3763/asre.2006.4908.

86
Ashworth, A., Hogg, K., & Higgs, C. (2013). Willis's practice and procedure for the
quantity surveyor. John Wiley & Sons.

Autodesk (2023). 3 Steps to Better Cost Control in Construction Projects. [Online]

Digital Builder. Available at: https://constructionblog.autodesk.com/3-
steps-to-better-cost-control. Accessed 19/98/2023.

Bajjou, M. S., & Chafi, A. (2020). Empirical study of schedule delay in Moroccan
construction projects. International Journal of Construction
Management, 20(7), 783-800.

Bello, S. A., Oyedele, L. O., Akinade, O. O., Bilal, M., Delgado, J. M. D., Akanbi, L.
A., ... & Owolabi, H. A. (2021). Cloud computing in construction industry:
Use cases, benefits and challenges. Automation in Construction, 122,
103441.

Bower, D. (2000). A Systematic Approach to the Evaluation of Indirect Costs of

Contract Variations‟, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 18,
no.3, pp. 263-268.

Budgeting and Monitoring of Personnel Costs. (1997). SIGMA Papers. [Online]

doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/5kml6g63ffzv-en. Accessed on 12/8/2023.

Chege, S.M., Wang, D., Suntu, S.L. and Bishoge, O.K. (2019). Influence of
technology transfer on performance and sustainability of standard gauge
railway in developing countries. Technology in Society, 56, pp.79–92.
doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.201 8.09.007.

87
Collins English Dictionary (2014).
Complete and Unabridged, 12th Ed. 2014 ©Digital

Duff G (2015). The ASQ Quality Improvement Pocket Guide. Basic History,
Concepts, Tools, and Relationships. ISBN: 978-0-87389-853-9.

Ermias, E., & Sujayath,M. (2020). Effects of Design and Specification Changes in the
Management Practice on Public Building Projects. IJARIIE-ISSN (O)-
2395-4396. Vol-6 Issue-6 2020

ESI Africa. (2016). Understanding FIDIC conditions of contract and prime pplication.
https://www.esi-africa.com/magazine-article/understanding-fidic-onditions-
contract-prime-application. Accessed on 3/5/2022

Faiq M. S. Al-Zwainy , 1 Ibrahim A. Mohammed, 2 and Ibrahim F. Varouqa

(2018)Diagnosing the Causes of Failure in the Construction Sector. Using
Root Cause Analysis Techniques. Hindawi Journal of Engineering Volume
2018, Article ID 1804053, 12 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1804053.
Accessed on 11/6/2022

Fidic 1999 Red Book (2006). [Online] Available at:

http://site.iugaza.edu.ps/kshaath /files. Accessed on 9/6/2023

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

Fisk, E.R. (1997). Construction Project Administration. New Jersey: Prentice – Hall.
.

88
Ghafoor, A., & Mahmood, Y. (2020). To investigate variation order effects on
building construction projects. GSJ, 8(9), 611-617.

Global Mobility Report (2017). Tracking Sector Performance. (n.d.). Available at:
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/28542/1205
00.pdf?sequence=6&isAllowed=y .Accessed on 23/11/2022.

Glock, C.Y., Kahn, R.L. and Cannell, C.F. (1957). The Dynamics of Interviewing:
Theory, Technique, and Cases. American Sociological Review, 22(6),
p.761. Doi: 10.2307/2089209.

Hameed Memon, A., Abdul Rahman, I. and Faris Abul Hasan, M. (2014). Significant
Causes and Effects of Variation Orders in Construction Projects. Research
Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 7(21), pp.4494–
4502. doi:10.19026/rjaset.7.826.

Hansen, S., Rostiyanti, S. F., & Rif’at, A. (2020). Causes, effects, and mitigations
framework of contract change orders: Lessons learned from GBK aquatic
stadium project. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in
Engineering and Construction, 12(1), 05019008.

Ibbs, C. W, Wong, C.K., and Hwak, Y.H., (2004). Project change management
system. Journal of management in engineering. Vol .17, no. 3 pp. 156-165,
2004.

Ismail, Amiruddin and Pourrostam, Towhid and Soleymanzadeh, Amir and

Ghouyounchizad, Majid. (2012). Factors Causing Variation Orders and
their Effects in Roadway Construction Projects. Research Journal of
Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology. 4. 4969-4972.

89
Jamal, H. (n.d). Railway Gauges - Types of Railway Gauges | Standard Gauge,
Narrow, Meter, Broad. [Online] www.aboutcivil.org. Available at:
https://www.aboutcivil .org/railway-gauges-types. Accessed on 28/5/ 2023.

Khalifa, W.M.A. and Mahamid, I. (2019). Causes of Change Orders in Construction

Projects. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 9(6),
pp.4956–4961. doi:https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.3168.

Kothari, C. R. (2009). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi:

New Age International (P) Ltd.

Kumaraswamy, M.M., Miller, D. R. A. and Yogeswaran, K. (1998). Claims for

extensions of time in civil engineering projects, Construction Management
and Economics, 16(3), pp.283-294.

Kusi, R. (2021). Categorization of the sources of variation orders in road construction

projects in Ghana (Doctoral dissertation).

Lamprou, A., & Vagiona, D. G. (2022). Identification and evaluation of success

criteria and critical success factors in project success. Global Journal of
Flexible Systems Management, 23(2), 237-253

Levy, M. (2006). Design-Build Project Delivery‟, 6th Ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill.

Levy, S. M. (2000). Project Management in Construction. New York: John Wiley and
Sons. Inc.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242110226__the origins
_of variation orders. Accessed on 23/7/2022

Majeed, B., and Ali, N., (2020). The causes of variation orders and their effects on
cost and time of projects in Sulaimani Governorate. Kurdistan Journal of
Applied Research, 5 (1), 218-235.

90
Manzoor Arain, F. and Sui Pheng, L. (2005). The potential effects of variation orders
(Anon., n.d.) On institutional building projects. Facilities, 23(11/12),
pp.496–510. Doi: 10.1108/02632770510618462.

Matimbe, H.S. and N.M. Lema (1997). "Evaluation of cost and time performance of
integrated roads projects (IRP) in Tanzania", Proceedings of Annual Roads
Convention on Road Transport: Key to Development, 1997pp. 332-341.
Dar es Salaam.

Memon, Aftab and Abdul Rahman, Ismail and Hasan, Mohamad. (2014). Significant
Causes and Effects of Variation Orders in Construction Projects. Research
Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology. 7. 4494-4502.
10.19026/rjaset.7.826.

Memon, I.A., Jamali, Q.B., Jamali, A.S., Abbasi, M.K., Jamali, N.A. and Jamali, Z.H.
(2019). Defect Reduction with the Use of Seven Quality Control Tools for
Productivity Improvement at an Automobile Company. Engineering,
Technology & Applied Science Research, 9(2), pp.4044–4047.
doi:https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.2634.

Mhando, Y., S. Mlinga, R. and M. Alinaitwe, H. (2018). Variation Mitigation Model

to Enhance Construction Performance of Public Building Projects in
Tanzania. American Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 6(3),
pp.105–118. Doi: 10.12691/ajcea-6-3-3.

Mittal, Y. K., Paul, V. K., Rostami, A., Riley, M., & Sawhney, A. (2020). Delay
factors in construction of healthcare infrastructure projects: a comparison
amongst developing countries. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 21, 649-
661.

91
Mohammad, A.I. Che Ani. Rakmat, M. and Yusof (2010). Investigation on the Causes
of Variation Orders In the Construction of Building Project – Journal of
Building Performance Volume 1 Issue 1 2010.10.

Mohammad, N. and Hamzah, Z. (2019). A Review of Causes of Variation Order in

the Construction of Terrace Housing Projects in Malaysia. MATEC Web of
Conferences, 277, p.03013. doi:10.1051/matecconf/
201927703013.Accesed on 23/11/2022.

Mohammed, E. E., and Elshaikh, E. (2017). Factors causing variation orders in

building projects in Khartoum state-Sudan. International Journal of
Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 6(11), 117-129.

Msallam, Majed and Abojaradeh, Mohammad and Jrew, Basim and Zaki, Inas.
(2015). Controlling Of Variation Orders in Highway Projects in Jordan.
Journal of Engineering and Architecture. 3. 10.15640/jea.v3n2a11.

Nady, A. E., Ibrahim, A. H., and Hosny, H. (2022). Factors affecting construction
project complexity. The Egyptian International Journal of Engineering
Sciences and Technology, 37(1), 24-33.

Neyestani, B. (2017). Seven Basic Tools of Quality Control: The Appropriate

Techniques for Solving Quality Problems in the Organizations. SSRN
Electronic Journal. doi:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2947700.

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

O’Connor, J.T., Larimore, M.A. and Tucker, R.L. (1986). Collecting Constructability
Improvement Ideas. Journal of Construction Engineering and

92
 Management, 112(4), pp.463–475. Doi: 10.1061/ ( ace) 0733-
9364(1986)112:4(463).

Osman, L. A., & Mohamud, A. O. (2022). The Impact of Time Delay on Construction
Projects Cost Overrun: A Case Study on Some of Construction Projects in
Mogadishu-Somalia. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 3884-3895.

Pourrostam, T., Ismail, A., Soleymanzadeh, A. and Gouyounchizad, M. (2012). An

Investigation of Procedures of Change Orders’ Control in Roadway
Construction Projects. Advanced Materials Research, 446-449, pp.3778–
3781. Doi: 0.4028/ scientific5/amr.446-449..

Red bag, (NA) CM-PE-313 Procedure for The Control of Project Variations. ww.red-
bag.com/general-procedures/82-cm-pe-313-procedure-for-the-control-of-
project-variations.html. Accesed on 11/2/2021

Ndihokubwayo, R., and Haupt, T. (2009). Variation orders on construction projects:

Value adding or waste. International Journal of Construction Project
Management, 1(2), 1-17.

Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and
Practitioner-Researchers (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Rubaiei, Qais and Abdul Nifa, Faizatul Akmar and Khai Lin, Chong & Rahim,
Syukran. (2022). Scope management review tool for controlling variation
order cost in government projects in the sultanate of Oman. AIP
Conference Proceedings. 2644. 030010. 10.1063/5.0104292.

93
Ruben, N. (2008). "An analysis of the impact of variation orders on project
performance", Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Theses and
Dissertations, Paper 33.

.
Saki, R., & Yeom, C. (2022). Causes of variation orders in road construction projects
in Tanzania. The Open Transportation Journal, 16(1).

Segal, S. (2018). Finsen’s The Building Contract. 3rd Ed.

Ssegawa, J. K., Mfolwe, K. M., Makuke, B., and Kutua, B. (2002, November).
Construction variations: a scourge or a necessity. In Proceedings of the
First International Conference of CIB W107 (pp. 11-13).

Smith, P. G., & Merritt, G. M. (2020). Proactive risk management: Controlling

uncertainty in product development. Productivity press.

Tague, N. (2005). The Quality Toolbox, Second Edition (E-Book). ISBN:

9781951058999

Tariq, J., & Gardezi, S. S. S. (2023). Study the delays and conflicts for construction
projects and their mutual relationship: A review. Ain Shams Engineering
Journal, 14(1), 101815.

Wainwright, W. (1983). Variation and final account procedure. 4th ed. London:
Hutchinson.

Wang, Jianmin, Victor Sifamen Sekei, Sherif Abdul Ganiyu, and Jesse Jackson
Makwetta. (2021). "Research on the Sustainability of the Standard Gauge
Railway Construction Project in Tanzania" Sustainability 13, no. 9: 5271.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095271. Accessed on 5/1/2023

94
Watt, A. (2014). Project Management. 2nd ed. B campus.

Xie, Yongshun, and Chengjin Wang. (2021). "Evolution and Construction

Differentiation Pattern of African Railway Network" Sustainability 13, no.
24: 13728. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13241372. Accessed on 15/8/2022

Yadeta, A. E. (2017, September). Recommended strategies to minimize variation

orders on public building projects. In Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on the Latest Innovations in Science, Goa, India (pp. 28-30).

Yap, J. B. H., Abdul-Rahman, H., & Wang, C. (2016). A conceptual framework for
managing design changes in building construction. In MATEC Web of
Conferences (Vol. 66, p. 00021). EDP Sciences.

Zain, S., Hamid, A. R. A., Ba-Hutair, A. M. A., Zadran, B. G., Abba, N., and Islam,
M. S. (2021). Ineffective Site Management Practices and Their Impacts on
Project Performance. Accessed on 8/8/2022.

95
 ANNEXES

APPENDIX NO.1

CHECKLIST TOOL FOR DATA COLLECTION DURING THE DESK

REVIEW

Report No_______ Date of Review____________

Title: The Impact of Variation Orders on Performance of Railway Construction

Projects. (The Case of Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Construction).

Section A: Introduction

I am Tulinagwe Solomon Msomba, a student for Master of Engineering Management

from University of Dar es Salaam. This checklist tool aims at collecting information
related to the Impact of Variation Orders on Performance of Railway
Construction Projects. The collected information is for academic purpose only and
will be treated as confidential.

Section B: Objective number one type and sources of variation orders in the
implementation of SGR projects. The information will be collected through desk
review and in-depth interview.

No. Type of Variation Source Of That Variation

Order Occurred
(tick the source)
Client Consultant Contractor Design External
Related Related

1.
2.
3.
4.
Etc.

96
Section C: Objective number two contributing factors to occurrence of variation
orders during the implementation of SGR projects. In this Objective causes and
impact of variation orders during the construction of SGR will be collected.

S/N. Causes of Variation Orders Impact of Variation Orders

1
2
3
4
Etc.

Section D: Objective number three, the most effective tools to manage the Project
Variation Orders

Common tools At what stage the How does the

used during tools have been tools control
S/N Management
management utilized mostly. (e.g. VO
tools
of VO design, analysis,
improve and control)
(Insert a tick)

1 Check sheets

2 Histograms

3 Pareto charts

4 Cause-and-
effect/fishbone

5 Scatter diagrams

6 Control charts

7 Flow charts

97
98
 APPENDIX NO. 2

Checklist questions for guiding Key Informant Interviews

1. From your own experience can you explain the source and frequency variation
orders on your construction work?

2. From your personal experience, how frequently are the following types of site
instructions encountered on construction projects

3. Can you explain the common factors contributing to the occurrence of

variation?

4. From your experience, what are the impact of variation orders on construction
of SGR projects?

5. Which tools or strategies are suggested for which can be used to minimize
variation orders in the Construction of SGR Project?

99
 APPENDIX NO.3

Reviewed Additional Works from the Desk Study

● Construction of extra works on the CCTV, PAS, and master clock at the stations
and LAN works for the medium stations, Marshalling Yard, and TPS buildings.

● Design and Construction of Marshalling Yard Workshop and Dry Port

Connection

● Supply Cost of Additional (15) Vehicles for the Engineers and other Employees

● Rail Training Programme

● Fencing Extension for DSM –MDM

● 8 Rental Vehicles for Engineers (For August 2019 - September 2019) Months

● The Employer requested larger medium stations during the Progress Meeting
No.4

● The employer requested for a large Dar-Es-Salaam Station, which will serve the
city and for landmark Service Ducts (Utility Relocation) KM2+500 -
KM20+000.

● Maintaining one TRC SGR Vehicle (Reg.No. RAC 345 Nissan Patrol).

● Façade Coating for Medium Stations

● Maintaining the TRC SGR Vehicles (Reg Nos. RAC 341, RAC 342, RAC 343
Nissan Hard body & maintaining other TRC SGR Vehicles (Reg. Nos. RAC 344,
346, 347, 348, 349 216 Nissan Station Wagon).

● Contractor's Notice for Claim against Probable Time and Consequential Cost
Impacts and Proposal for Protecting TAZAMA Oil Pipe across the SGR Right of
Way (RoW).

100
● An Engineer presented a separate "Order" for LAN works for the medium
stations, Mars haling Yard and TPS buildings. Service Ducts (Utility Relocation)
KM 20+000 - KM202+000.

● The Engineer provided “Order" for additional works for establishment of CCTV,
PAS and Master Clock at Stations.

● Relocation of Electricity Line

● Protection of Petrol and Gas Pipeline

● Relocation of Optic Fibre Cables

● Relocation of TTCL- Km 2+500 – Km 20+000

● Extension for Fencing DSM –MDM

● Instruction to Execute a Variation for Supply of one vehicle Toyota Land Cruiser
V8- VXR.

● 8 Rental Vehicles for Engineers (For August 2019 - September 2019) Months

● Relocating 132kV and 220kVA High Voltage Transmission Lines

● Construction of extra works on the CCTV, PAS, and master clock at the stations
and LAN works for the medium stations, Marshalling Yard, and TPS buildings.

● Design and Construction of Marshalling Yard Workshop and Dry Port

Connection

● Supply Cost of Additional (15) Vehicles for the Engineers and other Employees

● Rail Training Programme

● Fencing Extension for DSM –MDM

● 8 Rental Vehicles for Engineers (For August 2019 - September 2019) Months

101
● The Employer requested larger medium stations during the Progress Meeting
No.4

● The employer requested for a large Dar-Es-Salaam Station, which will serve the
city and for landmark Service Ducts (Utility Relocation) KM2+500 -
KM20+000.

● Maintaining one TRC SGR Vehicle (Reg.No. RAC 345 Nissan Patrol).

● Façade Coating for Medium Stations

● Maintaining the TRC SGR Vehicles (Reg Nos. RAC 341, RAC 342, RAC 343
Nissan Hard body & maintaining other TRC SGR Vehicles (Reg. Nos. RAC 344,
346, 347, 348, 349 216 Nissan Station Wagon).

● Contractor's Notice for Claim against Probable Time and Consequential Cost
Impacts and Proposal for Protecting TAZAMA Oil Pipe across the SGR Right of
Way (RoW).

● An Engineer presented a separate "Order" for LAN works for the medium
stations, marshalling Yard and TPS buildings. Service Ducts (Utility Relocation)
KM 20+000 - KM202+000.

● The Engineer provided “Order" for additional works for establishment of CCTV,
PAS and Master Clock at Stations.

● Relocation of Electricity Line

● Protection of Petrol and Gas Pipeline

● Relocation of Optic Fibre Cables

● Relocation of TTCL- Km 2+500 – Km 20+000

● Extension for Fencing DSM –MDM

102
● Instruction to Execute a Variation for Supply of one vehicle Toyota Land Cruiser
V8- VXR.

● 8 Rental Vehicles for Engineers (For August 2019 - September 2019) Months

● Relocating 132kV and 220kVA High Voltage Transmission Lines

● Drilling of Two (2) Deep Water Wells Km13+100

● Design and construction of Pedestrian Overpass at Km 8+830

● Establishment of System KM 0+860 to KM 1+090

● Relocation of storm water

● Relocation of Storm Water Drainage System KM 0+860 to KM 1+090

● Design and Construction of DAWASA Utility Protection at km 2+870 and km

5+642 and km 8+500.

● Re-allocation of water well at km 115, 196+820, and 201.

● Sharing of SGR/MGR Laying of DN400 (16 Inches) Pipeline Across MGR/SGR

Railways

● Re-location of 11kv Overhead Transmission Line Across ATS-1 at Km 8+200

103