Author:
Ibrahim Mahamid Civil Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Arab American University (AAUP), Palestine

Search for other papers by Ibrahim Mahamid in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5357-1152
Open access

Abstract

This article aims at illustrating the major factors of construction firms' failure from the perspective of constructors. Thirty-seven (37) factors are illustrated in this article. The factors are divided under 3 groups: financial, managerial and external. The study used the field survey technique (questionnaire) to collect the necessary data that serves its purpose. Results illustrate that the top 5 contributors are: delay in collecting payments from owner (financial group), poor work experience (managerial group), bidding strategy (managerial group), local political conditions, low profit due to high competition (financial group). Results indicate that the top factors are internal factors which could be handled and controlled by the company itself. The results of this study are the first step towards identifying the problems of contracting companies in order to understand them and try to find solutions that will raise the level of companies and ensure their continuity and success.

Abstract

This article aims at illustrating the major factors of construction firms' failure from the perspective of constructors. Thirty-seven (37) factors are illustrated in this article. The factors are divided under 3 groups: financial, managerial and external. The study used the field survey technique (questionnaire) to collect the necessary data that serves its purpose. Results illustrate that the top 5 contributors are: delay in collecting payments from owner (financial group), poor work experience (managerial group), bidding strategy (managerial group), local political conditions, low profit due to high competition (financial group). Results indicate that the top factors are internal factors which could be handled and controlled by the company itself. The results of this study are the first step towards identifying the problems of contracting companies in order to understand them and try to find solutions that will raise the level of companies and ensure their continuity and success.

1 Introduction

The construction business is significant and large as it plays a critical role in economy. However, there has been an increase in the number of financial failures in this business during the past years [1]. Many previous studies have discussed the problems in construction industry and suggested solutions to them [1–5]. However, slow progress was performed to tackle these problems due to many reasons such as: unrealistic recommendations by researchers, lack of required resources, poor attention paid by the governments to construction industry, difficulties in measuring outcomes in improvement programs that targeted construction industry. Refs. [6, 7] stated that the problems of construction industry in developing countries come from three sources: problems due to poor industry infrastructure, problems coming from clients and consultants, and problems coming from unqualified contractors and subcontractors. It is important for organizations and companies to organize themselves structurally and administratively and to create strategies aimed at their sustainability and ability to compete [8].

The building and construction sector is an essential and pivotal sector as it plays an important role in creating job opportunities, supporting the local economy and meeting the needs of society in terms of buildings and infrastructure. Although it is a major player in the local economy and its prominent role in providing various community services, it suffers from problems and obstacles that led to the failure of many contracting companies. These obstacles are due to local political, economic and organizational reasons. For instance, [1] reported that 120 contracting firms faced business failure in Palestine during the period 2017–2019. Globally, the construction industry is one of the most risky businesses, which was represented by the failure of a large number of companies. The risks are due to the many changes associated with this industry, such as the prices of materials, equipment and labor, as well as the presence of many parties related to the project, which may clash and differ among themselves, which affects the success and failure of companies. Ref. [9] examined the risks and risk management experiences of Hungarian construction companies. They supposed that the risks management and handling mainly differ by the position and size of the construction party. According to [10], commercial banks' real estate-related loans made the construction industry extremely vulnerable in Ireland, so when the real estate market collapsed, the construction industry went bankrupt first. Ref. [11] examined the factors affecting collaboration in construction industry. They concluded that the construction industry suffers from a lack of trust that contributes to more cooperation and exchange of information between construction companies. This paper aims at exploring the causes leading to business failure in construction industry from the perspective of contractors.

In Palestine and neighboring countries, very few studies have dealt with the issue of contractor failure. This study came to fill this gap, as it aims to study the factors that influence the failure of contracting companies from the point of view of contractors in Palestine. The study used the field survey technique to collect the necessary data that serves its purpose. The results of this study are the first step towards identifying the problems of contracting companies in order to understand them and try to find solutions that will raise the level of companies and ensure their continuity and success.

2 Previous studies

Business failure is defined as difficulties or inability of an organization or a firm to pay its commitments [12]. Ref. [1] defined failure as inability of an organization to adjust itself with its strategic plans to achieve its financial and expansion targets. Construction industry has a high rate of failure. In addition to its bad effects in term of financial loss for owner and contractor, construction business failure has adverse effects on society and on a country's economy as well [13]. A variety of characteristics were considered to define the failure of construction project such as stopping due to any reason, contract termination, stopping of sales, and losses and inability to try [14]. Ref. [15] pointed out that construction projects fail at a high rate due to many causes. He found the root of construction firm failures through questionnaire survey. In his study, 41 causes of failure were identified and grouped under 4 categories: management, politics, finance, and environment. The main contributors to construction firms' failures were: delays in payment, high dependency on bank loans, high interest rate on bank loans, fluctuation in building materials cost, poor contract management, and lack of regulation. Ref. [1] identified 73 factors affecting construction firms' failure. He divided them into 5 groups: contract issues, management, organization, economy, politics and finance. The top factors were: material cost, inadequate resources, payments delay, suppliers' commitment, political conditions, and monopoly.

Ref. [16] studied the significant factors of construction firms' failure in Turkey through field survey. They revealed that poor experience and economy of the country were the main contributors to business failure. Ref. [17] concluded that about 80% of construction firms' failures were due to 5 factors: low profits, weakness of construction industry, high expenses, shortage in capital and high depts. Four out of the five mentioned factors are monetary factors that could be handled and controlled by the firm itself. The top causes were: poor experience in the business and national economy. In the study performed by [12], 44 factors affecting business failure in construction industry were identified. Eighty-four (84) contractors filled a questionnaire survey. The top factors listed in the study were: material cost changes, payments delay, poor experience in the business, political conditions and closure. Ref. [6] indicated that several internal and external causes might affect the construction firm's failure. They recommended that the firm should take into consideration the adverse effects for managers, directors, staff, auditors and government on firm's failure. Ref. [18] conducted a review study to explore the factors of failures in construction industry. To avoid failure, the firms should consider the influence of managerial negative effects, company conditions and characteristics, financial conditions and work environment.

Ref. [19] conclude that poor labor productivity in construction projects in developing countries is one of the most significant problems that influence the project failure. Ref. [20] carried out a survey to investigate the main causes of construction companies' failure. The questionnaire included 6 groups with 59 factors. The groups were: financial, political, expansion, environmental, managerial and construction. The main factors concluded in their study were: bidding strategy, bad regulations, poor labor productivity, poor site managers, poor work experience, project delay, low profits, high competition, inflation, payments delay, unstable government policies, rework, material waste, poor supervision and lack of control systems. Ref. [21] concluded that among the factors affecting failure of construction companies, poor productivity, poor experience, fraud and poor procurement system were the top factors. Ref. [7] revealed that material waste and cost overrun are highly correlated in construction projects. Cost increase led to cash flow problems which led to construction failure.

3 Research methods

This study aims to identify the factors affecting the failure of contractor companies. First, the influencing factors were identified from the interview and opinions of experts and the factors found in previous studies similar to the study. Thirty-seven (37) factors were identified and divided into three categories: managerial, financial and external. Secondly, a questionnaire was designed to collect the necessary data for the study. The questionnaire was divided into two parts: the first part aimed at collecting general information about the company such as specialization, experience, employees, etc., while the second part asked about the extent of the influence of the considered factors on the failure of the company. The participants were asked to fill out the questionnaire to determine the effect of each factor using the following key: 1 – for very low effect, 2 – for low effect, 3 – for moderate effect, 4 – for high effect and 5 – for very high effect.

Before sending the questionnaire to the participants, it was sent to a number of local experts to evaluate it and address its suitability for measuring the objectives of the study. The experts' responses were positive and they made very small adjustments to the questionnaire. The questionnaire was sent to the participants in different ways, including: direct communication, e-mail and fax. The questionnaire was sent to 100 contracting companies of grade 1, 2 and 3 registered in the Contractors Association. The representative number of companies was determined according to Equation (1) [22] and Table 1. Computations in Table 1 indicated that the required number of companies is 22. The questionnaires were sent to a number greater than 22 (sent to 100 companies) to get more accurate and reliable data. The companies were selected randomly.

Table 1.

Computing of representative number of companies

Representative number of companies
n0242
n1118
n274
n356
n443
n538
n629
n724
n822
Eighty-two (82) questionnaires were correctly filled out and approved in the study (rate of response = 82%). The participants' responses showed that most of them have more than 10 years of experience in implementing and managing projects. Their responses also showed the diversity of their roles in the companies they work in: project manager, contractor, financial manager, office engineer and site engineer.
n=(ts/d)2/[1+(ts/d)2/N]
Where,
  • n = representative number of companies

  • N = number of population

  • t = abscissa of the normal curve that cuts of an area of α = 0.01 at the tails (t = 2)

  • d = expected estimate error (d = 0.01)

  • s = maximum standard deviation = P × q (P = 0.5 and q = 0.5)

Table 1 represents the calculation of representative number of companies. Calculations stopped when n and n–1 are almost equal.

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Ranking

Factors under each group are ranked from contractors' point of view based on calculation of factor score.

4.1.1 Factors related to managerial group

Results of managerial factors causing construction business failure are shown in Table 2. Twenty (20) factors are addressed under this group from critical review of similar studies and responses of local professional experts in the area. Results reveal that the major managerial factors contributing to failure of construction firms are: poor work experience, bidding strategy, poor contract management, lack of management and motivation system for labors, and poor procurement management. While the lowest affecting managerial factors are: bad relation between managers and labors, increased number and size of projects, improper planning during the early phases, improper planning techniques, and one man rule. Results also show that all factors under this group have scores of value greater than 3, which means that all of them have high impact on business failure.

Table 2.

Ranking of managerial factors leading to construction business failure

Factor No.FactorFactor scoreRank
M1poor work experience4.331
M2bidding strategy4.322
M3poor contract management4.063
M4lack of management and motivation system for labors3.894
M5poor procurement management3.885
M6poor documentation system3.856
M7high competition3.527
M8lack of professional management programs3.448
M9improper resources management3.419
M10lack of communication between participants3.4010
M11internal problems3.3611
M12organization of firm3.2812
M13lack of control systems3.2713
M14fraud3.2514
M15claims3.2115
M16bad relation between managers and labors3.2016
M17increased number and size of projects3.2017
M18improper planning during the early phases3.1418
M19improper planning techniques3.119
M20one man rule3.0220

4.1.2 Factors related to financial group

Results of financial factors contributing to construction business failure are shown in Table 3. Twelve (12) factors are classified under this group from review of similar studies and responses of local professional experts. The results show that the critical 5 factors are: delay in collecting payments from owner, low profit due to high competition, material cost changes, and paying high interest on bank loans. While the bottom 5 factors are: controlling resources cost, dealing with change orders, monopoly, material waste excess, and rework cost. Results also show that all factors under this group have scores of value greater than 3, which means that all of them have high impact on business failure.

Table 3.

Ranking of financial factors leading to construction business failure

Factor No.FactorFactor scoreRank
F1delay in collecting payments from owner4.351
F2low profit due to high competition4.252
F3material cost changes4.233
F4paying high interest on bank loans4.204
F5wrong cost estimate3.865
F6money change fluctuations3.846
F7cash flow problems3.757
F8controlling resources cost3.418
F9dealing with change orders3.349
F10monopoly3.1410
F11material waste excess3.1311
F12rework cost3.0412

4.1.3 Factors related to external group

Table 4 shows scores and ranking of external factors leading to business failure in construction industry. Five (5) factors are indicated under this group. The top factor is “local political conditions”, followed by “closure and movement prevention between areas”. “Natural disaster” is the factor with the lowest score under this group (score = 2.01).

Table 4.

Ranking of external factors leading to construction business failure

Factor No.FactorFactor scoreRank
E1local political conditions4.31
E2closure and movement prevention between areas4.122
E3changes in banks policies3.563
E4weather2.824
E5natural disaster2.015

4.1.4 Overall factor ranking

Ranking and score for all factors causing business failure in construction industry are shown in Table 5. Results illustrate that the top 5 contributors are: delay in collecting payments from owner (financial group), poor work experience (managerial group), bidding strategy (managerial group), local political conditions, low profit due to high competition (financial group). It is noticed that no factor related to external group is among the top 5 contributors to business failure. This indicates that the top factors are internal factors which could be handled and controlled by different teams of construction projects. Therefore, the failure of business in construction industry can be minimized if these results are taken into consideration and managed in a way that reduces their negative effects on firms' success.

Table 5.

Overall ranking of factors of construction firm business failure

Factor No.FactorFactor scoreRank
F1delay in collecting payments from owner4.351
M1poor work experience4.332
M2bidding strategy4.323
E1local political conditions4.34
F2low profit due to high competition4.255
F3material cost changes4.236
F4paying high interest on bank loans4.207
E2closure and movement prevention between areas4.128
M3poor contract management4.069
M4lack of management and motivation system for labors3.8910
M5poor procurement management3.8811
F5wrong cost estimate3.8612
M6poor documentation system3.8513
F6money change fluctuations3.8414
F7cash flow problems3.7515
E3changes in banks policies3.5616
M7high competition3.5217
M8lack of professional management programs3.4418
M9improper resources management3.4119
F8controlling resources cost3.4120
M10lack of communication between participants3.4021
M11internal problems3.3622
F9dealing with change orders3.3423
M12organization of firm3.2824
M13lack of control systems3.2725
M14fraud3.2526
M15claims3.2127
M16bad relation between managers and labors3.2028
M17increased number and size of projects3.2029
M18improper planning during the early phases3.1430
F10monopoly3.1431
F11material waste excess3.1332
M19improper planning techniques3.133
F12rework cost3.0434
M20one man rule3.0235
E4weather2.8236
E5natural disaster2.0137

The factors with lowest effects on contactors' failure are: improper planning techniques (managerial group), rework cost (financial group), one man rule (managerial group), weather (external group), and natural disaster (external group). Two (2) out of the bottom 5 factors are related to external group, 2 factors are related to managerial group and one factor is under the financial group.

Results also show that 35 factors out of the 37 factors considered in this article have high or very high impact on business failure. Only the following 2 factors have moderate impact on business failure: weather (external group), and natural disaster (external group). No factor is identified with a score less than 2.

4.1.5 Top five major failure factors

The top 5 critical factors of construction firms' failure are listed in Table 6. The following paragraphs discuss them:

  1. Delay in collecting payments from owner: when the owner of the project delays the payments due to the contractor, the contractor, in turn, cannot pay the financial requirements of the project, such as payments for building materials, labor, subcontractors, equipment, staff, and others, which affects the progress of the project and the company's ability to continue. This result is consistent with what was achieved by [1], [21] and [12].

  2. Poor work experience: lack of sufficient experience in executing and managing projects by the contractor clearly and significantly affects the sustainability of the company. As the lack of experience leads to wrong pricing of projects, the inability to fulfill contractual balances, the inability to manage project resources, the inability to deal with changes on the ground, and the inability to deal with project parties effectively, will ultimately lead to the failure of the company. This is what was concluded in the study of [19].

  3. Bidding strategy: The policy applied locally in awarding the bid, which depends on awarding the bid to the lowest-priced contractor, contributes greatly to the failure of companies in that the lowest-priced contractor may not have the necessary qualifications to implement and manage the project and pay the financial dues necessary to continue the project smoothly and successfully. Therefore, owners should focus on the qualifications of the contracting company in terms of experience in the market, the size of the resources, the qualifications of the employees and the size of the capital to ensure the success of the project and the company as well. The same result was obtained by [19].

  4. Local political conditions: the political circumstances in which Palestine is going through clearly contribute to the failure of contracting companies. Since local political conditions contribute to dividing the country into separate geographical areas, this limits the movement of labors, materials and equipment, in addition to the obstacles imposed on importing materials and equipment from abroad, which reduces the availability of what projects need in terms of equipment and materials, in addition to the high fluctuation in their prices. Add to that strikes and lockouts, which impact on projects progress and performance. All these factors limit the company's financial capabilities and lead to its failure, especially if it was originally weak in experience, capabilities and qualifications. This result was concluded by [1].

  5. Low profit due to high competition: due to the large number of contracting companies compared to the limited local market and number of projects, some contractors apply the low profit policy to win a larger number of projects. This policy may be useless due to the constantly changing prices of materials, equipment and labors, and the high cost of living in general, such as water, electricity and other life necessities. This may lead to a loss for the company and its inability to keep pace with market requirements. This finding is unique as it has not been reported in previous studies.

Table 6.

The most critical failure factors

Factor No.FactorFactor scoreRank
F1delay in collecting payments from owner4.351
M1poor work experience4.332
M2bidding strategy4.323
E1local political conditions4.34
F2low profit due to high competition4.255

4.1.6 Ranking of major failure groups (sources)

The scores and ranking of major sources of business failure in construction industry are represented in Table 7. With a score value of 3.71, the financial group is the top group leading to construction business failure. This is followed by managerial group (score = 3.51) and external group (score = 3.36).

Table 7.

Ranking of groups of failure factors

GroupScoreRank
Financial3.711
Managerial3.512
External3.363

4.2 Data dispersion and homogeneity

To test the responses dispersion and homogeneity, standard deviation and coefficient of variation are calculated. Results are shown in Fig. 1 (standard deviation vs factor score) and Fig. 2 (coefficient of variation vs factor score). Figure 1 shows a dense cloud (responses close to each other) that indicates a small dispersion in the responses. Figure 2 also shows a dense cloud for coefficient of variation in responses which indicates a homogenous data.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Factor score vs standard deviation

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 15, 1; 10.1556/1848.2023.00707

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Factor score vs coefficient of variation

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 15, 1; 10.1556/1848.2023.00707

Figures indicate an inverse relation between factor score and standard deviation/coefficient of variation. This indicates a high agreement between contractors on the effects of the main factors concluded by the study. So, more efforts should be made to minimize these factors in construction industry to avoid the failure of contractors.

5 Conclusion

This article aims at illustrating the major factors of construction firms' failure from the perspective of constructors. Thirty-seven (37) factors were illustrated in this article. The factors were divided into 3 groups (sources): financial, managerial and external.

Results illustrates that the top 5 contributors are: delay in collecting payments from owner (financial group), poor work experience (managerial group), bidding strategy (managerial group), local political conditions, low profit due to high competition (financial group). Results indicate that the top factors are internal factors which could be handled and controlled by different teams of construction projects. Therefore, the failure of business in construction industry can be minimized if these results are taken into consideration and managed in a way that reduces their negative effects on firms' success.

The factors with lowest effects on contactors' failure are: improper planning techniques (managerial group), rework cost (financial group), one man rule (managerial group), weather (external group), and natural disaster (external group). The financial group is concluded as the main source of construction business failure, followed by managerial group and external group. The test of the responses dispersion and homogeneity shows a small dispersion and homogenous data. Results conclude a high agreement between contractors on the effects of the main factors concluded by the study. So, more efforts should be made to minimize these factors in construction industry to avoid the failure of contractors.

The findings of this paper lead to the following recommendations: (a) Owners should pay their bills on time to enable contractors to pay their financial commitments. (b) Qualifications of bidders should be the base for selection not the lowest price. Lowest price bidders are generally weak firms (firms with limited experience, staff and resources) that cannot face the challenges and problems on the ground, which leads to failure. (c) Government should take risks due to local political conditions and support construction firms morally and financially to avoid collapse. Contingency cost should be considered in the government annual budget to support construction firms due to unstable political situation. It would help companies to withstand the challenges. (d) Limiting the impact of fluctuation in building materials prices and currency exchange rates by updating and amending special conditions in contracts.

References

  • [1]

    K. Al Hallaq, “Critical factors causing contractor's business failure in Gaza strip,” J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1020, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    A. Enshassi, K. Al-Hallaq, and S. Mohamed, “Causes of contractor's business failure in developing countries: the case of Palestine,” J. Constr. Dev. Countries, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 114, 2006.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    I. Mahamid, “Analysis of rework in residential building projects in Palestine,” Jordan J. Civil Eng., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 197208, 2016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    M. Doumpos, K. Andriosopoulos, E. Galariotis, G. Makridou, and C. Zopounidis, “Corporate failure prediction in the European energy sector: a multicriteria approach and the effect of country characteristics,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 262, no. 1, pp. 347360, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    I. Mahamid, “Effect of design quality on delay in residential construction projects,” J. Sustain. Archit. Civil Eng., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 118129, 2021.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    D. Mbat and E. Eyo, “Corporate failure: causes and remedies,” Business Manage. Res., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1924, 2013.

  • [7]

    I. Mahamid, “Impact of rework on material waste in building construction projects,” Int. J. Constr. Manage., vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 15001507, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2020.1728607.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]

    A. Abu Bakar, M. Yusof, M. Tufail, and W. Virgiyanti, “Effect of knowledge management on growth performance in construction industry,” Manage. Decis., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 735749, 2016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    D. R. Szabó, N. Kovács, A. Patyi, and P. Tóth, “Risks in the Hungarian construction industry; interpretations, evaluations, and patterns,” June 2014, Conference: Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2014, at Portoroz, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    L. Török, “Ireland before and after the crisis: authoritative but hazardous structural reforms in financial crisis management,” Public Finance Q., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 254274, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    R. Fulford and C. Standing, “Construction industry productivity and the potential for collaborative practice,” Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 315326, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    I. Mahamid, “Factors affecting contractor's business failure: contractors' perspective,” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 269285, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981211219607.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [13]

    H. Driel, “Financial fraud, scandals, and regulation: a conceptual framework and literature review,” Business Hist., vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 12591299, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2018.1519026.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [14]

    M. Abebe, The Effect of Strategic Leadership on Organizational Innovation: In Case of Selected Digital Tech Firms in Ethiopia, 2021, Master thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    A. Bedada, “An analysis of how the construction business in Ethiopia is affected by the rising cost of building materials,” Am. J. Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 16, 2023. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajcbm.20230701.11.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    S. Kivrak and G. Arslan, “Factors causing construction company failure,” Building Abroad, pp. 297305, 2008, October 2008.

  • [17]

    Donkor, S., Determinants of business failure: the perspective of SMEs building contractors in the Ghanaian construction industry (Doctoral dissertation), 2011.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    G. Holt, “Construction business failure: conceptual synthesis of causal agents,” Constr. Innov., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5076, 2013.

  • [19]

    H. Absalom, M. Sylvester, W. Githae, D. Stephen, and O. Abednego, “Factors influencing effective productivity on construction sites in Nairobi county,” Int. J. Soft Comput. Eng. (IJSCE), vol. 4, no. 5, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]

    A. Sasikumar, R. Kumar, V. Rajan, and S. Kalpanadevi, “Critical causes of contractors’ failure in Indian construction industry,” J. Emerging Tech. Innovative Res., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 5659, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    K. John, A. Gwaya, and G. Wanyona, “Causes of contractors’ failure in the construction industry in Rwanda,” Int. J. Innovative Sci. Mod. Eng., vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 7582, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]

    C. Emory, Business Research Methods, Revised Edition. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1980.

  • [1]

    K. Al Hallaq, “Critical factors causing contractor's business failure in Gaza strip,” J. Eng. Res. Technol., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1020, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    A. Enshassi, K. Al-Hallaq, and S. Mohamed, “Causes of contractor's business failure in developing countries: the case of Palestine,” J. Constr. Dev. Countries, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 114, 2006.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    I. Mahamid, “Analysis of rework in residential building projects in Palestine,” Jordan J. Civil Eng., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 197208, 2016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    M. Doumpos, K. Andriosopoulos, E. Galariotis, G. Makridou, and C. Zopounidis, “Corporate failure prediction in the European energy sector: a multicriteria approach and the effect of country characteristics,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 262, no. 1, pp. 347360, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    I. Mahamid, “Effect of design quality on delay in residential construction projects,” J. Sustain. Archit. Civil Eng., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 118129, 2021.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    D. Mbat and E. Eyo, “Corporate failure: causes and remedies,” Business Manage. Res., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 1924, 2013.

  • [7]

    I. Mahamid, “Impact of rework on material waste in building construction projects,” Int. J. Constr. Manage., vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 15001507, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2020.1728607.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]

    A. Abu Bakar, M. Yusof, M. Tufail, and W. Virgiyanti, “Effect of knowledge management on growth performance in construction industry,” Manage. Decis., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 735749, 2016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    D. R. Szabó, N. Kovács, A. Patyi, and P. Tóth, “Risks in the Hungarian construction industry; interpretations, evaluations, and patterns,” June 2014, Conference: Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2014, at Portoroz, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    L. Török, “Ireland before and after the crisis: authoritative but hazardous structural reforms in financial crisis management,” Public Finance Q., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 254274, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [11]

    R. Fulford and C. Standing, “Construction industry productivity and the potential for collaborative practice,” Int. J. Project Manage., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 315326, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    I. Mahamid, “Factors affecting contractor's business failure: contractors' perspective,” Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 269285, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981211219607.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [13]

    H. Driel, “Financial fraud, scandals, and regulation: a conceptual framework and literature review,” Business Hist., vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 12591299, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2018.1519026.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [14]

    M. Abebe, The Effect of Strategic Leadership on Organizational Innovation: In Case of Selected Digital Tech Firms in Ethiopia, 2021, Master thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    A. Bedada, “An analysis of how the construction business in Ethiopia is affected by the rising cost of building materials,” Am. J. Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 16, 2023. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajcbm.20230701.11.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    S. Kivrak and G. Arslan, “Factors causing construction company failure,” Building Abroad, pp. 297305, 2008, October 2008.

  • [17]

    Donkor, S., Determinants of business failure: the perspective of SMEs building contractors in the Ghanaian construction industry (Doctoral dissertation), 2011.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    G. Holt, “Construction business failure: conceptual synthesis of causal agents,” Constr. Innov., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5076, 2013.

  • [19]

    H. Absalom, M. Sylvester, W. Githae, D. Stephen, and O. Abednego, “Factors influencing effective productivity on construction sites in Nairobi county,” Int. J. Soft Comput. Eng. (IJSCE), vol. 4, no. 5, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]

    A. Sasikumar, R. Kumar, V. Rajan, and S. Kalpanadevi, “Critical causes of contractors’ failure in Indian construction industry,” J. Emerging Tech. Innovative Res., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 5659, 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    K. John, A. Gwaya, and G. Wanyona, “Causes of contractors’ failure in the construction industry in Rwanda,” Int. J. Innovative Sci. Mod. Eng., vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 7582, 2019.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]

    C. Emory, Business Research Methods, Revised Edition. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1980.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
Submit Your Manuscript
 

Senior editors

Editor-in-Chief: Ákos, Lakatos University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Founder, former Editor-in-Chief (2011-2020): Ferenc Kalmár University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Founding Editor: György Csomós University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Associate Editor: Derek Clements Croome University of Reading (UK)

Associate Editor: Dezső Beke University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Editorial Board

  • Mohammad Nazir AHMAD Institute of Visual Informatics, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia

    Murat BAKIROV Center for Materials and Lifetime Management Ltd. Moscow Russia

    Nicolae BALC Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Umberto BERARDI Ryerson University Toronto Canada

    Ildikó BODNÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Sándor BODZÁS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Fatih Mehmet BOTSALI Selçuk University Konya Turkey

    Samuel BRUNNER Empa Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology

    István BUDAI University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Constantin BUNGAU University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Shanshan CAI Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China

    Michele De CARLI University of Padua Padua Italy

    Robert CERNY Czech Technical University in Prague Czech Republic

    György CSOMÓS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Tamás CSOKNYAI Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Eugen Ioan GERGELY University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    József FINTA University of Pécs Pécs Hungary

    Anna FORMICA IASI National Research Council Rome

    Alexandru GACSADI University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Eric A. GRULKE University of Kentucky Lexington United States

    Janez GRUM University of Ljubljana Ljubljana Slovenia

    Géza HUSI University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Ghaleb A. HUSSEINI American University of Sharjah Sharjah United Arab Emirates

    Nikolay IVANOV Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University St. Petersburg Russia

    Antal JÁRAI Eötvös Loránd University Budapest Hungary

    Gudni JÓHANNESSON The National Energy Authority of Iceland Reykjavik Iceland

    László KAJTÁR Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Ferenc KALMÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Tünde KALMÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Milos KALOUSEK Brno University of Technology Brno Czech Republik

    Jan KOCI Czech Technical University in Prague Prague Czech Republic

    Vaclav KOCI Czech Technical University in Prague Prague Czech Republic

    Imra KOCSIS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Imre KOVÁCS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Angela Daniela LA ROSA Norwegian University of Science and Technology

    Éva LOVRA Univeqrsity of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Elena LUCCHI Eurac Research, Institute for Renewable Energy Bolzano Italy

    Tamás MANKOVITS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Igor MEDVED Slovak Technical University in Bratislava Bratislava Slovakia

    Ligia MOGA Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Marco MOLINARI Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm Sweden

    Henrieta MORAVCIKOVA Slovak Academy of Sciences Bratislava Slovakia

    Phalguni MUKHOPHADYAYA University of Victoria Victoria Canada

    Balázs NAGY Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Husam S. NAJM Rutgers University New Brunswick United States

    Jozsef NYERS Subotica Tech College of Applied Sciences Subotica Serbia

    Bjarne W. OLESEN Technical University of Denmark Lyngby Denmark

    Stefan ONIGA North University of Baia Mare Baia Mare Romania

    Joaquim Norberto PIRES Universidade de Coimbra Coimbra Portugal

    László POKORÁDI Óbuda University Budapest Hungary

    Antal PUHL (1950–2023) University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Roman RABENSEIFER Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava Bratislava Slovak Republik

    Mohammad H. A. SALAH Hashemite University Zarqua Jordan

    Dietrich SCHMIDT Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology IWES Kassel Germany

    Lorand SZABÓ Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Csaba SZÁSZ Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Ioan SZÁVA Transylvania University of Brasov Brasov Romania

    Péter SZEMES University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Edit SZŰCS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Radu TARCA University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Zsolt TIBA University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    László TÓTH University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    László TÖRÖK University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Anton TRNIK Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra Nitra Slovakia

    Ibrahim UZMAY Erciyes University Kayseri Turkey

    Tibor VESSELÉNYI University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Nalinaksh S. VYAS Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur India

    Deborah WHITE The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Address of the institute: Faculty of Engineering, University of Debrecen
H-4028 Debrecen, Ótemető u. 2-4. Hungary
Email: irase@eng.unideb.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • DOAJ
  • ERIH PLUS
  • Google Scholar
  • ProQuest
  • SCOPUS
  • Ulrich's Periodicals Directory

 

2022  
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
9
Scimago
Journal Rank
0.235
Scimago Quartile Score Architecture (Q2)
Engineering (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Environmental Engineering (Q3)
Information Systems (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1.6
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Architecture 46/170 (73rd PCTL)
General Engineering 174/302 (42nd PCTL)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 93/150 (38th PCTL)
Environmental Engineering 123/184 (33rd PCTL)
Management Science and Operations Research 142/198 (28th PCTL)
Information Systems 281/379 (25th PCTL)
 
Scopus
SNIP
0.686

2021  
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
7
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,199
Scimago Quartile Score Engineering (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Environmental Engineering (Q4)
Information Systems (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) (Q4)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,2
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Architecture 48/149 (Q2)
General Engineering 186/300 (Q3)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 79/124 (Q3)
Environmental Engineering 118/173 (Q3)
Management Science and Operations Research 141/184 (Q4)
Information Systems 274/353 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP
0,457

2020  
Scimago
H-index
5
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,165
Scimago
Quartile Score
Engineering (miscellaneous) Q3
Environmental Engineering Q4
Information Systems Q4
Management Science and Operations Research Q4
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q4
Scopus
Cite Score
102/116=0,9
Scopus
Cite Score Rank
General Engineering 205/297 (Q3)
Environmental Engineering 107/146 (Q3)
Information Systems 269/329 (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research 139/166 (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 64/98 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,26
Scopus
Cites
57
Scopus
Documents
36
Days from submission to acceptance 84
Days from acceptance to publication 348
Acceptance
Rate

23%

 

2019  
Scimago
H-index
4
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,229
Scimago
Quartile Score
Engineering (miscellaneous) Q2
Environmental Engineering Q3
Information Systems Q3
Management Science and Operations Research Q4
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3
Scopus
Cite Score
46/81=0,6
Scopus
Cite Score Rank
General Engineering 227/299 (Q4)
Environmental Engineering 107/132 (Q4)
Information Systems 259/300 (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research 136/161 (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 60/86 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,866
Scopus
Cites
35
Scopus
Documents
47
Acceptance
Rate
21%

 

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 1100 EUR/article
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Limited number of full waiver available. Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription Information Gold Open Access

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
2010
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
3
Founder Debreceni Egyetem
Founder's
Address
H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary Egyetem tér 1
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2062-0810 (Print)
ISSN 2063-4269 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Nov 2023 0 67 24
Dec 2023 0 414 29
Jan 2024 0 201 31
Feb 2024 0 169 37
Mar 2024 0 267 88
Apr 2024 0 189 44
May 2024 0 0 0