Risk Management Plan For Elizabeth Quay Construction Project

Overview of Elizabeth Quay Construction Project

The project study is based on the principles of AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 that is addressing as well as managing the identified risks within the construction work of Elizabeth Quay. This particular project introduces with the project scope and objectives of the construction work. Risk management plan of this project work helps to identify and mitigate the potential risks.

Elizabeth Quay is the major construction project that is undertaken in the Western Australia. The place is becoming a destination for all ages of people. There will be 1.5 hectares of the space that links the public parks as well as spaces around the inlet towards the island (Studyperth.com.au 2014). The public remains eco-friendly in the place and new shops and restaurants complement them. The public area around the inlet is completed. Elizabeth Quay achieves objectives to re-establish a historic connection between the city as well as river. The project area takes of 10 hectares of riverfront in heart of the city, the project includes of construction of new inlet consists of parks and islands that connect the bridge (Cimic.com.au 2015).

The project work is focused on four main phrases such as:

Phase 1: 29,000 m3 of purpose of dredge

Phase 2: 160,000 m3 excavations for the inlet as well as pathway

Phase 3: 14,000 m2 of driven the sheet piles

Phase 4: 28,000 m2 of paving

The Elizabeth Project is important for the state government so that they can develop Perth as a global competitive city so that they can improve their residents, attract visitors and city workers. The total budget of this project is $2.6 billion. The total duration of the project is 2 years.

The following are the objectives of the Elizabeth Quay Project:

To re-establish a historic connection between the city as well as river

To develop Perth as a global competitive city so that they can improve their residents

The risk process consists of communication and consultation plan, establishing context, risk assessment process, risk treatment and risk monitoring and review (Too & Weaver 2014).

This particular plan includes set of purpose and required outcome, project objectives, stakeholder analysis and their roles and responsibilities, key messages as well as communication strategies through the consultation period (Petronila 2014). The plan ensures that risks are mitigated by using effective communication methods.

The project establishes communication plan to meet with the following objectives so that they can transfer data among the stakeholders.

• To make sure that communication forms strategic planning as well as process for decision making
• To gain suggestions from other stakeholders when dealing with risks
• To keep all the stakeholders informed with the identified risks
• To provide solutions to the risks
• To carry out development activities for the stakeholder so that they can understand their project objectives
• To promote of customer satisfaction by providing communication plan
• To understand the interest levels of the stakeholders 

Project Phases and Objectives

Group	Frequency	Media	Purpose
Project management groups	Weekly	Review of the project risk through meeting	The risks are discussed and proper mitigation steps are taken to solve it. Then, risk management report is prepared to update the stakeholders with its status (Snyder 2014).
Risk management groups	Bi-weekly	Team meeting to discuss the status of the risks	It reviews if the stakeholders have interest to manage the risks (Kerzner 2013). It also reviews the communication channels required to exchange of information.
Organizational team	Monthly	Executive briefing sessions	It updates the stakeholders with the risk management, which are taken to resolve the risks (Schwalbe 2015). It provides with risk treatment methods to manage the risks on time.

Based on the As/NZ ISO 31000: 2009, the context of the risk management is taken into account that establishes of internal as well as external risks (Burke & Barron 2014). As per the AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009, both inside, and also the outside context of the Elizabeth Quay, is being talked about. This particular risk administration standard expresses the prerequisite for security administration in the project work and also for capacity administration those are embraced activities for the functional wellbeing. It additionally expresses a portion of the useful wellbeing exercises, for example, a prerequisite of a safety officer, generation of security plan and additionally required risk management measures. It is required for free security evaluation inside the project work. The two contexts are discussed as below:

The internal departments those are involved with the construction project plan are design and plan department, operations, finance, construction, safety, internal audit as well as communication department. Elizabeth Quay attracts around 1,000,000 visitors within three weeks after the opening. The project work achieves objectives to re-establish a historic connection between the city as well as river (Cimic.com.au 2015). It is constructed in heart of the city, and the project includes of construction of new inlet consists of parks as well as islands that connect the bridge.  The place becomes so popular among the locals visitors and tourists that ferry services is required to expand.  It can attract city workers, visitors and families with children. All the departments work to meet with the organizational objectives such as:

1. There is a requirement of faster growth of the project for profitability of the project group.
2. There is a requirement of improvement in the domestic influence within the industry (Heagney 2016).
3. It attracts the local visitors and other people by providing them an eco-friendly park (Mra.wa.gov.au 2015).
4. The visitors like the opening festival with free events as well as entertainments.

The project client is Western Australia State Government that helps them to meet with the project objectives. Elizabeth Quay is the waterfront development project in the external environment as it reconnects Perth city with Swan River in order to create an eco-friendly environment (Mra.wa.gov.au 2016). The benefit of the project is construction of new city bound the traffic link. It is not only accommodating the westbound traffic but it also provides an alternative path within the city. The project creates job as well as investment for the Western Australia when it recovers the upfront cost due to sale of land around the inlet (Studyperth.com.au 2015). After the completion of the plan, the inlet consists of 800 of the residential apartments, 200,000sqm of the office space, as well as 25,000sqm of the retail space. From the side of external context, there is an issue of lack of constructional suppliers within the country. Therefore, it raises the risk from logistics, as it is required to hire of foreign suppliers. (Studyperth.com.au 2014) If the project work focuses on domestic suppliers, then there are quality risks. Ineffective communication plan also leads to the project risk.   

Stakeholders and their Roles and Responsibilities

This context contains the process to identify the risks, analyzing and evaluation of risks, treat them and finally monitor the risks (Martinelli & Milosevic 2016). The main goal of risk management plan is to minimize the risks that provide a bad impact on the employees as well as organizational objectives. At first risk is identified, then they are analyzed and finally it is evaluated (Heldman 2015). On time, all the risks are required to mitigate so that it does not provide adverse impact on the project scope and objectives. The population of Perth is increasing, it means that the city requires new offices, outlets of retail and hotels, therefore this project provides with new exciting places as well as facilities for the central Perth. The risk management is undertaken to justify the resources, which are carried out the risk management (Martinelli & Milosevic 2016). The context of the risk management process consists of the following processes such as:

1. Defining of the project goals as well as objectives within the risk management processes (van Aartsengel & Kurtoglu 2013).
2. Defining of the responsibilities of the project stakeholders in the risk management process so that all the stakeholders are familiar with their key roles into the project.
3. Defining of the project scope (Lientz 2016).
4. Defining of the risk assessment methodologies
5. Identification and specification of the decisions made to mitigate the risks (Sears et al. 2014).

The project takes into account project criteria, which are used to evaluate the significance of identified risks. The criteria are based on value of organization, the project objectives as well as resources (Olsen 2015). At the time of defining of the risk criteria, the following factors are taken:

1. Nature of risk and consequences that can happen
2. Likelihood of the risk
3. Timeframe of likelihood and consequence
4. Level of risks require to determine
5. Risk level to be acceptable and tolerable
6. Risk treatment methods
7. Stakeholders point of view on the risks

The stakeholders involved with the project plan are project manager, project sponsor, site supervisor, civil engineer, and construction technician, local authorities, suppliers, leading hand, labourer and form setter.

The following are the roles as well as responsibilities of the stakeholders those are involved in the construction project work of Elizabeth Quay:

Stakeholder role	Internal/External	Responsibilities
Project manager	Internal	1. The project manager should develop the schedule of the project. 2. The person estimates the total budget for the plan. 3. Determines the project scope (Hwang & Ng 2013).
Project sponsor	Internal	1. The person ensures that the work fits into the project budget 2. Collect funds for the project 3. Change client’s requirements into realistic terms (Heizer & Barry 2013). 4. All the project materials are of good quality.
Site supervisor	Internal	1. The site supervisor takes permits for the site from the high-level manager to start the construction work (Martinelli & Milosevic 2016). 2. The person involves in designing of the construction site to construct of offices, parks, restaurants and others (Too & Weaver 2014). 3. The person supervises the laborer to work as per project requirements.
Civil engineer	Internal	1. The person enforces the safety procedures at the site and uses protective equipments into the project. 2. Attends meeting, which is organized with the clients (van Aartsengel & Kurtoglu 2013). 3. Assisting the project manager into the supervision work 4. Assist into planning as well as sequencing of the construction works
Construction technician	Internal	1. The person visits the construction site at daily basis in order to inspect of the construction phases (Martinelli & Milosevic 2016). 2. Preparation of daily progress report 3. Maintain of progress schedules
Local authorities	External	1. Provide permission to construct the Elizabeth Quay on the selected site 2. Enforcing of the local laws as well as legislation 3. Provide information as well as advices to the project manager (Kerzner 2013).
Suppliers	External	1. Provide equipments and services in time 2. Delivery of project materials to the construction organization
Leading hand	External	1. The person makes sure that all the project activities are to be carried out securely (van Aartsengel & Kurtoglu 2013). 2. Request of the project materials as well as equipments
Labourer	External	1. The laborer prepares the selected project site to construct the offices, restaurants and others (Too & Weaver 2014). 2. Delivery of construction materials on time
Form Setter	External	1. Building of the layout of the forms (Hwang & Ng 2013). 2. Filling the project related forms to fill materials

The risk management policy ensures that there is a sustainable business growth in the project work with stability as well as promotion of pre-active approaches in the reporting as well as resolving of the associated risks. The policies make sure that the current risk exposures in the project are mitigated to provide a construction work (Martinelli & Milosevic 2016). It enables of compliances with project regulations through adopting of best practices. It also assesses growth of the construction work by means of financial stability. The risk management plan for Elizabeth Quay is conducting under the guidelines and policies of AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. It recognizes the project risks as well as hazards (Too & Weaver 2014). It provides with a way to deal with the project standards to manage the risks within the project. While the workers are conducting the construction work, they should follow all the risk management policies so that they can mitigate the occurrence of risks and saves the life of the workers.

Internal and External Contexts of Risk Management

This section is focused on identification, analysis and evaluation of risks associated with the project for construction of Elizabeth Quay. The identification and analysis of risks are being presented in this section according to SA/SNZ HB 89.

In this phase, the identification of possible risks will be conducted to determine the impact of those risks upon the project. The identified risks that will be recorded must be according to the established criteria for risk assessment in context to the Elizabeth Quay development project.

Various techniques are available for identification of risks which can be implemented in the Elizabeth Quay development project. In this plan for risk management, two main techniques are taken into consideration to determine the risks associated with the project. The first option that is considered suitable is the use of checklists (Turner 2014). The checklist is a simple form developed to determine the issues that may arise as risks in a project. Another technique is brainstorming which involves a group of people combined together to determine the risks associated with the project. This technique is considered as one of the best options for risk identification and mitigation. The brainstorming activities offers complex risk analysis.    

The risk management plan for the development of Elizabeth Quay is developed in accordance to the SA/SNZ HB 89 which illustrates upon the guidelines for techniques to assess risks. This plan for risk management considers risks in terms of environment, social and geographical conditions of the riverside (Teller & Kock 2013). The identified risks are recorded and presented in the Risk register to demonstrate the impact of probability of determined risks.

Project: Elizabeth Quay development                                                                     Date: 02 May 2017 Location: Australia
S. No	Risk	What may happen?	How it may happen?	Consequences	Rating	Risk Level
Likelihood	Consequences
1.	Destruction of the area for riverside walk	No open space for public	Acquisition of land for construction	Beautification issues	5	2	H
2.	Diversion of Riverside drive	Congestion of traffic	Land claimed for construction	Damage of assets	4	1	M
3.	Lack of financial viability	Return on investment is negative	Inappropriate estimation of budget (Kendrick 2015)	Financial issues	3	5	E
4.	Lack of environmental sustainability	Increase in sea level per year thus negative impact on climate change	Environmental degradation	Environmental issues	4	2	M
5.	Inappropriate and detrimental use of land	Degradation of land	Infiltration of hazard material	Health issues	3	2	M
6.	Lack of concept and creativity in design	Design does not meet the required criteria	Unskilled workers (Pritchard & PMP 2014)	Delay in time	5	1	M
7.	Insensitivity of micro-climatic conditions of the location	Impact on the aquatic environment	Pollution created from construction	Environmental issues	4	2	M
8.	Misappropriation of the created land	Contamination of land	Infection from hazardous materials used in construction	Health issues	2	3	M
9.	Detrimental impacts on the city foreshore and city center	Reduced connection between city foreshore and city center	Improper choice of location	Damage of assets	3	3	M
10.	Failure to understand and cater the needs of tourists	Reduction in attraction of tourists	Loss of beautification of the riverside	Loss in revenue	1	5	M

This step comprises of analyzing the probabilities of the risks that have been identified along with their consequences. This process helps to rate risks according to their level and determine how severe they are in context to the particular project. 

For this particular project to develop the Elizabeth Quay, a simple qualitative risk assessment matrix has been used for defining the rating of risks with the help of likelihood and consequences (Kerzner 2013). A rating scale matrix of 5 point is used for this project in which the rating offers to concentrate upon the risks and prioritization to manage them according to significance. The risk register is being prepared based on the matrix illustrated in beneath table that helps to achieve the required rating of risks for each event.

Likelihood	Consequences
Insignificant 1	Minor 2	Moderate 3	Major 4	Catastrophic 5
Certain 5	M	H	H	E	E
Likely 4	M	M	H	H	E
Possible 3	L	M	M	H	E
Unlikely 2	L	M	M	M	H
Rare 1	L	L	M	M	M

Risk Assessment and Mitigation Process

Green: This indicates low level risks. It can also be considered as negligible risk.

Yellow: This indicates risks that are of medium level and considered as acceptable risks.

Orange: It refers to serious issues and immediate mitigation steps have to be carried out.

Red: This type of risks are critical and may delay of even failure of the project.

Potential Failure Mode	Potential Failure effects	Potential causes of Failure	Current Controls	Consequence	Likelihood	Detectability	RPN	Recommended Action	Responsibility	Revised Consequence	Revised Likelihood	Revised Detectability	Revised RPN
Damage to the riverside walk area	No open space for public	Acquisition of land for construction	Take proper actions to retain the beauty of riverside  walk	5	4	3	60	Bypass riverside walk for construction	Design Engineer	4	3	4	48
Diversion in the  Riverside drive	Congestion of traffic	Land claimed for construction	Arrangement of proper traffic controls	4	5	4	80	Develop traffic control procedures	Traffic controller	3	4	4	48
Lack of financial viability	Return on investment is negative	Inappropriate estimation of budget	Arrangement of sponsorship	5	3	2	30	Proper budgeting prior to start of project	Financial Analyst	4	2	1	8
Environmental sustainability	Increase in sea level per year thus negative impact on climate change	Environmental degradation	Application of Green construction practices	3	4	2	24	Apply green construction process	Environmentalist	2	3	1	6
Detrimental use of land	Degradation of land	Infiltration of hazard material	Controlled supervision	4	3	5	60	Testing of materials	Supervisor	3	2	4	24
Lack of concept and creativity in design	Design does not meet the required criteria	Unskilled workers	Training of workers	2	5	4	40	Arrange training sessions	Site Engineer, Architect	2	4	3	24
Changes in Microclimatic conditions	Impact on the aquatic environment	Pollution created from construction	Material certificate to be pollution free	3	3	5	45	Check pollution level	Environmentalist	2	3	4	24
Misappropriation of the created land	Contamination of land	Infection from hazardous materials used in construction	Preliminary tests of materials	4	5	3	60	Testing of materials	Geologist	3	4	2	24
Detrimental impacts on the city foreshore and city center	Reduced connection between city foreshore and city center	Improper choice of location	Induction of safety	5	2	4	40	Selection of proper site location	Site Engineer	3	1	3	9
Failure to understand and cater the needs of tourists	Reduction in attraction of tourists	Loss of beautification of the riverside	Retain the beauty with alternative design	3	4	1	12	Beautification of the riverside	Business Analyst	2	3	1	6

A list of possible preliminary controls are provided in column 7 of the FMEA analysis.

Based on the above FMEA analysis, the below chart has been developed to illustrate the risks’ RPN (Risk Priority Number) after applying the recommended treatment (Hopkin 2017). It has been noticed that even after treatment of the risks, the financial viability have to be taken into account for this particular project.

Figure 2: Severity/Occurrence Matrix

(Source: Created by Author)

The severity indicates the possibility of a risk that it may occur in a project and the occurrence relates to how often the risk may occur in the project. The above graph presents the two indices based on the development of Elizabeth Quay project.

Now, after the identification and analysis stages, it is time to evaluate those risks. All the listed risks have to be evaluated in order to focus on those with higher priorities and apply the appropriate treatment (Zhang 2016). This section defines the used method for evaluation, in accordance with SA/SNZ HB 89, and list risks that require further treatment.

ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) principle is used for the purpose of evaluation so that risks can be identified and priorities of treatment can be defined. The use of this method allows to determine whether further treatment is required or not for the project (Walker 2015). The below figure shows ALARP principle with high level risks at the top and low level risks at the bottom. The middle region is defined as ‘Tolerable Region’; as most risks in this area are tolerable. 

The list of risks that require further mitigation with the help of ALARP principle are provided as below:

• No. 3: Lack of financial viability
• No. 4: Lack of environmental sustainability
• No. 6: Lack of concept and creativity in design

Some of the options for treatment of risks in context to the development of Elizabeth Quay that are used for mitigation of risks are listed as below:

1. The workers involved in the construction process of Elizabeth Quay have to be made aware on the need for green construction (Kunreuther et al. 2013).
2. The construction have to be carried out considering the environmental impact and must ensure the specific standards are being followed to reduce the impact on environment and society (Too & Weaver 2014).
3. A weekly internal audit have to be conducted for identifying the existing issues within the plan for development.

The strategies that are implemented in this project for treatment of risks to mitigate the issues occurring within the project plan are listed as below:

1. The best and effective options for treatment of risks are considered.
2. The risks are rated and based on the rating of risks, the benefits has been estimated to ensure success of the project (de Lucena, Lustosa & Hillson 2015).

The risks that have been identified are observed and looked into as the risks affecting the development of Elizabeth Quay. This execution plan needs occasional observing to overcome the risks. It is done to routinely confirm and inspect where the project ought to advance in achieving their hazard systems and targets. It is done to decide whether the strategies for mitigation of risks ought to meet with business necessities (Edwards & Bowen 2013). ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) principle is used for the purpose of evaluation so that risks can be identified and priorities of treatment can be defined. The use of this method allows to determine whether further treatment is required or not for the project. A portion of the monitoring techniques on a periodic basis are utilized, for example, hazard enlist, approval of the framework, inside review, assessment and in addition week after week gatherings with the administration group. The primary point of this hazard observing is to survey the whole plan for the project and in addition evaluate the money related reasonability for advancement of Elizabeth Quay.

Risk Management Criteria

At last, the closure of risks ought to be done to close every one of the risks by moderating them at the opportune time utilizing risk treatment alternatives. Finally, after the improvement of Elizabeth Quay in view of parts of ecological security, criticism of the clients is taken to distinguish if there are any conceivable risks (Chance & Brooks 2015). The risk administration plan is shut when there are no such risks, which happen or impacted the plan for project. The procedure to close the project risk is a stage to pick up the acknowledgment of the customer on the project’s results. Finally, the project group watches the controlling procedure; triggers used to alleviate the risks and takes a look at the formal (Haimes 2015). Because of a result of the treatment procedure, comparative risks are not happening, and documentation ought to do to analyze those risks.

Conclusion

It is concluded that the construction project of Elizabeth Quay consists of the project standards of AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009. The project work is based on re-establishing a historic connection between the city as well as river. All the risks are identified and it is mitigated by risk assessment plan. The risk management is undertaken to justify the resources, which are carried out the risk management. Communication as well as consultation plan are required within the organization so that each of the project stakeholders should interact with each other and discusses the project risks. With use of risk management plan, all the risks are mitigated on time so that it does not affect the project success. This particular project work provides the population of Perth with an eco-friendly environment so that it attracts more and more local visitors as well as tourists towards them.

References

Burke, R. & Barron, S., 2014. Project management leadership: building creative teams. John Wiley & Sons.

Chance, D.M. & Brooks, R., 2015. Introduction to derivatives & risk management. Cengage Learning.

Cimic.com.au 2015. Elizabeth Quay, Perth – CIMIC Group. [online] Cimic.com.au. Available at: https://www.cimic.com.au/our-business/projects/elizabeth-quay [Accessed 2 May 2017].

de Lucena, B.R.D., Lustosa, L.J. & Hillson, D., 2015. Program Risk Management: Making Strategy Possible. In Strategic Project Management: Contemporary Issues & Strategies for Developing Economies (pp. 153-178). CRC Press.

Edwards, P. & Bowen, P., 2013. Risk management in project organisations. Routledge.

Haimes, Y.Y., 2015. Risk modeling, assessment, & management. John Wiley & Sons.

Heagney, J., 2016. Fundamentals of project management. AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn.

Heizer, R. & Barry, R., 2013. Operation Management, Sustainability and Supply Chain management (Vol. 11). Pearson, UK.

Risk Management Policies

Heldman, K., 2015. PMP Project Management Professional Exam Deluxe Study Guide: Updated for the 2015 Exam. John Wiley & Sons.

Hopkin, P., 2017. Fundamentals of risk management: underst&ing, evaluating & implementing effective risk management. Kogan Page Publishers.

Hwang, B.G. & Ng, W.J., 2013. Project management knowledge and skills for green construction: Overcoming challenges. International Journal of Project Management, 31(2), pp.272-284.

Kendrick, T., 2015. Identifying & managing project risk: essential tools for failure-proofing your project. AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn.

Kerzner, H., 2013. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.

Kerzner, H., 2013. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, & controlling. John Wiley & Sons.

Kunreuther, H., Heal, G., Allen, M., Edenhofer, O., Field, C.B. & Yohe, G., 2013. Risk management & climate change. Nature Climate Change, 3(5), pp.447-450.

Lientz, B. & Rea, K., 2016. Breakthrough technology project management. Routledge.

Martinelli, R.J. & Milosevic, D.Z., 2016. Project management toolbox: tools and techniques for the practicing project manager. John Wiley & Sons.

Martinsuo, M., 2013. Project portfolio management in practice & in context. International Journal of Project Management, 31(6), pp.794-803.

Mir, F.A. & Pinnington, A.H., 2014. Exploring the value of project management: linking project management performance & project success. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), pp.202-217.

Mra.wa.gov.au 2015. Quay delivers benefits above and below. [online] Mra.wa.gov.au. Available at: https://www.mra.wa.gov.au/news-and-updates/article/quay-delivers-benefits-above-and-below [Accessed 2 May 2017].

Mra.wa.gov.au 2016. Elizabeth Quay Vision | MRA. [online] Mra.wa.gov.au. Available at: https://www.mra.wa.gov.au/projects-and-places/elizabeth-quay/vision [Accessed 2 May 2017].

Olsen, P., 2015. Utilizing Project Management Tools to Develop a New Academic Advising Framework (Doctoral dissertation, The College of St. Scholastica).

Petronila, A., 2014. Project Management Plan. Docs. school Publications.

Pritchard, C.L. & PMP, P.R., 2014. Risk management: concepts & guidance. CRC Press.

Schwalbe, K., 2015. Information technology project management. Cengage Learning.

Sears, S.K., Sears, G.A., Clough, R.H., Rounds, J.L. and Segner, R.O., 2015. Construction project management. John Wiley & Sons.

Snyder, C.S., 2014. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK (®) Guide. Project Management Institute.

Studyperth.com.au 2014. Elizabeth Quay is the place to be in Perth!. [online] Studyperth.com.au. Available at: https://www.studyperth.com.au/about/news-feeds/2016/05/elizabeth-quay-place-be-perth [Accessed 2 May 2017].

Studyperth.com.au 2015. Major projects in Perth. [online] Studyperth.com.au. Available at: https://www.studyperth.com.au/your-future-perth/major-projects-perth [Accessed 2 May 2017].

Teller, J. & Kock, A., 2013. An empirical investigation on how portfolio risk management influences project portfolio success. International Journal of Project Management, 31(6), pp.817-829.

Too, E.G. & Weaver, P., 2014. The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), pp.1382-1394.

Too, E.G. & Weaver, P., 2014. The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), pp.1382-1394.

Turner, J.R., 2014. The handbook of project-based management (Vol. 92). New York, NY: McGraw-hill.

van Aartsengel, A. & Kurtoglu, S., 2013. Develop Project Management Plan. In Handbook on Continuous Improvement Transformation (pp. 57-63). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Walker, A., 2015. Project management in construction. John Wiley & Sons.

Zhang, Y., 2016. Selecting risk response strategies considering project risk interdependence. International Journal of Project Management, 34(5), pp.819-830.