Risk Management Plan For Excavation Work

Case

Construction projects being complex in nature comprises of different interrelated operations. These operations are separately associated with a number of risks that need to be assessed and minimised to make the construction project more efficient and successful. Risks associated with construction operations are dependent on different factors like their interrelation with other activities and complexity of the activity as well (Serpella, Ferrada, Howard, & Rubio, 2014). These risks are hazardous for workers making a serious concern for managers as well. Therefore a proper risk management system has to be developed to manage and control construction risks at the construction site.

In this report a brief risk management plan is discussed including a risk matrix, consequence table for cost as well time, likelihood table, escalation table, and assessing the contingency of time and cost for an excavation work of the given case.

In the given case XYZ company is preparing to dig an underground hole of given specifications. The given specifications for the excavation work are:

• 10m x 10m x 5m – Concept Design
• No geotechnical data, assume 80% soil, 20% rock
• Productivity rate in soil: 20m3/d
• Productivity rate in rock: 10m3/d
• Excavator: $2000/d
• Labor: $500/d
• Overhead including profit: $200/d

In this case total excavation has to be made is calculated as

Total excavation = volume of the dig

= 10*10*5=500m³

Total soil excavation = 500*80/100

=400m³

Total rock excavation = 500*20/100

=100m³

Time for soil excavation = total soil excavation/efficiency of soil excavation

= 400/20

= 20 days

Time for rock excavation = total rock excavation/efficiency of rock excavation

= 100/10

= 10 days

Total time required for excavation work = 20+10 = 30 days

Company requires the labour and excavator for 30 days which will cost separately as:

Excavator’s cost for 30 days = 30*cost of excavator for 1 day

= 30*2000

= $60000/

Labor’s cost for 30 days = 30*cost of labor for 1 day

= 30*500

= $15000/

Overhead charges including company profit = $200 per day

Total overhead charge = 30*200

= $6000/

Total cost of excavation = cost of excavator + cost of labor + overhead charges

= 60000+15000+6000

= $81000/

This given case has to several risks associated with it which has to be analysed and controlled by the company.

While executing any activity of construction project risks associated with that particular activity have to be assessed and analysed. In this order different risk management tools are used by organizations. Among these, XYZ Company uses risk matrix, consequence table, likelihood table, escalation table, and assess the contingencies of time and cost for the given excavation work. This management system of the company follows the typical process of risk management including all the three stages of risk management that are: Risk Analysis or Identification, Risk Assessment or Evaluation, and Risk Treatment or Response.

At this stage risks are identifies or analysed at levels of hazardousness. In excavation work at a construction site there are different risks that develop a hazardous situation and harm workers at the operational site of excavation work (Boehe, 2016). At the excavation site, there may be several hazardous like:

• Workers may fall into the excavations or trenches
• Tripping over debris, equipment and spoil
• Falling objects from excavated material and other objects on workers
• Unstable adjacent structures
• Exposure to overhead cables of electricity or underground services
• Poorly placed or mishandled material at the excavation trenches
• Exposure to the hazardous atmosphere or gases
• Exposure to the underground sources of irritating, toxic or inflammable and explosive gases while excavating
• Accidents due to excavators or other mobile vehicles

These identified risks associated with the excavation work at site have to be evaluated efficiently at the next stage (Cooper, et al, 2014).

Risk Management

Risk evaluation is the process of prioritizing risks based on different criteria like hazardousness of risk, probability or likelihood of risk occurrence and many more (Hwang, Zhao, & Chin, 2017). Managers at the site make decisions on the basis of risk evaluation done by the risk management team. Risk evaluation uses different tools to prioritize or categorise the risks identified in the previous step of irk analysis or identification (Albery, Borys, & Tepe, 2016). These tools are key elements of risk evaluation at the time of making decision for taking right decision for risk management strategy formation (Kerzner, & Kerzner, 2017). Some of the risk evaluation tools used by the XYZ Company are Risk matrix, consequence table for cost as well time, likelihood table, escalation table, and assessing the contingency of time and cost for an excavation work of the given case (Baron-Puda, 2015).

Likelihood table

Likelihood table defines the frequency or probability of an incident or accident at the site location. This frequency helps to determine the risk matrix value for risk analysis or evaluation at the time of assessing a risk (Salah, & Moselhi, 2015). For the given case scenario of digging an underground hole of given dimensions the likelihood table to prepare a 4*4 risk matrix can be seen below:

1	Unlikely	This indicates a rarely occurring risk that has the probability of occurrence <20%. Risks of this likelihood are of non-complex nature.
2	Moderate	These risks have moderate probability of occurrence: 20-40%. Maximum probability of 40% can only be seen in very complex projects.
3	Likely	These risks are very like to take place at any stage of the work. organizations face these risks frequently in almost every project or work at the site.
4	Very Likely	Risks that are of no control or very certain to occure in every task of construction project.

Consequence table

Consequence table defines the severity of an incident or accident at the site location. This level of severity or hazardousness of an incident at the site location multiplying with the likelihood values of an incide3nt gives the overall value of risk for risk matric for individual incident (Peterson, Lerman, & Nissen, 2016). For the give case scenario, in which XYZ company is excavating an underground hole of the given dimensions, consequence table can be prepared as below:

Level & descriptor	Health Impacts	Critical services interruption	Organizational outcomes/ objectives	Reputation and image per issue	Non-compliance
Minor (1)	Routine health check-ups required (up to 1 week incapacity)	Short term temporary suspension – backlog cleared < 1 day	Inconvenient delays	Non-headline exposure, clear fault settled quickly; negligible impact	Breach; objection/complaint lodged; minor harm with investigation
Moderate (2)	Increased level medical attention (2 wks to 3 mths incapacity)	Medium term temporary suspension – backlog cleared by additional resources	Material delays; marginal under-achievement of target performance	Repeated non-headline exposure; slow resolution; Ministerial enquiry/briefing	Negligent breach; lack of good faith evident; performance review initiated
Major (3)	Severe health crisis (incapacity beyond 3 mths)	Prolonged suspension of work – additional resources required; performance affected	Significant delays; performance significantly under target	Headline profile; repeated exposure; at fault or unresolved complexities; ministerial involvement	Deliberate breach or gross negligence; formal investigation; disciplinary action; ministerial involvement
Catastrophic (4)	Multiple severe health crises/injury or death	Indeterminate prolonged suspension of work; non performance	Non achievement of objective/ outcome; performance failure	Maximum high level headline exposure; Ministerial censure; loss of credibility	Serious, wilful breach; criminal negligence or act; prosecution; dismissal; ministerial censure

Risk matrix

It is a matrix used at the time of risk assessment in order to define the level of risk in terms or its hazardousness considering the probability or likelihood of a risk against its respective consequences or hazards (Quintus, & Ladefoged, 2016). This mechanism of the tool enhances the visibility or risk hazards and assists mangers in making right decision for the risk management plan for the site work. In this matrix level of risk hazards is calculate by multiplying the probability of risk occurrence and its severity (Qian, & Lin, 2016). Although standard risk matrices are available in certain contexts like US DoD, NASA, and ISO, risk matrices can be formed for individual projects or activities as per their own risks associated with the particular activity (Taylan, Bafail, Abdulaal, & Kabli, 2014).

In order to prepare a 4*4 risk matrix for the given case severity can be taken as Minor, Moderate, Major, and Extreme, whereas the likelihood or probability can be taken as Unlikely, Moderate, Likely, and Very Likely.

For the given case scenario of excavation work of 500m³ of soil and rock risk matrix is formed as below:

	Severity
	Minor	Moderate	Major	Extreme
Likelihood	Unlikely	Low	Low	Low	Low
Moderate	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium
Likely	Low	Medium	Medium	High
Very Likely	Low	Medium	High	High

Using these tools for the given excavation work XYZ Company has found that the excavation work is associated with medium level of risks. These risks that are found to be of medium level are like: falling of objects on workers, falling of trench earth and similar other risks. These risks will affect the estimated price as well.

Risk Analysis

Contingency allowance is the allocation of extra time or cost for the project activity. Time contingency is defined as the extra time allowance for both the labor as well as excavator in case of any delay due to an accidental incident at the site location. In the given case scenario excavation work is of 30 days only but accidents can occurs at any stage of the work. therefore to minimize the over cost in the planning process an extra time allowance is provided to overcome the delay charges for the project.

Along with the extra time allowed for minimizing the time consequences extra cost allowances are also provided for the same work. These allowances are for the repairing of any damage in the machinery or expenses for the health care of workers at the site (Yildiz, Dikmen, Birgonul, Ercoskun, & Alten, 2014).

At this stage response plans or strategies are prepared for the work. XYZ Company really look after its employees or site workers and always make more strategic in the response of any type of risks. The risk response strategy of XYZ Company can be seen in below given table:

For Threats For Opportunities
Avoid. Best option for any risk identified at the initial stage is avoiding it by making suitable changes in the execution plan. Generally threats of a construction work are good to avoid.	Exploit. In excavation work there are some opportunities that can help the work in making it more efficient and safe for the company. In case if there is already a pit at the excavation site this can be used to reduce the efforts of both the labor as well as machinery.
Transfer. In construction projects there are some risks that are difficult to deal with by the company therefore such risks are transferred to a third party assigning complete responsibility of that particular risk. In this process organization is free from dealing with that particular risk.	Share. Sharing and transferring a risk are similar up to some extent. In sharing company grabs the opportunity of sharing the work and benefits with the third party.
Mitigate. In order to reduce the probability or likelihood and/or impact of an incident mitigation is the best strategy suitable for the organization.	Enhance. In this strategy XYZ organization try to enhance every opportunity available from risk as a perk.
Acceptance. In some case it is not possible to deal with the risks with the help of any other strategy or it can be stated that there are risks that cannot be mitigated, transferred, or shared. In such cases organization has to accept the situation and deal with it.

Conclusion

XYZ Company will execute the excavation work with minimum risks ensuring a better safety for workers and making the work both the time efficient as well as cost efficient. The above risk management methodology will help the organization to understand different risks at different stages and will also help the organization to prepare best suitable strategy for the risk management. The excavation work is quite long and risks are likely to occur therefore this risk assessment will help the organization really and will surely make the work efficient.

References

Serpella, A. F., Ferrada, X., Howard, R., & Rubio, L. (2014). Risk management in construction projects: a knowledge-based approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 119, pp. 653-662.

Cooper, D., Bosnich, P., Grey, S., Purdy, G., Raymond, G., Walker, P., & Wood, M. (2014). Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk with ISO 31000 and IEC 62198. US: Wiley Global Education.

Kerzner, H., & Kerzner, H. R. (2017). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. US: John Wiley & Sons.

Boehe, D. M. (2016). Supervisory styles: A contingency framework. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), pp. 399-414.

Hwang, B. G., Zhao, X., & Chin, E. W. Y. (2017). International construction joint ventures between Singapore and developing countries: Risk assessment and allocation preferences. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 24(2), pp. 209-228.

Albery, S., Borys, D., & Tepe, S. (2016). Advantages for risk assessment: Evaluating learnings from question sets inspired by the FRAM and the risk matrix in a manufacturing environment. Safety science, 89, pp. 180-189.

Baron-Puda, M. (2015). Occupational risk asssessment in management of health and safety in workplaces. Zarz?dzanie Przedsi?biorstwem, 18(3), pp. 2-10.

Peterson, C., Lerman, D. C., & Nissen, M. A. (2016). Reinforcer choice as an antecedent versus consequence. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 49(2), pp. 286-293.

Taylan, O., Bafail, A. O., Abdulaal, R. M., & Kabli, M. R. (2014). Construction projects selection and risk assessment by fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methodologies. Applied Soft Computing, 17, pp. 105-116.

Salah, A., & Moselhi, O. (2015). Contingency modelling for construction projects using fuzzy-set theory. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 22(2), pp. 214-241.

Yildiz, A. E., Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M. T., Ercoskun, K., & Alten, S. (2014). A knowledge-based risk mapping tool for cost estimation of international construction projects. Automation in Construction, 43, pp. 144-155.

Quintus, S., & Ladefoged, T. N. (2016). In surplus and in scarcity: agricultural development, risk management, and political economy on Ofu Island, American Samoa. American Antiquity, 81(2), pp. 273-293.

Qian, Q., & Lin, P. (2016). Safety risk management of underground engineering in China: Progress, challenges and strategies. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 8(4), pp. 423-442.