# Critical Factors behind Construction Delay in Petrochemical Projects in Saudi Arabia
## 7 Discussion of the Results
### FAII Ranking  
The frequency of potential delay factors is shown in Table 5. These values were developed after applying the Frequency Index (FI) equation. Table 6 shows the Frequency Adjusted Importance Index (FAII), which is simply a combination between RII and FI. The FAII values were generated by using Equation (3). Then, the generated values were ranked from the highest to lowest to identify the top five factors having the highest FAII value. The following list shows the top potential factors listed from the highest to lowest from the top five:  
1. Delays in material or equipment delivery. 2. Delays in getting work permits. 3. Poor site management and supervision by contractors. 4. Poor planning and scheduling of projects by the contractor. 5. Long time for approval and decision making by owner. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**s/n** & **Potential Delay Factor** & **RII** & **Ranking** \\ \hline
1 & Delays in material or equipment delivery. & 0.849 & 1 \\
2 & Poor site management and supervision by contractors. & 0.811 & 2 \\
3 & Poor planning and scheduling of projects by the contractor. & 0.793 & 3 \\
4 & Long time for approval and decision making by owner. & 0.776 & 4 \\
5 & Delays in getting work permits. & 0.762 & 5 \\
6 & Changes of scope/design during construction. & 0.76 & 6 \\
7 & Inaccurate design drawings/documents by the designer. & 0.758 & 7 \\
8 & Lack of experience and knowledge of contractor staff. & 0.751 & 8 \\
9 & Delays in handing over construction site to the contractor. & 0.747 & 9 \\
10 & Shortage of skilled laborers for the contractor. & 0.74 & 10 \\
11 & Shortage of materials or equipment. & 0.713 & 11 \\
12 & Conflict between main contractor and subcontractor. & 0.711 & 12 \\
13 & Low productivity by contractor labor. & 0.707 & 13 \\
14 & Delays related to sub-contractors’ work. & 0.691 & 14 \\
15 & Lack of effective communication between the parties involved. & 0.684 & 15 \\
16 & Rework due to errors during construction. & 0.673 & 16 \\
17 & Wrong construction methods. & 0.667 & 17 \\
18 & Unforeseen (unexpected) site conditions. & 0.662 & 18 \\
19 & Weather effects. & 0.66 & 19 \\
20 & Delays in progress payment by owner. & 0.658 & 20 \\
21 & Delays in contractor payment to sub-contractors and suppliers. & 0.647 & 21 \\
22 & Inflation and escalation of material prices. & 0.636 & 22 \\
23 & Governmental and political related issues. & 0.578 & 23 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: The Relative Importance Index (RII). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**s/n** & **Potential Delay Factor** & **FI** & **Ranking** \\ \hline
1 & Delays in getting work permits. & 0.67 & 1 \\
2 & Delays in material or equipment delivery. & 0.63 & 2 \\
3 & Poor site management and supervision by the contractors. & 0.61 & 3 \\
4 & Long time for approval and decision making by owner. & 0.60 & 4 \\
5 & Poor planning and scheduling of projects by the contractor. & 0.59 & 5 \\
6 & Shortage of skilled laborers for the contractor. & 0.59 & 5 \\
7 & Changes of scope/design during construction. & 0.58 & 6 \\
8 & Lack of effective communication between the parties involved. & 0.57 & 7 \\
9 & Delays in handing over construction site to the contractor. & 0.55 & 8 \\
10 & Inaccurate design drawings/documents by the designer. & 0.55 & 9 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: The Frequency Importance Index (FI). In addition, this correlation factor is used to check the difference between Owner and contractor perspectives. From Table 7, it is clearly shown that there are differences between owner ranking and contractor ranking, some high and some low, but in general, the overall ranking correlation was found to be 0.4, which indicates an agreement between both perspectives somehow.