Abstract
The literature on megaprojects are oriented towards ‘knowing’ the problems and ‘knowing’ the solutions, and there is a dearth in literature aimed at explaining strategies adopted in ‘doing’ or implementing that knowledge. Particularly, the literature highlights communication as important as part of the ‘knowing,’ while there is a gap in ‘doing,’ as performance improvements are still not evident. This research aims to explore how this knowing-doing gap in the communication of risk information was addressed by using 4D visualization. This article discusses the vent facility of a megaproject in Australia as a case study to illustrate the innovation. The 4D model developed for the facility helped the project team to visualize the construction of a critical part of the project, discuss the construction methodology, identify the risks in the construction process and persuade the non-technical decision-makers of the project to take appropriate action. The risks identified through the visualization covered safety, program, and interface risks. This study offers insights into the role of visualization in bridging the knowing-doing gap in the construction industry in the context of a megaproject.
Highlights
Megaprojects are projects that are colossal, captivating, costly, controversial, complex, and laden with control issues (Frick, 2008)
While majority of research in megaprojects are oriented towards ‘knowing’ the problems and ‘knowing’ the solutions, there is a dearth in literature aimed at explaining strategies adopted in ‘doing’ or implementing that knowledge
We argue that innovations in visualization of information can significantly improve risk management practices in megaprojects by making the risks easier to communicate with all stakeholders
Summary
Megaprojects are projects that are colossal, captivating, costly, controversial, complex, and laden with control issues (Frick, 2008) Due to these characteristics, megaprojects are a different breed compared to normal projects (Capka, 2004). Megaprojects struggle to meet initial performance targets (Gil & Pinto, 2018) such as cost schedules, time schedules, promised benefits, risk mitigation, etc. We call these failures mega-failures because megaprojects cost a lot of money and consume enormous amounts of resources and attention (Söderlund, Sankaran and Biesenthal, 2017) making their inefficiencies prominent and severe. There is a need for research on improving the performance of megaprojects
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call