Table 4 Impact of risk on APDM... | Emerald Publishing

Table 4

Impact of risk on APDM programmatic approaches

No.	Risk	Number of responses (n)						Risk score	Mean value (1–5)		p-value
No.	Risk	NA (0)	Very low (1)	Low (2)	Moderate (3)	High (4)	Very high (5)	Risk score	Less experienced agency (n = 9)	Experienced agency (n = 21)	p-value
1	Utility issues	1	0	2	14	13	3	3.53	3.78	3.52	0.3733
2	Environmental permits and approvals	1	1	2	14	11	4	3.47	3.56	3.43	0.8849
3	Schedule and phasing issues (aggressive schedules, restricted work windows, etc.)	1	0	3	14	12	2	3.42	3.25	3.43	0.6713
4	Coordination with government agencies or other authorities having jurisdiction	1	0	5	13	11	3	3.38	3.22	3.52	0.3863
5	Change in scope (e.g. due to coordination with third parties; late change requests)	1	1	5	11	12	3	3.34	3.44	3.43	0.9808
6	Right-of-way and easements	1		5	15	7	4	3.32	3.33	3.38	0.9805
7	Railroad involvement	2	5	4	3	11	6	3.31	2.88	3.55	0.2550
8	Constructability issues	1	2	6	13	9	2	3.09	3.0	3.10	0.7577
9	Incomplete project scope definition/design uncertainty	1	1	10	9	8	3	3.06	2.78	3.19	0.4515
10	Geotechnical conditions	1	1	9	11	9	2	3.06	3.00	3.14	0.7409
11	Market conditions (e.g. price volatility, labor availability, etc.)	1	2	8	13	3	4	2.97	2.12	3.29	0.0071
12	Staff experience/availability	1	1	9	13	7	1	2.94	3.44	2.71	0.0297
13	Use of new procurement methods/contracts	1	3	9	9	7	2	2.87	2.88	2.81	0.9395
14	Financial issues	2	5	7	8	9	1	2.80	2.56	2.90	0.4803
15	Political risks/opposition	2	2	9	13	4	1	2.76	2.50	2.80	0.4775
16	Conformance with regulations/guidelines/design criteria	1	5	11	8	7	1	2.63	2.89	2.57	0.4513
17	Legal challenges and changes in law	1	12	9	6	2	1	2.03	1.62	2.19	0.2917

No.	Risk	Number of responses (n)						Risk score	Mean value (1–5)		p-value
No.	Risk	NA (0)	Very low (1)	Low (2)	Moderate (3)	High (4)	Very high (5)	Risk score	Less experienced agency (n = 9)	Experienced agency (n = 21)	p-value
1	Utility issues	1	0	2	14	13	3	3.53	3.78	3.52	0.3733
2	Environmental permits and approvals	1	1	2	14	11	4	3.47	3.56	3.43	0.8849
3	Schedule and phasing issues (aggressive schedules, restricted work windows, etc.)	1	0	3	14	12	2	3.42	3.25	3.43	0.6713
4	Coordination with government agencies or other authorities having jurisdiction	1	0	5	13	11	3	3.38	3.22	3.52	0.3863
5	Change in scope (e.g. due to coordination with third parties; late change requests)	1	1	5	11	12	3	3.34	3.44	3.43	0.9808
6	Right-of-way and easements	1		5	15	7	4	3.32	3.33	3.38	0.9805
7	Railroad involvement	2	5	4	3	11	6	3.31	2.88	3.55	0.2550
8	Constructability issues	1	2	6	13	9	2	3.09	3.0	3.10	0.7577
9	Incomplete project scope definition/design uncertainty	1	1	10	9	8	3	3.06	2.78	3.19	0.4515
10	Geotechnical conditions	1	1	9	11	9	2	3.06	3.00	3.14	0.7409
11	Market conditions (e.g. price volatility, labor availability, etc.)	1	2	8	13	3	4	2.97	2.12	3.29	0.0071
12	Staff experience/availability	1	1	9	13	7	1	2.94	3.44	2.71	0.0297
13	Use of new procurement methods/contracts	1	3	9	9	7	2	2.87	2.88	2.81	0.9395
14	Financial issues	2	5	7	8	9	1	2.80	2.56	2.90	0.4803
15	Political risks/opposition	2	2	9	13	4	1	2.76	2.50	2.80	0.4775
16	Conformance with regulations/guidelines/design criteria	1	5	11	8	7	1	2.63	2.89	2.57	0.4513
17	Legal challenges and changes in law	1	12	9	6	2	1	2.03	1.62	2.19	0.2917

Note(s): Risk impacts were rated from 0 (NA) to 5 (Very High); p < 0.05 indicates a statistically significant difference between agency experience groups