AJIBM  Vol.4 No.9 , September 2014
Comparison of Alberta Industrial and Pipeline Projects and US Projects Performance
Abstract: Project performance issues are major concerns in Alberta. This paper compares the projects executed in Alberta and US projects. The paper analyses the projects performance in Alberta and compares it with US projects with a view to improve project performance in Alberta. 17 participating companies in Alberta provided the previous projects data and COAA/CII database provided the US data for the analysis. A qualitative research methodology was also employed in investigating the Alberta project performance. Interviews were conducted with industry practitioners, which contained open-ended questions. The research found that in comparison, the Alberta projects showed higher average cost and schedule growth than the US projects and the US based projects were more productive in erecting structural steel than Alberta projects. This method has the potential to contribute to a reduction in cost and schedule overruns, and improves project performance. It is concluded that comparison of projects executed in Alberta and US projects can provide a guide to companies to improve performance in Alberta.
Cite this paper: Ikpe, E. , Kumar, J. and Jergeas, G. (2014) Comparison of Alberta Industrial and Pipeline Projects and US Projects Performance. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 4, 474-481. doi: 10.4236/ajibm.2014.49053.

[1]   COAA (2009) Alberta Report #1 Construction Owners Association of Alberta.

[2]   Alberta Finance and Enterprise (AFE) (2008) Highlights of the Highlights of the Alberta Economy.

[3]   Alberta Industry (2012).

[4]   Dunbar, R., Strogran, M., Chan, P. and Chan, K.S. (2004) Oil Sands Supply Outlook: Potential Supply and Costs of Crude Bitumen and Synthetic Oil in Canada 2003-2017, Canadian Energy Research Inst., Calgary.

[5]   Jergeas, G.F. (2009) Improving Construction Productivity on Alberta Oil and Gas Capital Projects. Report to Alberta Finance and Enterprise Project Report, Alberta.

[6]   Lee, Y.P., et al. (2006) Understanding Factors for Benchmarking Adoption: New Evidence from Malaysia. Bechmarking: An International Journal, 13, 548-565.

[7]   Nasir, H., Dorji, U., Attalla, M., Rankin, J., Fayek, A.R. and Haas, C. (2008) Studies in Construction Performance Benchmarking. Proceedings of Annual Conference of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Québec City, 10-13 June 2008, 136-145.

[8]   Brunso, T.P. and Siddiqi, K.M. (2003) Using Benchmarks and Metrics to Evaluate Project Delivery of Environmental Restoration Program. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129, 119-130.

[9]   Mohamed, S. (1996) Benchmarking and Improving Construction Productivity. Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, 3, 50-58.

[10]   Williams, J., Brown, C. and Springer, A. (2012) Overcoming Benchmarking Reluctance: A Literature Review. Bechmarking: An International Journal, 19, 255-276.

[11]   Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G (2000) Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., Eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd Edition, Sage Publications Ltd., Thousand Oaks, 163-188.

[12]   Patton, M.Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Techniques, 2nd Edition, Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks.

[13]   Walker, D.H.T. (1997) Choosing an Appropriate Research Methodology. Journal of Construction Management and Economics, 15, 149-159.

[14]   Creswell, J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks.

[15]   Field, A. (2005) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 2nd Edition, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

[16]   Agresti, A. and Finlay, B. (1999) Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River.