Enhancing Flexibility in Project Scope with the help of Value Engineering
A. Singh (TU Delft - Civil Engineering & Geosciences)
H.L.M. Bakker – Graduation committee member (TU Delft - Integral Design & Management)
A. Jalali Sohi – Mentor (TU Delft - Integral Design & Management)
Leonie Koops – Mentor (TU Delft - Design & Construction Management)
Anand Ramdien – Mentor (Rijkswaterstaat)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
This study addresses the need for greater flexibility in project scope to match the dynamic lifecycle and complexities of modern projects. Traditional, rigid project management processes struggle to accommodate changing circumstances and diverse stakeholder expectations, especially in long or complex endeavors. The problem statement centers on the front-end scope: it is often tightly framed, limiting the ability to adjust or implement feasible changes.
Grounded in Jalai Sohi (2018), the research identifies 13 enablers and strategies for flexible scope, with a strong emphasis on soft factors such as trust, stakeholder involvement, communication, collaboration, commitment, and managerial review; an additional enabler—interaction among stakeholders—is incorporated. Three enablers were selected for deeper investigation: broad task definition, embrace change, and interaction among stakeholders. Barriers to implementing these enablers were categorized as limited awareness, stakeholder-driven barriers, organizational behavior, and contractual barriers, informing the development of a practical framework.
Value Engineering (VE) is examined as a complementary approach. VE is a structured process aimed at achieving essential functions at the lowest life-cycle cost while increasing project value, extending beyond mere cost cutting. Although evidence for VE in construction remains limited, the study identifies 21 potential benefits and validates them via a practitioner survey (n=25), with all benefits scoring a Relative Importance Index above 0.6.
Two case studies illustrate VE and enabler implementation. In Case 1, VE was introduced after scope development, leading to stakeholder resistance; in Case 2, VE was used proactively from the outset, yielding earlier consensus and fewer barriers. The most common barrier observed is lack of trust. A framework is proposed to resolve barriers by spreading awareness of enablers, ensuring stakeholder engagement, and conducting VE, supported by expert analysis. The findings suggest VE and soft-factor enablers can enhance scope flexibility, though broader empirical validation is recommended.