The main factors and sub-attributes that determine effective M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry and its relationship with M&E determinants in other countries

A total of 14 factors were used to measure the determinants of M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry. Out of the 14 factors, only 5 factors were ranked as high influence by experts based on the median score range of 9.0-10.0. These factors are budgetary allocation and logistics, technical capacity and training, effective leadership, effective communication and managerial skills. Accordingly, consensus was reached on the factors as having a significant influence on the effectiveness of M&E (Table 12.2). The high consensus rate is based on the IQD score of between 0 and 1 (IQD < 1).

Additionally, whereas eight other factors were perceived to averagely influence effective monitoring and evaluation in the GC1 based on their median rating of between 7.0 and 8.99, consensus was agreed on all the factors by experts. This consensus was based on the IQD score of less than 1 (IQD < 1). The influence of “data quality” on M&E in the construction project delivery had a median score

Table 12.2 Effective M&E factors

* Indicates new factors introduced from Delphi Round One

Table 12.3 Stakeholders’ involvement attributes

of 6.0, signifying low influence by experts. The factor, however, achieved consensus based on the 1QD score of 1.0.

The impact of attributes on the determinants of effective M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry was measured. Thirteen attributes were used to measure the impact of stakeholder involvement on the effectiveness of M&E. Out of the 13 attributes listed, experts perceived three attributes as having a very high impact on M&E (VH1: 9.0-10). With reference to Table 12.3, all remaining ten attributes received a high impact rating (HI: 7.0-8.99) by all experts, suggesting there were none of the attributes found not to have an impact on stakeholder involvement. Subsequently, based on the 1QD score, all 13 attributes achieved good consensus (IQD < 1).

Nine budgetary allocation and logistics characteristics were listed to describe their impact on M&E in the GCI. Only one characteristic, “clear budget line for M&E”, out of the nine listed characteristics, received very high impact ratings by the experts (VH1: 9.0-10) as shown in Table 12.4. Consensus was, however, not achieved for that

Table 12.4 Budgetary allocation and logistics attributes

184 Insight from Delphi research study

Table 12.5 Political influence attributes

attribute (clear budget line) as it obtained an IQD score of 1.5 which is beyond the cutoff (1QD < 1) for the study. Eight other features of budgetary allocation and logistics received high impact ratings from experts with a median score between 7.0 and 8.0 (HI: 7.0-8.99). The IQD score of these features was below the cut-off for the study, thus less than 1 (IQD < 1). Hence, consensus was achieved for all eight features.

Regarding the assessment of political influence on M&E, ten attributes were listed. Four attributes were rated by experts to impact very highly (VH1: 9.0-10). These attributes were political decisions, change of government, management interference in M&E and the composition of the M&E team (Table 12.5). Six other attributes obtained a high impact rating by experts, having recorded a median score of 8.0. All attributes except one (political decision) achieved consensus, thus obtaining an IQD score below 1 (IQD < 1). “Political decision” had an IQD score of 1.5 indicating low consensus (IQD > 1.1 < 2). None of the attributes was found among experts not to have a high impact on M&E in the construction industry in Ghana.

In the assessment of the impact of technical capacity and training on M&E as presented in Table 12.6, 11 characteristics were listed. Experts rated five of the features as having a high impact with a median score of 9.0 (VH1: 9.0-10) while the other features were rated as high impact (HI: 7.0-8.99). Ten of the eleven features achieved high consensus with their IQD rating ranging between 0 and 1 (IQD < 1). The feature “knowledge on M&E” failed to reach consensus because it obtained an IQD score greater than the cut-off for the study, thus 1.50. Experts commented that

stakeholders and M&E team members do not require prior knowledge of monitoring and evaluation to be effective. The training component and the participation in the M&E will ensure relevant knowledge on M&E. (Anonymous expert).

Subsequently, when the approach to M&E attributes was evaluated, findings revealed that two attributes, namely “use of right M&E tools and techniques”

Table 12.6 Technical capacity and training attributes

* Indicates new factors introduced from Delphi Round One

and “frequency of M&E” were rated to have a very high impact (VHI: 9.0-10) on M&E, obtaining a median score of 9.0 each. All other attributes recorded a median score of 8.0, suggesting a high impact rating on M&E (Hl: 7.0-8.99). None of the attributes, however, was found to have no impact. Regarding the evaluation for consensus amongst experts, all the attributes recorded an IQD score of 0.0 which signifies high consensus amongst the experts (Table 12.7).

Fifteen attributes were listed to assess the impact of effective leadership on M&E. Amongst the attributes, four were ranked as very high impact (VHI: 9.0-10), obtaining a median score of 9.0 each. Furthermore, 11 attributes recorded median scores between 7.0 and 8.0, signifying a high impact (HI: 7.0-8.99) rating amongst the experts. Table 12.8 presents the interquartile deviation scores of the attributes. One attribute, effective communication, even though was rated to have a very high impact on leadership, did not achieve consensus. It obtained an IQD score of 2.0 which is far above the cut-off for the study (IQD < 1). The remaining attributes, however, achieved consensus, having IQD less than 1.

Table 12.7 Approach to M&E attributes

186 Insight from Delphi research study

Table 12.8 Leadership attributes

* Indicates new factors introduced from Delphi Round One

Effective communication as a critical determinant of M&E listed 14 attributes to assess its impact (Table 12.9). Four attributes which include effective communication skills, reporting systems, poor communication structure and the use of the right media recorded a median score of 9.0 each which signifies a very high impact rating (VHI: 9.0-10). Ten other listed attributes recorded a high impact rating (HI: 7.0-8.99). None of the attributes was found not to have an impact. Regarding agreed consensus amongst experts on the attributes, “the use of the right media” even though achieved high impact score of 9.0, consensus was not

Table 12.9 Effective communication attributes

* Indicates new factors introduced from Delphi Round One

Case study 187 reached since it obtained an IQD score of 1.5 which is above the cut-off rating for consensus for this study. All other attributes recorded an IQD score less than or equal to 1 (IQD < 1). It was, however, clear that the only attribute which did not achieve consensus amongst experts was because it was perceived to be duplication with “the channel of communication". It received a comment from an expert suggesting that:

use of right media is the same as the channel of communication. (Anonymous expert)

Findings emanating from the Delphi study suggest that the main and subattributes that determine effective M&E in GO are comparable to other countries. Consensus was also achieved on all 14 main attributes that determine effective M&E. They had been found to be strong determinants of M&E in other contexts (Hardlife & Zhou, 2013; Kamau & Mohamed, 2015; Mugo & Oleche, 2015; Musomba et al., 2013; Ogolla & Moronge, 2016; Seasons, 2003). The influence of data quality in determining effective M&E was, however, found to be very weak, obtaining a median score of 6.0 which contradicts the findings of Mulandi (2013).

In the case of the 13 sub-attributes used in assessing the impact of stakeholders’ involvement in M&E, again there was agreement on all attributes in significantly influencing stakeholder involvement. All attributes had an IQD rating of less than 1 which is within the cut-off for achieving consensus as set for the study. A high median rating was also observed, ranging between 7.0 and 9.0. Experts’ rating suggests the sub-attributes had a high impact on M&E of construction projects in the GCI. Likewise, attributes of budgetary allocation and logistics were rated to have a high impact on M&E, indicating similar characteristics in other contexts and environments. Regarding the clear budget line for M&E, even though it was rated to have an impact, consensus amongst experts was not achieved. The attribute obtained mean and standard deviation scores of 8.18 and 1.33, respectively. The high standard deviation score suggests the variableness of the attributes amongst experts. The findings on these attributes contradict findings of the study by Hwang and Lim (2013) which suggest allocation of funds for M&E was necessary to ensure success. Similarly, while the influence of politics on M&E recorded a very high rating amongst experts in the context of the GCI, political decisions did not achieve consensus even though the attribute was rated to have a very high impact on M&E, based on the median score of 9.0 which corroborates with other studies (Kamau & Mohamed, 2015; Muiga, 2015; Musomba et al., 2013; Seasons, 2003; Waithera & Wanyoike, 2015).

Other attributes such as international relations and favouritism both recorded a high impact on M&E, having obtained a median score of 8.0 each and an IQD of 0.50, but they recorded high standard deviation scores of 1.04 and 1.13, respectively, signifying the variability amongst experts on the attributes. Assessing the sub-attributes of technical capacity and training characteristics, these were classified by experts as having a high impact on determining effective M&E in the

GCI. Consensus was achieved on all attributes except the knowledge on M&E attribute which recorded an IQD score of 1.50 and a standard deviation score of 1.67, indicating high variability. Elsewhere in Kenya, lack of knowledge on M&E was attributed to negatively influencing the success of M&E of donor-funded food security intervention projects (Kimweli, 2013). Even though consensus was not achieved on knowledge on M&E having a significant impact in the Ghanaian construction industry, experts were convinced that the attribute had a very high impact, recording a median score of 9.0.

Regarding the impact of approach to M&E attributes on effective M&E, experts found all attributes to have a high impact on M&E which suggests similar findings from other cultural contexts (Van Mierlo, 2011). Similarly, consensus was achieved on all attributes. However, the use of appropriate tools and techniques saw a standard deviation of 1.37, implying high variableness amongst experts on the attribute. Whereas effective communication is recognized as having a very high impact on leadership in M&E by experts and similar studies by Luthra and Dahiya (2015), it recorded an IQD score of 2.0 rating by experts, revealing no consensus on attributes. All other attributes of leadership were rated to have a high and very high impact (Bikitsha, Mamafha & Ngomane, 2014; Iqbal et al., 2015; Kolzow, 2014; Popa, 2012) based on the observed median scores between 7.0 and 9.0 and an IQD score less than or equal to 1. Studies from other cultural contexts and fields indicate that effective communication had a significant impact on M&E (Mugambi & Kanda, 2013; Windapo, Odediran & Akintona, 2015). The study listed 14 attributes to measure the impact of effective communication on M&E which indicated a high impact rating by experts in the GCI. However, the “use of right media” for communication did not achieve consensus, recording an IQD of 1.50 with a relatively low standard deviation score of 0.90. The non-con-sensus could be attributed to the perceived duplication of the attribute. Experts were of the view that the “use of the right media” for communication is explained in the effective communication channel which measured the high impact on communication on M&E to achieve project success.

12.4-3 Critical challenging factors that influence M&E

Critical challenging factors that influence M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry

The impact of factors posing as challenges to the effective implementation of M&E was also evaluated. Twelve challenges impacting effective M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry were listed to measure their impact by experts in the Delphi study. The assessment revealed five attributes recording a median score of 9.0 each. This high median score suggests a very high impact (VHI: 9.0-10) while the remaining attributes garnered median scores between 7.0 and 8.99, attributing a high impact rating of the challenging attributes to M&E (Table 12.10). In referring to the achievement of consensus, all attributes received 100% consensus, obtaining IQD scores of less than 1 (IQD < 1).

Challenges that have been listed to have a dire impact on M&E in other sectors and cultural contexts such as lack of comparable definition (Patton, 2003),

Table 12.10 Challenges to effective M&E attributes

* Indicates new factors introduced from Delphi Round One

poor approach to M&E data collection and analysis, weak linkage between planning and M&E (Seasons, 2003), power struggle between M&E unit and organizational structure (Muriithi & Crawford, 2003), lack of established M&E units (Cameron, 1993) and poor communication (Diallo & Thuillier, 2005) revealed similar impacts of these challenging attributes on the success of M&E in the Ghanaian construction industry. Hence, all 12 challenging attributes listed to assess the impact of M&E in the GO were rated to have a high impact based on their median scores of between 7 and 8. The challenging attributes also achieved consensus, obtaining IQD < 1.

Impact of effective M&E determinants on the success of project delivery in the QCI

The impact of M&E determinants, namely stakeholder involvement, budgetary allocation and logistics, political influence, technical capacity and training, approach to M&E, effective leadership and effective communication on project success were assessed. Eleven project success (PS) factors were assessed for the impact M&E has on them. Consensus was largely evident on all 11 project success indicators when the assessment of M&E determinants of project success was undertaken by experts. A high impact rating was observed (HI: 70-8.99) along with a 100% consensus reached on all project success indicators (Table 12.11). The Delphi study suggests that value for money, client satisfaction, conformity and completion of project on time noted by other studies from different cultural contexts (Papke-Shields, Beise, & Quan, 2010; Chin, 2012; Ika Diallo, & Thuillier, 2012; Chipato, 2016) shared similar characteristics with the Ghanaian construction industry. This was evident as experts rated all project success indicators as having a high impact based on the observed median score.

190 Insight from Delphi research study

Table 12.11 Project success indicators