 -Study of the Practice of Making Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) and Making Risk Register (RR) by Key Project Players in Construction.  -Finding out the level of integration of Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) with that of Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).  -Making a RBS and WBS Integration Model in the light of findings.

1. ALLAH’O AKBAR
In the Name of
(ALMIGHTY) ALLAH,
the Most
BENEFICIENT
AND
MERCIFUL
ABOUT PRESENTER
Kamran Rahat
MBA-University of Karachi
ME-Project Management & Construction-NED University
BE-Civil-NED University
 Partner/Projects Manager at Aluco-Glass Systems
www.aluco-glass.webs.com
 Partner/Projects Manager at PrimeWork-Englitz Collaborative
www.primework-englitz.webs.com
 Cells: 0345-8114486, 0315-9222848
 Direct Tel: 92-21-38455508
 Email: kamranrahatkr@live.com
 URL: www.kamranrahat.webs.com
ABOUT PRESENTER
 The Author has years of experience in the field of Project Management,
Construction Management and Business Management/Research.
 The Author has conducted several Independent Researches for
Construction/Contracting Companies and other Business Organizations in
order to identify the problems, improve their productivity and preparing
SOPs.

2.  This Risk Management Research was done for some Construction Business
and only contains that useful data which is not confidential.
 Organizations/Individuals in need of Research/Consulting for Performance
Improvement and Profitability may contact this Author.
TITTLE OF RESEARCH REPORT
Level of Integration of Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) and Work Breakdown
Structure (WBS) for effective Risk Monitoring and Control in Construction
Industry of Karachi.
INTRODUCTION/OVERVIEW
 Construction Projects are initiated in dynamic and complex environment.
 High degree of uncertainty always poses different types of risks.
 Risk Identification often produces nothing more than a long list of risks
which can be hard to understand and manage. But it does not provide any
insight into the structure of risk on the project.
LITERATURE REVIEW
 Following the concept of the Work Breakdown Structure, the Risk
Breakdown Structure (RBS) provides a means for the project manager and
risk manager to structuring the risks being addressed.
 RBS could be considered as a "a hierarchically organized depiction of the
identified project risks arranged by risk category."
LITERATURE REVIEW
 It is common for stakeholders to misunderstand to whom each risk is
allocated and the degree of control that can be exerted over all facets of the
risk.

3.  So there is a need for a structured approach to risk identification and
management that considers a comprehensive list of risk events i.e RBS and
it’s integration with WBS.
REASERCH GAP
 Absence of Research with particular reference to Construction Industry of
Karachi. Even if one exists, this author is unable to find the same.
 Research Papers and Articles precisely do not explain how to integrate
RBS with WBS.
 Adequate method to implement Seamless coordination b/w PKPs is not
present.
 How to address Conflicting Objectives of PKPs is not suggested in previous
research.
OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH
 -Study of the Practice of Making Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) and
Making Risk Register (RR) by Key Project Players in Construction.
 -Finding out the level of integration of Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS)
with that of Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).
 -Making a RBS and WBS Integration Model in the light of findings.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 - How RBS and RR (Risk register) made by Project Key Players in
Construction?
 - How much RBS and WBS are integrated?
 - Is their any possibility of making an Integrated RBS-WBS Model?

4. RESEARCH METHODLOGY
 Qualitative Approach is used. Simple statistics is used for analysis,
interpretation and result.
 Secondary Data: Published Sources like Research Papers, Articles and
Books.
 Primary Data: Developing questionnaires, getting them filled by concerned
professionals and interpreting the result using various tools.
RESEARCH METHODLOGY
 Targeted Number of Questionnaires to be getting filled=40
 Targeted Categories are Client, Project Manager, Structural Engineer,
Architect and Contractor. Each Category sent 08 Questionnaires. (Ratio=
20%)
 Number of Duly Filled-in Questionnaires Returned=27 (Ratio=67.5%)
 Returned Questionnaires Rejected=02 (7.4%)
 Valid Returned Questionnaires=25 (62.5%)
 Clients 20%, Project Manager 20%, Structural Engineer 20%, Architect
16%, Contractor 24%.
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 WBS and RBS are not made by approximately half of the companies at
Minute Level.
 The Risk Exposure Level of Clients and Contractors come out to be 64%
and 36% respectively

5. KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 Companies/Professional under focus agree that Construction Projects are
exposed to External and Internal Risk Factors.
 Identification, Breakdown & Incorporation of these Risk Factors in early
Planning Stage help in making good Risk Response Planning mechanism.
 Breaking down the Categories of these Risks mentioned at highly minute
level is necessary for their integration with WBS
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 Making WBS in highly minute level is essential for its proper integration
with RBS.
 Project Key Players (PKPs) have conflicting/differing objectives about
Risk and they always try to shift their own risks to other Players.
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 Early Involvement of Project Key Players (EIPKP) is always helpful in
identifying, assessing and managing Project Risks, whereas Full Scale
Early Involvement (FSEI) of all PKPs seems to be quite difficult.

KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 Project Key Players (PKPs) are reluctant for FSEI. Reasons for this

6. reluctance come out to be lack of assurance about their formal hiring in
project at early stage, PKPs treating one another as Competitor, PKPs
striving to win a Turnkey Contract and Traditional Separation of Design
& Construction.
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 More than half of the population under study believes that the Best way to
secure FSEI of PKPs is their formal hiring only up to Comprehensive
Feasibility Stage.
 Remaining population understudy prefer formal hiring of all PKPs by
Client Project Management Team (CPMT) in Initial Stage without Bidding
and Hiring of a Design-Builder to overcome the Requirement of FSEI of
PKPs.
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 Alternative to FSEI of PKPs come out to be either an Extraordinary
Capable Client PM Team or a Design-Builder firm.
KEY FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
 To ensure Integration of RBS & WBS for effective Risk Monitoring &
Control, CPMT must develop three things in the priority of their sequence.
First one is “Customized Integrated RBS-WBS Model” (CIRWM). Second
one is “Integrated Coding Protocol Mechanism” (ICPM) (Coding of all
RBS and WBS Elements at Highly Minute Level and their Mutual
Integration). And third one is “Integrated Collective Risk Register”
(ICRR) (Combined Risk Register for all PKPs with relevant details for
every one).
RECOMMENDATIONS

7.  Make WBS at Highly Minute Level
 Client and Contractor must develop effective Risk Management System
 Risk Register must be prepared.
 RBS must be made at Highly Minute Level
 All PKPs must incorporate all External and Internal Risk factors
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Identify, Breakdown & Incorporate all Internal and External Risk Factors
in early Planning Stage
 Break down the Categories of Internal and External Risks at highly minute
level
 Make WBS at highly minute level
 All PKPs must be vigilant enough not to take unnecessary Risk of other
PKPs
 Ensure Early Involvement of PKPs
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Make strategies to overcome the problem of FSEI of PKPs.
 Make written assurances to concerned PKPs about their formal hiring in
project.
 To secure Full Scale Early Involvement (FSEI) of PKPs, hire all PKPs up
to comprehensive feasibility stage, especially the Contractor who is mostly
ignored after receiving its advice/feedback on constructability matters.
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Client Project Management Team (CPMT) must be capable enough so that
FSEI of PKPs may be avoided. Alternatively in case of absence of CPMT,
Client must hire services of a Project Management Consultants. Another

8. good option may be hiring a Design-Builder Company.
RECOMMENDATIONS
 CPMT must develop “Customized Integrated RBS-WBS Model”
(CIRWM), Integrated Coding Protocol Mechanism (ICPM) and Integrated
Collective Risk Register (ICRR) for ensuring Integration of RBS & WBS
for effective monitoring & control.
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Role of Contractor as Constructability Advisor (RCACA) is essential to
avoid most of the Technical and Administrative risks.
IMPLICATION OF RESEARCH
 This Research study has some good implications for construction industry
of Karachi despite its small scope. This can be helpful in creating more and
more awareness about integrating RBS with WBS thereby minimizing the
adverse impacts of risks on construction projects.
FUTURE RESEARCH
 Future Research may be directed towards developing “Customized
Integrated RBS-WBS Model” (CIRWM), Integrated Coding Protocol
Mechanism (ICPM) and Integrated Collective Risk Register (ICRR).
 Another Study may be done on means of ensuring Full Scale Early

9. Involvement (FSEI) of Project Key Players (PKPs).
 Another Study may be conducted on Due Risk Sharing Mechanism
(DRSM) by PKPs.
THE END
Thanks
www.kamranrahat.webs.com