Risk Analysis of Delay in The Construction Project

The complex problems that existed during the Field Implementation in the SMP Negeri 1 Surabaya project at that time caused some work that was not as planned both in terms of time, quality and cost which resulted in overbudget and overtime. When experiencing overbudget and overtime, it is necessary to have good cost, quality and time management. Good management should not only be owned by the project owner. The length of time to complete the project has a big effect on the increase in the overall project cost. Therefore, daily, weekly and monthly progress reports are needed to report work results and completion times for each project work item. Furthermore, this work is compared with the completion time of the plan so that the completion time can be controlled for each period. This is because the construction of the building has a delay in time so that it can cause disruption in some field operations. The analysis that I have done is viewed from all of them (owner and contractor). This study uses the AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process) research method because AHP is used to derive the ratio scale of several paired comparisons that are discrete or continuous. Other problems such as inconsistencies in planners, supervisors, executors, and other authorities in the field, namely lack of communication and late making decisions such as changes in design and changes in calculations that are in implementation and planning so that the project results in time and cost delays, and other problems. such as material calculations and others, there are also delays caused by delays in making decisions in implementation. Because of that, the project for the Public Junior High School 1 in Surabaya experienced delays in several jobs, namely the foundation, column, ladder, and beam work, which should have been done in 1-2 months to 3-4 months. In terms of implementation, such as lack of communication between planners, supervisors and implementers as well as other authorized officials, a good communication is needed. So that it does not cause so many problems and can reduce delays in terms of implementation in the field.


INTRODUCTION
Delays in implementation of one activity in the project can cause delays in other activities. This has an impact on delays in completing a project as a whole. The delay is mentioned in Presidential Regulation No. 54 of 2010 articles 120 and No. 70 of 2012 article 120, namely goods / services providers who are late in completing work within the period stipulated in the contract, will be subject to a late penalty of 1/1000 (one thousandth) of the contract price for each day of delay, and do not exceed the amount of performance guarantee. The delay will also affect the termination of the employment contract as stated in Presidential Regulation No. 54 of 2010, namely PPK can 1. unilaterally terminate the contract if the penalty for late implementation of the work has exceeded 5% (five percent) of the contract value. construction service. Therefore, construction service companies need to identify factors that cause delays in the completion time, so that the project can run as planned.
The purpose of this research is to analyze the important factors that influence project delays using the Analytical Hierarchy Process method, to find out the factors that are the risk of delays in construction projects at Junior High School 1 Surabaya, to find out the dominant risk factors that cause construction project delays in the construction of State Junior High Schools 1 Surabaya, Knowing the risk mitigation carried out to minimize project delays.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The method used in this research is descriptive and analytical methods. Analysis means that existing data are processed in such a way as to produce a conclusive conclusion. While descriptive means by describing the problems that already exist or appear. Analysis of data using AHP (Analytical hierarchy process), namely the theory of VOLUME 21 │ NUMBER 01 │ JULY 2021 https://ejournal.worldconference.id/index.php/neutron E-ISSN: 2685-3272 | P-ISSN 1412-0860 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
28 measurement through a comparison matrix to get priority scale values. After getting a priority scale, the data is then discussed and conclusions drawn (Mustari & Rahman, 2012).

Research Flowchart
The following is a research methodology flow chart: 4. Preparation phase 5. Evaluation process 6. Results

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
In the AHP method, the criteria are arranged in a hierarchical form. The first analysis in this study is the calculation of the criteria weight using the AHP method. There are 3 work steps in using the AHP method, namely: looking for geomes, pairwise comparison matrix, and data normalization (Syah, 2014). In processing the data to determine the factors causing the delay, interviews were conducted with the research advisors in the related companies and the results of field observations so that 6 main factors were found to be the cause of delays in development projects. The factors causing the delay can be seen in the following table (Hassan, 2016

Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)
After these factors are found, the next step is to conduct an AHP questionnaire which aims to rank the factors causing the delay.

Determining the Hierarchical Structure
In determining the maintenance strategy, first of all, we must first know what is meant by the AHP hierarchy. The AHP hierarchy is a propagating chart with the order of the top to the bottom chart, which are objectives, criteria, sub-criteria (if needed), and alternatives. The following is an explanation of the chart: a. Purpose: The aim in processing AHP this time is to determine the factors causing the delay with the highest ranking. b. Criteria and Sub-Criteria: Criteria and Sub-criteria are the basis necessary for an objective to affect the objective directly. VOLUME 21 │ NUMBER 01 │ JULY 2021 https://ejournal.worldconference.id/index.php/neutron E-ISSN: 2685-3272 | P-ISSN 1412-0860 c. Alternative: Alternative is a form of the lowest level that affects a criterion and indirectly affects the goal. Then it can be seen the form of AHP hierarchy consisting of Objectives, Criteria, and Alternatives which form the following chart: Figure 2. AHP Hierarchy By looking at the AHP's goals, it only needs to include one factor, namely "Influence on the project" with the criteria in table 4.1 so that there are 6 factors that cause delays, which will be compared through questionnaires distributed to respondents.

Performs an Alternative comparison score
After the questionnaire data is obtained, the next step is to do a Pairwise Comparison comparing X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, and X6 to determine the size of the effect on the delays in the topside platform project. The amount of scoring on the questionnaire is described in table 4.3:  From the results above, then corrected by adding the total weight, namely 0.12 + 0.28 + 0.18 + 0.12 + 0.10 + 0.21 = 1, it can be concluded that the results of the above calculations are correct.
Based on the research results, the combined priorities of all respondents show that the main factor causing the delay in project completion is the method factor criteria, namely the procurement of material is hampered by a weight of 0.12 or equal to 28.09%. Then followed by the second factor, namely the financial factor with a weight of 0.21 or equal to 20.57%, the third priority is limited equipment with a weight of 0.18 or equal to 18.09%, the fourth priority is limited workers with a weight of 0.12 or the same. with 11.95%, then the fifth priority is changing the design image with a weight of 0.12 or equal to 11.67% and the sixth priority is bad management with a weight of 0.10 or equal to 9.63%.

Conclusion
Based on the results of research using a cause-and-effect diagram approach and the AHP method regarding the evaluation of the factors causing the delay in the completion of a construction project at Junior High School 1 Surabaya, it can be concluded that: 1. There are 6 factors that influence the delays of the Junior High School 1 Surabaya project, namely changing design drawings, hampered material procurement, limited equipment, limited workers, poor management and financial factors. 2. The dominant or most dominant factor causing delays in the project of SMP Negeri 1 Surabaya is the material procurement is hampered with a weight of 0.12 or equal to 28.09%. Then followed by the second factor, namely the financial factor with a weight of 0.21 or equal to 20.57%, the third priority is limited equipment with a weight of 0.18 or equal to 18.09%, the fourth priority is limited workers with a weight of 0.12 or the same. with 11.95%, then the fifth priority is changing the design image with a weight of 0.12 or equal to 11.67% and the sixth priority is bad management with a weight of 0.10 or equal to 9.63%. 3. The risk mitigation carried out to minimize the occurrence of delays in the Junior High School 1 Surabaya project from each of the factors causing the delay are as follows: 1) Procurement of materials is hampered That the procurement of materials is hampered due to errors in logistics and procurement of goods. In this case, it is necessary to analyze the timing of procurement and storage of goods in the warehouse. So that when the inventory runs out, the logistics department will immediately procure it.

2) Financial factor
In this case the marketing, financial and legal departments have to make observations from previous projects.

3) Limited equipment
In this case, it is necessary to collect data on the need for equipment to support the fabrication process. So that the company can find out the production capacity and can divide the work between sub contractors and vendors 4) Worker limitations It is necessary to collect employee data to determine the welfare they experience. So that worker productivity is better. 5) Design drawing changed This is common in construction projects, it's just that it requires cooperation from both parties so that when a design change occurs, the contractor can immediately provide a solution and the owner also immediately approves the change in the image. 6) Bad management The marketing, legal and licensing departments need to be improved, because bad management can affect work in the field. Therefore it is necessary to make observations to find out deficiencies in subsequent projects.