IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Risk analysis of toll road KPS project with SSM (Soft System
Methodology) at Gempol – Banyuwangi toll road
To cite this article: P G Suranata et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 1098 022026

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 178.171.21.42 on 30/03/2021 at 04:08

The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

Risk analysis of toll road KPS project with SSM (Soft System
Methodology) at Gempol – Banyuwangi toll road

P G Suranata, P I Wahyuni and I W G E Triswandana*

Civil Engineering Departement of Faculty Engineering and Planning Warmadewa
University, Indonesia

ericktriswandana@gmail.com

Abstract. Indonesia has a big dream of catching up with infrastructure development with other
countries such as Malaysia and Thailand. The toll road as a pioneer of economic development in
the future was built to connect Merak to Banyuwangi through the infrastructure of the Trans Java
Toll Road. Gempol-Pasuruan, Pasuruan-Probolinggo, and Probolinggo Banyuwangi Toll Roads
are the last tipping points and one of the concessionaires is PT. Jasa Marga Probolinggo
Banyuwangi. Toll road construction is not free from limited infrastructure financing in Indonesia
and the risks of this project disrupt project performance and affect the cost of the project, project
time, and building quality. Soft System Methodology (SSM) method can help solve the problem
of project risks starting from identifying the risks of project implementation and analyzing the
risks that might occur. This research was conducted using the purposive sampling technique to
collect respondent data from 3 toll roads and then analyze it with a probability risk test,
consequence risk test, and soft system methodology (SSM). It can be concluded that the risk of
obstacles in the mountainous region, relocation of roads that intersect with community social
facilities is the most extreme risk which hinders the implementation of the construction of these
3 toll road projects.

1. Introduction
Toll road development in the East Java region aims to facilitate the flow of traffic transportation,
improve the distribution of goods and services to support economic growth in East Java Province. Like
other construction projects, toll road construction projects are also not free from various technical and
non-technical problems. This problem is caused by various factors which we know as a construction
project risk. These risks will greatly affect the performance of the project and result in losses both in the
sector costs, quality, and time, which determine the success of a project [1]. In the end, risks can arise
both unexpected and unexpected [2]. However, these risks can be managed by applying construction
risk management and then quantifying the risks that might occur in a project. The analysis can be done
with qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. This analysis is conducted to determine the
opportunities and impacts of a project [3,4]. Construction risk management consists of risk planning,
risk identification, qualitative and quantitative analysis, risk response planning, and risk monitoring and
control [5]. In this study, the authors analyzed the risks using the Soft System Methodology (SSM).
Risk is the likelihood of an event that can affect the achievement of organizational goals [6] and can
be said that risk is a variation of the results that can occur during a certain period [7]. For this reason,

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

risks must be identified and mapped with certain methods so that monitoring and controling can be
carried out.
Qualitative risk analysis is a method of prioritizing the list of identified risks for subsequent treatment
[8]. Risk preparation is based on its impact on project objectives and prioritizes risks based on
probabilities and their impact [9]. Quantitative risk analysis is the process of analyzing the impact of
risk events that occur and provides a ranking of numbers on the list of risks [10]. Quantitative analysis
is carried out on a list of risks that have been carried out qualitatively in a process that potentially and
substantially impacts on project performance [11].
In this study, the authors were identifying risks using Information gathering techniques and interview
method conducted with experts in project case studies. The results of the identification above are then
analyzed again by the expert using Fishbone Diagram that used to look for the cause of a problem or
distortion [12] to make a list of risks that occur in the project case study and then quantify the risk in a
probability and Impact Matrix using the Soft System Methodology (SSM) that was developed by Peter
Checkland in the late 60s at the University of Lancaster in England.
SSM is a research process that uses system models [13] that carried out by exploring unstructured
problems, discussing intensively with related parties, comparing the concept of the thinking system with
the real world, and conducting joint problem-solving.

2. Method
The research method used is qualitative descriptive research, where this method formulate problems that
occur in a case study by looking for literature reviews that can be used as references in collecting data
and research in developing the concept of SSM.

2.1. Data collection

At first, the authors collected the secondary data that can be obtained after reviewing project documents,
the risk results are quantified again using a fishbone diagram that generates a list of risks to be used as
references to make a list of questionnaire questions. hereafter, the primary data obtained by performing
an opinion survey through a questionnaire with a purposive sampling technique that aims to get a risk
ranking based on the required analysis parameters so that the data obtained is relevant to the aims and
objectives of the study. furthermore, the next thing to do after distributing the questionnaire and get the
results is to conduct a questionnaire analysis with a probability and consequence risk test.

2.2. Probability and consequences risk test

The risk test for Probability and Consequences in this research is intended to see how much or how
many respondents choose answers or provide answers to the questions in the questionnaire.

2.3. Analysis with SSM method

After getting the list of the most extreme risks found in the risk test of probability and consequences,
the next thing to do is build a rich picture of the problem being observed to describe the activity process
of each institution involved in a problem. Then proceed with the root definition, which is a
transformation process that can convert inputs into outputs using the CATWOE technique. Root
definition is obtained by weighing the results of the questionnaire in the previous stage which is then
quantified using the CATWOE technique. After the CATWOE analysis results are obtained, the
researcher together with the participants builds a system structure that explains the shape of the system
and how to connect relevant parts should be able to function ideally in the system. Then compare the
conceptual model with the real world to highlight the possibility of change in the real world. This model
will then be a recommendation for change. In the implementation, each party will be asked about their
perceptions and assessments of the activities being modeled, whether the activity must remain or be
changed. After the interviews are carried out one by one, then the discussion with the parties related to
the model built will then be determined by the selected conceptual model that has been discussed with
respondents by reviewing based on assessment criteria.

2
The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

3. Results and discussion

In formulating the problem in this study using a descriptive method to provide a detailed description of
the project case study by identifying risks by reviewing project documents to obtain a list of risks
quantified using the SSM method to obtain opportunities and the impact of potential risks. After getting
the risk list the next step is to identify the risk with a fishbone diagram.

Table 1. Ilustration of risk list variable.

Material Aspect Variable

A1 Delays in the delivery of material due to
various factors such as difficult access to the
construction site
A2 Increasing material prices
A3 Material lost due to security problems
Money Aspect Variable
B1 Delay in billing reporting, which disrupts the
company's operations
B2 Complicated bureaucracy level
B3 Inflation
Human Aspect Variable
C1 Work delays due to contractor / sub contractor
errors
C2 The difference in the volume of work to be
done in the field
C3 Worker specifications / expertise unmatch
C4 Decreased productivity due to saturation of
overtime settings
C5 Ignorance of safety procedure
C6 Workers ignore Standard Operation
Procedure
Method Aspect Variable
D1 The job is not according to specifications
D2 Urelevant of work method
D3 Design changes in the field
D4 The available equipment is inadequate for the
method
Machinery Aspect Variable
E1 Lack of equipment needed
E2 Change of design planning to design
implementation
E3 Difficulty Level of Design
E4 Machinery Engine Breakdown that obsctruct
the completion of work
Environtmental Aspect Variable
F1 Topographical Constraint
F2 Extreme Weather Condition for work

Based on the risk list variable in Table 1, the next thing to do is create a questionnaire. In taking the
questionnaire data the researchers selected respondents with the criteria already determined with the
help of the contractor. The data collection was carried out on several contractors working on the
Gempol-Probolinggo toll road project.

3
The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

3.1. Probability and consequences risk test

In this process based on the results of the Probability Risk Test x The consequences of the next step is
to map the value of the probability scale x the value of the consequence scale to be summarized in Table
2

Table 2. Ilustration of Probabilities and Consequences based on test.

Risk Category
Variable
(Questionnaire)
A1 Extreme (25)
F1 Extreme (25)
F4 Extreme (25)
D3 Extreme (16)
E2 Extreme (16)
E3 Extreme (16)
C5 Extreme (15)
C6 Extreme (15)
D2 Extreme (15)

From Table 2 the probability x consequences based on the above risk test, it can be concluded that the
main factors causing the highest risk that have an extreme impact on the construction of the Gempol-
Probolinggo toll road are the increase in material prices, constraints of the topographic aspects of the
area and the presence of general factors and social facilities that must be transferred (figure 1).

Figure 1. The CATWOE method of obstacle land acquisition risk.

Furthermore, in making a conceptual model as shown in Figure 2, the researcher meets the respondents
and conducts a discussion to design a system based on opinions and perspectives about the desired
system in material price increase activities.

4
The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

Figure 2. 3rd conceptual model scenario.

3.2. Establish selected concept

Next steps are comparing the three conceptual models above with the real world, namely the case study
by reviewing several assessment criteria. The evaluation criteria can be seen in the following Table 3.

Table 3. Conceptual model assessment criteria.

1st Scenario 2nd Scenario 3rd Scenario
Criteria Qual
Score Value Weight Score Value Weight Score Value Weight

Duration 50 2 1% 3 1,5% 5 2,5%

Cost 30 3 0,9% 4 1,2% 2 0,6%
Satisfa 20 2 0,4% 3 0,6% 4 0,8%
7 2,3% 10 3,3% 11 3,9%

4. Conclusion
Based on the results of risk identification and Soft System Methodology (SSM) analysis on the
construction of the Gempol-Banyuwangi toll road, the main factors that causing the highest risk of
extreme impacts are the increasing of material prices, constraints on topographic aspects of the area and
the presence of general factors and social facilities. Based on that assessment, the 3rd conceptual model
was selected as it has the greatest value as a model in overcoming risk and obstacles.

5
The 5th Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1098 (2021) 022026 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1098/2/022026

Acknowledgement
We thank the families who always provide their best support to us, our fellow lecturers of the
Warmadewa University, and do not forget to thank the entire AASEC 2020 committee for their
outstanding performance. Hopefully healthy and protected always.

References
[1] Kangari R 2008 Manajemen Risiko Persepsi dan Tren AS Konstruksi. Teknik Konstruksi dan
Pengelolaan ASCE
[2] Smith P R 2012 Risk Management Rotary International District 9640 : Australia
[3] Mahdi I M, Ebid A M and Khallaf R 2020 Decision support system for optimum soft clay
improvement technique for highway construction projects Ain Shams Engineering Journal
11(1) pp 213–223
[4] Wenbin B L, Wei M, John M, Ning T and Wei W 2012 Developing a performance management
system using soft systems methodology: A Chinese case study European Journal of
Operational Research 223 (2) pp 529-540
[5] Mehregan M R, Hosseinzadeh M and Kazemi A 2012 An application of Soft System
Methodology Procedia 41 pp 426–433
[6] COSO 2004 Enterprise Risk Management-Integrated Framework Executive Summary
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP: London
[7] Williams M H A and Richard 1997 Risk Management Insurance McGraw-Hill/Irwin 8th edition:
New York
[8] Project Management Institute 2017 A Guide to the project Management Body of Knowledge sixth
edition: Pennsylvania
[9] Sgourou E, Katsakiori P, Papaioannou I and Goutsos S 2012 Using Soft Systems Methodology
as a systemic approach to safety performance evaluation Procedia 45 pp 185–193
[10] Tongyuan, Luo, Chao, Wu L and Duan 2018 Fishbone diagram and risk matrix analysis method
and its application in safety assessment of natural gas spherical tank Journal of Cleaner
Production 174 pp 296-304
[11] Nabawy M and Khodeir L M 2020 A systematic review of quantitative risk analysis in
construction of mega projects Ain Shams Engineering Journal
[12] Maryliza M and Stephen A R S 1998 The rich picture of design activity Automation in
Construction 7 (2-3) pp 157-175
[13] Checkland P and Scholes J 2009 Soft System Methodology in Action John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Chichester