Introduction
Many megastructures are faced with a lot of risks. During the project approval, there is a lot of expectations from the projects. At some rare situations, the end product differs from what was initially planned for. Many factors come in in such situations. In their case study, Guo, Chang-Richards, Wilkinson and Li made a comparison between two mega infrastructural projects, that is, the construction of China's Yi-wan Railway Project and New Zealand's Northern Gateway Toll Road (NGTR) Project. The primary motive behind their case study was to understand how the two projects used different project governance structures in their risk management approaches ( Guo, Chang-Richards, Wilkinson, & Li, 2014). In their case study, they tried to investigate how project predictability compares to the project governance. Project governance comprises all the elements that make the project undertaken to be successful ( Ahola, Ruuska, Artto, & Kujala, 2014). Every project is unique, and therefore the project governance has to be tweaked to meet the needs of that project (Ahola et al., 2014) . The purpose of this research paper is to identify some of the project risks these two infrastructures faced and identification of risk strategies that can be used to solve the risks associated with large projects.
While the project success rates recording is very low, these two mega projects are some of the most successful ( Guo et al., 2014) . Despite the success of the project management in governance, they were faced with potential project risks as documented in the case study. Some of these project risks will be discussed, and their risk response strategies will also be discussed. These project risks are as follows;
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
As with many mega projects, working on the stipulated budget and time during the project approval phase becomes a major risk as the events in the project unfold. During the construction of the Yi-Wan railway, the project was described as one of the most difficult projects historically to be undertaken (Guo et al., 2014) . This is due to the geological structure where the railway line passes. This meant that the Chinese government had to invest in more funds than initially planned to lead the project into completion. It took seven years for the project to be completed. On the other hand, New Zealand's government had taken a loan to fund the construction of the Northern Gateway Toll Road. The terrain that the road was constructed on was very challenging to the project team. This posed a great challenge due to the project exceeding the allocated budget and time. The geological conditions of a site affect the project in terms of resources ( Joslin., & Müller, 2015) .
Another challenge is the changing project team morale ( Guo, et al., 2014) . These projects relied on human labor who are prone to changes in their morale. When project time elapses without completion, the morale with the project team can shift drastically affecting the project as a whole.
The uncertainties involved when estimating a task (Guo et al., 2014) . When dealing with mega projects as the ones in this case study, the project is broken down into smaller tasks which are easier to handle. These tasks come with the risk of uncertainty when approximating the project costs as well as time schedules. Having long project estimates would have the effect of the management getting pressured to shorten them. In return, the project workers would work poorly to hasten the completion of the tasks.
Another challenge highlighted in this case study is the study syndrome ( Guo, et al., 2014) . This can be defined as delaying to perform a task until the last minute to perform that task arrives ( Joslin., & Müller, 2015) . This increases the project risks associated with megaprojects. The management has all the time to focus on these tasks but does not attend to these issues until the last moments. If other unplanned events arise, the task goes into the risk of not being completed as planned.
When addressing the above-highlighted risk problems, some risk approach strategies may be implemented to counter these problems. These strategies are as follows;
To avoid the student syndrome, the project governance ensures that the tasks are started as soon as possible ( Too, & Weaver, 2014) . In doing this, it will help eliminate the uncertainties that are brought by starting the project at the last moments. The project managers should be responsible for determining when the task should actually start to avoid any inconveniences brought by starting the project late. This would offer room for tasks rework in case some corrections are needed.
The project governance team should be responsible for managing key project resources (Too, & Weaver, 2014) . These include finances and project durations. These two resources are among the most critical resources that affect the performance of the project. Mismanaging them would lead to project cost and time overruns, and this could affect the end product of the project.
The project governance team should ensure that there is protection for the project task estimates. These are time margins that are put in place as a measure to counter delays in the estimated project tasks completions ( Too, & Weaver, 2014) . The margin for estimates should be set at a level where the project teams are confident in time slots required to accomplish a task.
Avoiding multitasking to the project workers. Assigning more than one task to a worker at the same time affects their working morale ( Too, & Weaver, 2014) . Some project managers may assign to a worker more than one task to save on labor costs. Doing this affects the worker's ability to perform the tasks due to the disruptions in the behavior of the workers. It is recommended that the tasks should be assigned one at a time, putting in all the efforts to have a risk free project.
Conclusion
The case study highlighted many problems that mega projects fall into despite the effort of the project teams involved in the project governance to eradicate them. To have a better infrastructure free from most project risks, the project governance team should keep in mind some of the project mitigation strategies highlighted above. No matter how unique the project governance is, practicing these strategies would put the projects at a better position to avoid and mitigate project risks.
References
Ahola, T., Ruuska, I., Artto, K., & Kujala, J. (2014). What is project governance and what are its origins? International Journal of Project Management , 32 (8), 1321-1332.
Guo, F., Chang-Richards, Y., Wilkinson, S., & Li, T. C. (2014). Effects of project governance structures on the management of risks in major infrastructure projects: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Project Management , 32 (5), 815-826.
Joslin, R., & Müller, R. (2015). Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts. International Journal of Project Management , 33 (6), 1377-1392.
Too, E. G., & Weaver, P. (2014). The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management , 32 (8), 1382-1394.
