Project Performance Analysis from a Financial Sustainability Perspective: A Case Study of Schedule, Cost, and Risk Performance in a 2×31 MW Coal-Fired Power Plant Project

Abstract

Large-scale energy infrastructure projects face significant challenges in achieving schedule, cost, and financial sustainability targets amid increasing technical complexity, uncertainty, and project risk. Deviations during project execution, particularly schedule delays and cost overruns, can significantly affect project continuity and long-term financial performance. This study aims to analyze project performance from a financial sustainability perspective by examining the interaction between schedule performance, cost performance, project risk, and project control on a 2×31 MW coal-fired power plant project located in the Karimun Free Trade Zone, Riau Islands. The study employed a qualitative approach with a holistic single case study design, supported by limited descriptive and nonparametric quantitative analysis. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with five key informants, non-participant observation, project documentation, and a focus group discussion (FGD) used to confirm and deepen the findings, complemented by 60 monthly periods of Plan Progress, Actual Progress, Plan Cost, and Actual Cost data (July 2019-June 2024). Qualitative data were analyzed thematically with reference to the Miles and Huberman interactive model, assisted by NVivo software for coding and triangulation, while quantitative data were tested using descriptive statistics, the Shapiro-Wilk normality test, the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, and Spearman correlation. The findings show that the project experienced a 21-month schedule delay, increasing the planned duration from 39 to 60 months (53.85%), accompanied by a cost overrun of 55.50% (planned cost index of 100.00 rising to an actual cost index of 155.50). The Wilcoxon test showed that the difference between planned and actual costs was at the borderline of the 5% significance level (Z = -1.995; p = 0.046), so the result is used as supporting quantitative evidence and interpreted with caution. These deviations were primarily driven by procurement delays, design changes, technical constraints, weak coordination, rework, and ineffective integrated project control. The results indicate that project risk acted both as a trigger and reinforcer of schedule and cost deviations, which in turn affected financial sustainability through cash flow pressure, increased financing costs, and margin erosion. This study concludes that financial sustainability in infrastructure projects requires an integrated control system linking schedule, cost, risk, and financial monitoring throughout the project life cycle.