Hugill, D (1997) Unconscious forces in project management teams. In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
A combination of economic forces and increasing fragmentation in the construction industry is creating a situation where inter-organisational and personal conflict is common. This leads to anxiety and stress amongst management teams. The manifestation of stress can be considered in relation to individuals and also groups. This paper examines the theories of unconscious forces in project management teams and in particular the nature of 'defence mechanisms' they exhibit. The issue of how such forces can be measured is examined from both a quantitative and qualitative perspective. Conclusions are drawn in support of a qualitative approach.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | group dynamics; unconscious forces; stress; anxiety; bion; naturalism; positivism; ethnomethodology; basic assumption |
| Index terms: | positivism, anxiety, group dynamics, construction industry, ethnomethodology, qualitative approach, fragmentation, project management team |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, philosophical concept, sociology, research methods, profession, mental health and wellbeing, business |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here