Review of construction labor productivity factors from a geographical standpoint

Momade, M H; Shahid, S; Falah, G; Syamsunur, D and Estrella, D (2023) Review of construction labor productivity factors from a geographical standpoint. International Journal of Construction Management, 23(4), pp. 697-707. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

Many studies on construction labor productivity (CLP) have been conducted by researchers worldwide over the years, but there has been no study to date whereby the findings from the previous articles have been extensively reviewed from a geographical perspective. Furthermore, the published articles have not been unanimous on their findings in the same region further questioning the reliability of previous research. This study aims to review previous research on the topic of CLP to identify the reasons for the variation on the findings from a geographical perspective. A thorough literature review was conducted with all available scientific databases and a total of 122 articles were shortlisted. From the previous articles, the author’s focused on the definition used by the researcher on CLP; influencing CLP factors identified in the article; the research limitations based on geographical regions. As productivity remains a crucial aspect for the construction industry to improve on, the study raises the level of awareness and facilitates building the intellectual wealth on the perspective of identification of CLP factors in different regions of the world.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction labor productivity; definition; geographical perspective
Index terms: productivity, database, construction industry, construction labour, literature review, variation
Subjects: contractual condition, management, industry analysis, data management, data analysis and analytics
Topics: Research Practice, Business Strategy, Digital Applications, Site Management, Contract Administration
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