Kuoribo, E; Owusu-Manu, D G; Yomoah, R; Debrah, C; Acheampong, A and Edwards, D J (2023) Ethical and unethical behaviour of built environment professionals in the Ghanaian construction industry. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 21(3), pp. 840-861. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: The construction industry is an enabler of economic growth in developing countries, but its performance is governed by the professional behaviour of construction professionals. Unethical behaviour (UB) breaches codes of practice and undermines economic performance hence, ubiquitous academic attention has been given to understanding this phenomenon. This paper aims to contribute to the ensuing discourse by reporting upon the most critical ethical behaviours (EBs and UBs) of professionals in the Ghanaian construction industry (GCI). Design/methodology/approach: The study compounded identified factors into a closed-ended questionnaire in a quantitative research strategy. Data analysis was conducted using the relative importance index and one sample t-test. To measure the reliability of the scale, Cronbach’s alpha was used, which indicated that all measured items were reliable for further analysis. Findings: The study confirmed that professionals within the GCI are aware of the existence of UBs and revealed that the most prevalent ethical conducts exhibited, namely, level of accuracy, accountability, honesty, reliability, fairness and respect for colleagues. Common unethical conducts exhibited included: favouritism, bribery and corruption, professional negligence, falsification, fraud and overbilling. Research limitations/implications: The study reported on the dominant ethical conduct among built environment professionals. The claims put forward in the analysis are, thus, affected by Ghana’s social, economic and political environments, which could restrict the generalization of the findings. Practical implications: Incipient findings presented from this research will guide stakeholders to develop and device strategies that will aid alleviate persistent ethical issues within the built environment. Social implications: The study highlights individuals' perspectives on ethical issues persistent in the built environment. The findings suggest individuals adhere to ethical practices in a project environment by the evidence presented. Originality/value: This pioneering study is a novel assessment on EBs and UBs of built environment professionals in the GCI. The study supplementary adds value to the literature on ethical and unethical practices. By identifying these practices, construction firms have a competitive edge in combating UB and promoting EB among built environment professionals in the GCI.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; ethical behaviour; ethics; Ghana; unethical behaviour |
| Index terms: | Ghana, ethics, unethical conduct, quantitative research, unethical practices, construction industry, economic growth, ethical conduct, built environment, construction professional, fairness, codes of practice, negligence, accuracy, construction firm, accountability, relative importance index, strategy, data analysis, fraud, developing country, ethical behaviour, corruption, questionnaire, evidence, methodology |
| Subjects: | professional development, development economics, health safety and environment, Geography, research methods, management, economic development, liability law, infrastructure and transport systems, regulatory law, industry analysis, professional ethics, leadership, organization, risk assessment, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, data analysis and analytics, ethical practice, ethical issues |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, International Construction, Urban Studies, Legal Issues |
| 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