McFillen, J M and Maloney, W F (1986) Human resource data in the construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 112(1), pp. 22-32. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Unionized construction workers in a major midwestern city were surveyed to collect data on education, training, experience, employment history, and a variety of other demographic variables. The characteristics of this local work force were analyzed and, where possible, contrasted with the data on the national construction labor force. The implications of the findings were discussed as they relate to the need for human resource planning in the construction industry. For example, the data indicated that younger workers are not joining unions in the same numbers as in the past. The anticipated result is a future shortage of skilled workers in the unionized sector of the industry, which has implications for construction productivity and for the funding of various worker benefits. The need for improved human resource planning was stressed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | funding, construction labour, construction industry, construction productivity, construction worker, skilled worker, employment, human resource, history, demographic variable |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, architectural and construction history, operations management, practitioner, industry analysis, demography, management |
| Topics: | Site Management, Human Resources, Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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