Federle, M O and Maloney, W F (1992) Substitutes for leadership and unionized construction carpenters. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(2), pp. 332-348. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
A construction foreman’s inability to supervise his workers properly is thought to be a cause of the declining cost-effectiveness of the construction industry. It may be, however, that there are characteristics about carpenters and their work environment, described as substitutes for leadership, that negate the ability of the foreman to influence satisfaction and performance. This paper identifies 11 potential substitutes in the construction work environment. Leader behaviors, satisfactions, performance, and role ambiguity and conflict items are also identified and adapted for use in a questionnaire. The subject population is the membership of a carpenters' district council for a major Midwestern metropolitan area. Many statistical relationships were found, indicating the existence of substitutes for leadership in the unionized carpentry environment. The two most powerful substitutes for leadership in construction carpentry were: (1) ability, experience, training, and knowledge; and (2) closely knit cohesive work crews. Areas of future research for leadership in construction are identified and discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | questionnaire, population, cost-effectivenes, construction industry, construction work, work environment, carpenter, satisfaction |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, project delivery, operations management, economics, management, industry analysis, demography |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost Management, Organizational Design, Urban Studies |
| 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