Gorse, C A; Emmitt, S; Lowis, M and Howarth, A (2002) Interaction characteristics of successful contractors' representatives. In: Greenwood, D (ed.) Proceedings of 18th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2002, Northumbria, UK.
Abstract
The ability of construction professionals to use communication to influence and gain control over their environment ensuring project success must be a subject of real interest, yet little research exists in this area. The aim of this study was to identify the nature of contractor’s representatives' interaction during project team meetings. Following the observations of group interaction, the company’s directors differentiated the contractor’s representatives into four categories of effectiveness. The professionals' degree of effectiveness was based on their previous ability to repeatedly deliver contracts on time and within budget. Significant differences were found between the interaction of those considered more and less effective. Those considered more effective used a broader range of communication acts. The research data for this project were collected and classified using the Bales' Interaction Process Analysis method, supported by qualitative observations. Finally, the characteristic interaction patterns of contractor’s representatives found to be more successful are proposed.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | communication; construction-professional; project-success; meeting |
| Index terms: | project team, interaction, effectiveness, process analysis, construction professional, project success |
| Subjects: | project delivery, professional development, project management theory and practice, performance management, management, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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