Dulaimi, M F and Langford, D (1999) Job behavior of construction project managers: Determinants and assessment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(4), pp. 256-264. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The paper reports the findings of an investigation into the psychosocial aspects of the work of construction project managers (PMs) in the United Kingdom. A theoretical model, which identified the different variables that may influence the behavior and effectiveness of PMs was developed. This study has used an adapted form of the behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) to measure a PM's effectiveness. The technique yielded five behavioral dimensions by which a PM's role may be described, and it was used in a survey involving 62 PMs. Analysis of the data suggests that a PM's effectiveness was influenced by situational and personal variables. The results strongly suggest that by understanding the complexity of such relationships, construction firms can influence the direction and behavior of PMs. The results also suggest that the behavior of PMs and project performance varied independently.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | survey, construction firm, United Kingdom, manager, complexity, construction project, determinant, dimension, effectiveness, project performance, investigation |
| Subjects: | organization, data collection methods, risk assessment, practitioner, health monitoring assessment and metrics, performance management, project management theory and practice, production management, Geography, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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