Kazaz, A and Ulubeyli, S (2006) Organizational factors influencing construction manpower productivity in Turkey. In: Boyd, D (ed.) Proceedings of 22nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2006, Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
This research reports an investigation of organizational factors affecting labour productivity in the Turkish construction industry. In this survey, it is aimed that these organizational factors are formed and evaluated thoroughly. To this aim, numerical values reflecting respondents' ideas were obtained by a questionnaire applied to managers, engineers, and architects of 82 large scale construction firms with one-to-one technique. The results were calculated by the relative importance index method. The survey results showed that site management, material management, and systematic flow of work were ranked as the three most effective organizational factors on labour productivity.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | labour; organizational factors; productivity; Turkey |
| Index terms: | productivity, relative importance index, engineer, construction firm, survey, manager, organizational factor, Turkey, construction industry, site management, labour productivity, architect, questionnaire, investigation |
| Subjects: | construction operations, practitioner, organization, business, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, industry analysis, Geography, management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Site Management, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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