Nesan, L J (1997) A generic model for effective implementation of empowerment in construction contractor organisations. PhD thesis, University of Wolverhampton, UK.
Abstract
This study addresses reengineering of UK construction (contracting) organisations for continuous business improvement, by the use of the concept of empowerment. The In aim of this research is to develop an implementation model, along with a best practice framework, to assist construction organisations in effectively implementing empowerment. This also includes identification of 'efficacy' information and their flow between various business participants (employees). Initial investigations, including literature search and questionnaire survey within leading UK construction and manufacturing companies identified and subsequently confirmed sixty two key empowerment activities attributed to nine major elements. The nine major elements are: leadership; empowerment system; resources development; involvement; education and training; teamwork; process improvement; performance measurement; and recognition. This indicates that the modem empowerment concept is no longer a domain of simply participation in decision-making (PDM) and delegation of authority. In addition, it includes several areas of the business as above. Analysis of the survey also developed an activity model along with an empowerment implementation profile, using which companies can benchmark their implementation efforts. Having confirmed the basic constructs (elements and activities) of empowerment implementation, three of the major UK construction companies, who had pioneered with empowerment were studied in detail as to how to effectively implement empowerment in construction organisations. Using structured data analysis (SDA) techniques, the current systems of these three organisations were studied separately and subsequently, a generic model (along with a best practice framework) was developed. The SDA techniques also helped to identify and map the flow of efficacy information which is critical in the implementation of empowerment. Case studies also revealed that there has been a correlation between empowerment implementation and Strategic and Operational business performance improvement. Finally, a detailed feasibility study conducted amongst some of the leading construction companies confirmed that the model is technically, economically, and socially feasible to be applied to different types of construction companies.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; continuous improvement; contractor; empowerment; prototype development; questionnaire survey |
| Index terms: | feasibility study, process improvement, empowerment, prototype, construction company, survey, structured data analysis, decision-making, questionnaire, business performance, construction contractor, construction organization, performance measurement, teamwork, case study, continuous improvement, best practice, investigation, implementation, business improvement, education and training |
| Subjects: | design stages, modelling and simulation, data science, contractual arrangements, data collection methods, business, organization, practitioner, professional education, decision analysis, management, performance measurement |
| Topics: | Education, Organizational Design, Quality Management, Human Resources, Design Practice, Procurement, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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