Fraser, C (1998) Personal factors influencing managerial effectiveness: A study of Australian construction site managers. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
Previous research into site managerial effectiveness in the construction industry has been primarily results orientated - based on factual evidence relating to project completion within prescribed parameters of time, cost and quality. These are factors often influenced by circumstances not within the control of the construction site manager. Thus, a need for a nonresults- based effectiveness measurement tool has been identified. Additionally, beliefs exist within the construction industry regarding personal attributes of managers which are thought to influence their effectiveness. There is a need to identify the personal factors which do actually influence effectiveness as distinct from those which are falsely believed to have influence. This research has developed such a non-results-based effectiveness measurement tool. Subordinates, peers and superiors of 46 current construction site managers, and a control group of 15 failed site managers, evaluated their site manager over 52 competency elements summated to establish an overall effectiveness score. A series of personal factors, which senior managers who recruit and promote site managers believed influenced the effectiveness of site managers, were identified. Each personal factor was then tested for correlation against the effectiveness score.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | effectiveness; measurement; construction site; site manager |
| Index terms: | effectiveness, site manager, construction industry, evidence, manager, construction site |
| Subjects: | work location, practitioner, evaluation and assessment methods, industry analysis, performance management |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Site Management, Quality Management |
| 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