Ness, K (2010) 'I know Brendan; he’s a good lad': The evaluation of skill in the recruitment and selection of construction workers. In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
This paper reports a qualitative investigation of how those who engage site workers in the UK evaluate their skills. It is based on interviews with 50 tradespeople and managers, covering a period from the Second World War to the present day, and on archival research into a DLO in 1979-1982. It was found that remarkably consistent criteria are currently used by managers and by operatives themselves to recognize whether recruits are likely to have the desired skills and qualities. The main criteria are: personal acquaintance or recommendation; inspection of tools; and the informal trial period. There are differences, however, from the criteria used thirty years ago, which tended to be more formal, and which also included trade union membership.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | skills; recruitment; selection; building trades; labour; informality |
| Index terms: | archival research, trade union, interview, recruitment, manager, operative, war, building trade, investigation, inspection, construction worker |
| Subjects: | practitioner, conflict and crisis studies, data collection methods, management, quality assurance, sociology, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Human Resources |
| 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