Bruce, P J; Hrymak, V; Bruce, C and Byrne, J (2025) The role of interpersonal conflict as a cause of work-related stress in construction managers in Ireland. Construction Innovation, 25(1), pp. 61-77. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to provide evidence to support an emerging theory that interpersonal conflict is the primary cause of workplace stress among a self-selected sample of Irish construction managers. Design/methodology/approach: Eighteen construction managers working in Ireland were recruited for this study. Using semi-structured interviews and interpretative phenomenological analysis as the research methodology, the causes of their workplace stress were investigated. Findings: Participants reported that the principal cause of their workplace stress was high levels of interpersonal conflict between colleagues. The effects of this interpersonal conflict included avoidance behaviour, ill health, absences from the workplace and loss of productivity issues. Deadlines, penalty clauses, lack of appreciation, cliques, costs, communication, temporary contracts and delays were also reported stressors. Research limitations/implications: A limitation of the study is the small sample of 18 construction managers and the limited geographical area. Social implications: The social implications of this study could be to clearly identify that interpersonal conflict may be under reported in the construction industry, and there is a possibility that it is being misclassified as other workplace behaviours such as bullying, harassment and workplace violence. If this is so, this could aid future researchers in addressing this challenging workplace behaviour. Originality/value: The current consensus in the literature is that the three main causes of workplace stress are bullying, harassment and violence. However, the role and importance of interpersonal conflict as reported in this study, with the exception of North America and China, is not reflected in the wider health and safety research literature. In addition, interpersonal conflict and its reluctance to be reported is largely absent from construction safety research. The findings of this study may be explained if the workplace stress research community is currently misclassifying interpersonal conflict as a manifestation of bullying, harassment or violence. If this is the case, interpersonal conflict needs further research. This is to establish if this cause of construction-related workplace stress needs to be reconsidered as a standalone phenomenon in the wider family of challenging workplace behaviours.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bullying; construction manager; interpersonal conflict; workplace misbehaviour; workplace stress |
| Index terms: | productivity, research methodology, Ireland, workplace stress, construction industry, penalty, health and safety, stressors, interview, evidence, construction manager, methodology, construction safety, China |
| Subjects: | management, health conditions and diseases, environmental health, regulatory law, industry analysis, research design and methodology, data collection methods, profession, research methods, Geography, health safety and environment, evaluation and assessment methods, psychology |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Legal Issues, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, 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