Turner, M and Lingard, H (2011) Demands and resources of workers in the Australian construction industry: Identification and exploration using q methodology. In: Egbu, C and Lou, E C W (eds.) Proceedings of 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2011, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
Workers of the Australian construction industry experience demands, such as long working hours, irregular work schedules and geographically isolated work locations. Research has indicated a clear relationship between excessive work demands and work-life conflict, which has negative impacts for workers health and wellbeing. Coupled with work demands, workers also experience demands originating from their family and community domains, which are often driven by life stage and individual preferences of workers. In order to fulfil work, family and community demands, workers often call on resources such as supervisor support, flexibility of work schedule, and childcare. However, it is not clear how workers experience demands and resources, and what configuration is required so that workers can function effectively in multiple roles. Research is underway to: (i) identify the demands and resources relevant to workers of the Australian construction industry; and (ii) identify the demand-resource profiles of different worker groups within a diverse construction workforce. An innovative Q-sort method will be used to explore workers experience of demands and resources, and profiles of different worker groups will be identified. The innovative q-sort methodology using demands and resources unique to an Australian construction workforce is discussed.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | demands; human resources management; q methodology; resources; work-life fit |
| Index terms: | Q methodology, health and wellbeing, configuration, methodology, exploration, working hours, human resource, preference, work-life fit, construction industry, supervisor |
| Subjects: | practitioner, mental health and wellbeing, data analysis and analytics, environmental resource management, employment law, management, decision-making and reasoning, research methods, industry analysis, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Human Resources, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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