Blanchard, F L (1992) Construction industry organization, labor relations and productivity. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
Abstract
The definitive works on construction organization have been credited to Arthur L. Stinchcombe who postulated a theory based on craft orientation, and Robert G. Eccles whose theory is based on subcontracting. The author takes issue with the bases of these theories and provides statistical support for the contention that they do not correctly describe the basis for the organization of construction. An alternative theory is offered and its basis supported with appropriate data. Various theories have been put forward to link productivity with motivation, satisfaction and job characteristics. Many such theories are based on Expectancy, Equity and Job Characteristic models. The author contends that Expectancy theories can be utilized to link needs satisfaction to productivity in the construction industry. Research was conducted on a number of projects which resulted in the development of an Equilibrium Model to explain needs satisfaction and associated productivity. The results of this research are given and support for the model indicated. Additional analysis of the research data resulted in conclusions and recommendations which may help the construction industry in improving its productivity.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Moavenzadeh, F |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | motivation; productivity; subcontracting |
| Index terms: | motivation, construction organization, satisfaction, subcontracting, productivity, construction industry, labour relation |
| Subjects: | management, economics, industry analysis, project delivery, organization, psychology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Human Resources, Project Management, Supply Chain Management |
| 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