Infante-Perea, M; Román-Onsalo, M and Navarro-Astor, E (2025) Occupational alternatives in Spanish building engineering: A gender perspective. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 23(6), pp. 2005-2022. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose – Construction remains a male-dominated industry with marked occupational segregation. Based on Gottfredson's Circumscription and Compromise theory of career development, the purpose of this study is to outline the range of occupational alternatives that Building Engineering students in Andalusia (Spain) find acceptable for their future careers. These alternatives enable an analysis to be performed regarding the extent to which such segregation is related to their possible career aspirations. Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 704 Spanish final-year Building Engineering students was drawn from a survey administered in person to all students attending each compulsory subject. A cluster statistical analysis was carried out to study how they are grouped according to their occupational preferences and perceived career barriers. Findings – Men might choose their career options with a low level of compromise, and their range of satisfactory occupations corresponds to their main preferences: "Technical project drafting and development", "Technical site management" and "Production site management". Women, showing a higher perception of career barriers, have to exercise a higher compromise on their preferred options. They are likely to sacrifice their field of interest for the sake of prestige and are more likely than men to give up prestige to preserve options more closely related to their gender such as "Technical project drafting and development" and "Risk prevention and Health and Safety". "Technical site management" shows the greatest perceived barriers, but its high preference level and the associated prestige render it likely to form part of the range of career aspirations for women. The employment options that women and men aspire to are more similar while they are still at university than when they later join the labour market. It is concluded that occupational segregation is a complex phenomenon that must be addressed from different perspectives. The responsibility of the business community is highlighted, and the implementation of actions in higher education is suggested. Originality/value – The research contributes to the career development body of knowledge in male-dominated and gender-segregated occupational fields within STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). The focus is on the Building Engineering profession which remains largely under-researched
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building engineering; career choice; career development; gender; m19; occupational alternatives |
| Index terms: | health and safety, survey, occupation, science, career, building engineering, methodology, preference, body of knowledge, low level, exercise, higher education, statistical analysis, Spain, employment, women, labour market, site management, profession, drafting, option, implementation, prevention |
| Subjects: | data science, technical documentation, mechanical systems, data collection methods, measurement and scaling, decision analysis, sociology, educational institutions, professional development, economics, management, construction operations, knowledge management, contractual arrangements, health behaviours and lifestyles, institututions, specialized education, financial risk, health safety and environment, Geography, decision-making and reasoning, research methods |
| Topics: | Education, Supply Chain Management, Risk Management, Procurement, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Design Practice, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Cost Management, Research Practice, Information Management |
| 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