Institutional environment and institutional logics in construction safety management: The case of climatic heat stress on site

Jia, Y A; Rowlinson, S; Xu, M and Li, B (2015) Institutional environment and institutional logics in construction safety management: The case of climatic heat stress on site. In: Raiden, A and Aboagye-Nimo, E (eds.) Proceedings of 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2015, Lincoln, UK.

Abstract

Although climatic heat stress can be fully brought under control and prevented from causing short-term or long-term damage to the human body in laboratory experiments, the expected effect of interventions are however often lost in the practice on construction site as frontline personnel are driven by conflicting institutional logics in their specific institutional environment. The paper presents a comparative study between Hong Kong and Mainland China in the case of climatic heat stress management on construction sites. Specifically, we look into how societal culture as institutional logics leads workers and managers to their pragmatic or normative behaviours that deviate from the expected outcome of safety management. Two competing institutional logics in construction safety management are identified and discussed, i.e., production logic and prevention logic. Comparative analysis of the Chinese samples under two different institutional environments identifies two distinct society-level cultural logics that shape personal strategies of reconciling safety and production goals, i.e., Confucianism logic and Chinese pragmatism logic. Their implications on construction safety management are further discussed.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction safety; institutional intervention; institutional environment; institutional logics; production logic; prevention logic
Index terms: comparative study, climatic heat stress, prevention, China, safety management, construction safety, pragmatism, Hong Kong, manager, laboratory, institutional logic, personnel, society, construction site, strategy, comparative analysis, experiment
Subjects: theoretical framing, management, Geography, financial risk, occupational health and safety management, research management, communities and social development, environmental health, philosophical concept, data collection methods, research design and methodology, practitioner, work location, data analysis and analytics
Topics: Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Human Resources, Site 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