Klous, Jason D (2026) Investigating the role of the language action perspective in improving communication and collaboration in lean construction teams. PhD thesis, Nottingham Trent University, UK.
Abstract
Integrating the Language Action Perspective (LAP) with Lean Construction methodologies can significantly improve communication, collaboration, trust, and overall moods in construction project teams. Rooted in the idea that language creates new realities and actions rather than merely a means of information exchange, the LAP emphasises the use of speech acts as a mechanism for building trust, making and securing reliable promises, and aligning teams. By adopting a qualitative research design of action case study research, this study examines how a training intervention with construction teams on the LAP principles can impact communication dynamics, trust levels, and the reliability of promises. Two action case studies form the basis of the research, where focus group workshops introduced the LAP concepts, including speech acts, conditions of satisfaction (CoS), trust, listening, and moods. Pre- and post-workshop surveys, interviews, and direct observations were analysed using content analysis and mean scores of survey responses to evaluate changes in team behaviour and overall project communication. The findings demonstrate that engaging construction project teams on the use of LAP through focus group workshops significantly enhanced communication clarity, fostered a culture of trust, and improved the reliability of team commitments. When used within lean construction projects, the LAP can facilitate more efficient workflows, collaborative team environments, and a greater level of trust. By shifting focus from managing activities to managing outcomes through reliable promises, the LAP is a critical foundation for improving lean project delivery. The originality of this study lies in bridging two previously disconnected domains—lean construction and the Language Action Perspective—thereby offering both a new theoretical lens and a practical framework for addressing long-standing communication challenges. This dual contribution extends lean construction theory by embedding language as a performative act at its core, and advances LAP scholarship by demonstrating its application in a new sectoral context. In doing so, the research not only provides empirical evidence of impact but also establishes a novel interdisciplinary foundation for enhancing collaboration and creating high-performing project teams.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Manu, Emmanuel; Asnaashari, Ehsan and Arab, M Zakwan |
| Index terms: | project team, construction team, evidence, lean project delivery, interview, content analysis, commitment, qualitative research, focus group, mood, information exchange, dynamics, collaboration, survey, workshop, direct observation, methodology, workflow, lean construction, project communication, satisfaction, construction project team, case study |
| Subjects: | research methods, building construction, project delivery, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, professional development, construction type, psychology, data science, behavioral psychology, data collection methods, lean construction, management, evaluation and assessment methods, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Information Management, Digital Applications, Construction Technology, Site Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Project Management, 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