Pacheco, Christofer M (2026) Hard hats and second chances: A phenomenological study of employer support in construction-based reintegration. DBA thesis, University of South Florida, USA.
Abstract
This qualitative phenomenological study examines how formerly incarcerated individuals perceive and experience employer support during workplace reintegration in the construction industry. Although employment is widely recognized as a protective factor against recidivism, post-hire experiences from the perspective of justice-involved employees remain underexplored. Grounded in an interpretivist paradigm and informed by Social Support, Social Learning, and Identity perspectives, the study investigated how structure, self, and environment interact to influence retention, growth, and desistance. Nineteen interviews were completed with six construction workers in New Mexico who had maintained employment for at least one year following incarceration. Through the use of Seidman's three-interview model and Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis, three interlocking themes were identified: Structured Support, Intrinsic Personal Characteristics, and External Influences and Structural Conditions. Structured Support encompassed mentorship, clear expectations, and skill development that generated stability and belonging. Intrinsic Personal Characteristics, faith, agency, and integrity, anchored persistence and accountability. External Influences and Structural Conditions captured the dual role of stigma, family, parole logistics, and transformative life events as constraints as well as catalysts. A cross-case analysis revealed three dynamic patterns: reinforcing loops between support and agency, tensions where personal resolve met structural barriers, and transformative experiences that reoriented priorities toward stability and responsibility. These interactions informed an emergent Reintegration Theory expressed as R = ƒ(Ss, Ip, Ec), where successful reintegration is a recursive function of Structured Support (Ss), Intrinsic Personal Characteristics (Ip), and External Conditions (Ec); Ec moderates outcomes, and Ss and Ip reinforce one another over time. The conclusion of the study's analysis and outcomes is reintegration is cyclical rather than linear, shaped by reciprocal exchanges between support and personal agency, constrained by systemic barriers, and accelerated by pivotal turning points. Practical implications include embedding brief, consistent mentorship and feedback cycles into daily site routines, anticipating parole-related frictions, and using transparent, performance-based advancement to normalize second chance hiring. This study contributes a mid-range, industry-specific theory that links individual resilience, employer structure, and contextual realities, offering construction leaders a replicable model to strengthen workforce stability and expand opportunity through structured second chances.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Wolgemuth, Jennifer and Robinson, Dahlia |
| Index terms: | phenomenological study, retention, employment, integrity, paradigm, identity, interaction, construction industry, construction worker, justice, interview, routine, social learning, skills development, stability, Mexico, accountability, thematic analysis, cross-case analysis, agency, performance-based |
| Subjects: | practitioner, legal systems, theoretical framing, structural engineering, health safety and environment, Geography, behavioral psychology, liability law, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, education and knowledge transfer, management, performance measurement, methods and analysis, personnel development, sociology, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Human Resources |
| 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