Sandberg, R; Räisänen, C; Löwstedt, M and Raidén, A B (2016) Exploring the work practices of site managers as processes of embodiment. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 32nd Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2016, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
Examining the social sustainability of site managers' work situations Rikard SandbergChalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96, Göteborg, SwedenRecently, organisation scholars have highlighted a need to investigate managerial work in organisations so as to take into account the work activities that influence workers' expectations, meanings and values about what is desirable and necessarily related to everyday work. In construction, site managers' approach to work has been depicted as “muddling through”; that they skilfully solve problems as these inevitably crop up and try to be everywhere at the same time. This reactive behaviour is not sustainable since it has been shown to lead to stress and hinders on-going development of management in construction organisations. Therefore, more attention needs to be paid to the implications of managers' work performance on both individual as well as organizational levels.The purpose of this paper is to explore what “muddling through” means for construction site managers in Sweden. We draw on empirical data from 40 life-story narrative interviews with site managers, foremen and supervisors in a large number of construction organisations. We use practice theories and a masculinity lens to explore and analyse the data. We found that all the site managers interviewed were remarkably committed to their work, seeing themselves both as sense-makers and sense-givers, responsible for all the issues, large and small, pertaining to the construction site and project. However, they deplored organisational and institutional constraints, which in their view mostly obstructed rather than supported or facilitated their work. Sense-making and sense-giving roles demand presence, flexibility, experience, hindsight, judgment and improvisation, which in turn, and over time, often result in exhaustion and stress. We conclude that “muddling through” is a misnomer that can lead to an underestimation of the intrinsic physical and emotional strain of site-management work. This in turn, may explain the lack of support and trivialisation of lower-management competences and lack of training.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | managerial work; "muddling through"; practice; site managers; embodiment |
| Index terms: | manager, presence, crop, construction organization, site manager, judgment, narrative, competence, work practice, masculinity, construction site, interview, social sustainability, meaning, work performance, supervisor, Sweden, practice theory |
| Subjects: | environmental science, operations management, management, personnel development, Geography, land management, qualitative and interpretive research, dispute resolution, data collection methods, organization, practitioner, theoretical framing, communities and social development, sociology, work location |
| Topics: | Project Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Site Management, Legal Issues, Human Resources, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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