Emuze, F (2022) Examining exploitation and its influence on construction sites in South Africa. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 38th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2022, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to understand exploitation. Phenomenological research was used in the study. Participants in the interviews answered open-ended questions based on lived experiences on construction sites. Analysis of the data affirmed that exploitation harms the work environment and the image of contractors. For example, people in construction tend to react negatively to instances of exploitation by quitting their jobs when demotivated or causing a scene at work. In contrast, the theoretical argument indicates that respect for persons motivates people in construction to perform better in their work with direct implications for a healthy work environment that saves time and money. By becoming mindful, people in construction will be more aware of situations and how to prevent exploitation on construction sites. Construction managers need to embrace mindfulness and RfP as a prerequisite for safe work performance to build back the economic wiser.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; exploitation; respect for persons; site work; South Africa |
| Index terms: | South Africa, site work, work performance, work environment, construction manager, construction site, exploitation, interview, becoming, mindfulness |
| Subjects: | management, Geography, health conditions and diseases, philosophical process, profession, data collection methods, operations management, work location, site logistics |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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