Mills, A (2003) Property and construction professions: The views of industry leaders. Construction Economics and Building, 3(2), pp. 9-14. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
The role of professionals has changed significantly, and sotoo should the role of professional societies. The future isvery unclear, and it is likely that professional societies willcontinue to change and adapt. But what is their role today;is it to provide leadership, serve their members, or promotetheir professions? These questions were put to a numberof construction industry leaders to seek their views. Thepresidents of three professional institutes and a governmentregulator for the construction industry were approachedand their opinions recorded. Each interviewee was chosenbecause of their leadership role within the property andconstruction industries. Using an informal exploratoryinterview approach each respondent discussed issuesfacing their professional society. The results show thatindemnity insurance, continuing professional development,and public recognition were key concerns.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; professional societies; professions; construction; property |
| Index terms: | profession, leadership role, insurance, society, continuing professional development, construction industry, Australia |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, industry analysis, leadership, communities and social development, institututions, professional development, Geography |
| Topics: | Education, Human Resources, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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