Hague, D J (1985) Incentives and motivation in the construction industry: A critique. Construction Management and Economics, 3(2), pp. 163-170. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Bonus, payment-by-results, financial incentives (or any synonymous method for systematically encouraging productivity) has been the grumbling appendix to industrial relations in the building industry, with arguments for and against it’s use, thoroughly rehearsed over some 70 years. Oddly, this polarization of belief, reminiscent of the Lilliputan warfare between Bigendians and Littlendians, is not carried over into other, generally mechanistic techniques for programming, resource allocation, et al., whose veracity and effectiveness are disinterestedly investigated. A case for defining a proper role for financial incentive schemes is argued, starting with an apparent contradiction; change in the workplace disrupts group cohesion and social structures, yet building operations, by their very nature, continuously alter both work environment and workplace groupings, without similarly affecting building workers. The examination proceeds by juxtaposing the well known Herzberg hygiene/motivation theory with the generally overlooked Davis (1948) investigation of building workers, then focuses upon monotony, briefly comparing 'job-satisfaction' and 'no job-satisfaction' experienced in other industries, moving to a conclusion via the findings of Borcheding and Oglesby (1974) that good site organization engenders high job-satisfaction and productivity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | incentives; motivation; organization; productivity |
| Index terms: | motivation, cohesion, financial incentive, building operation, programming, critique, productivity, satisfaction, industrial relation, resource allocation, social structure, construction industry, site organization, work environment, investigation, effectiveness, building industry |
| Subjects: | social theory, management, structural engineering, performance management, industry analysis, programming, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, project delivery, economic analysis, resource management, psychology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Site Management, Quality Management, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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