Pretorius, F I H and Taylor, R G (1986) Conflict and individual coping behaviour in informal matrix organizations within the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 4(2), pp. 87-104. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
In this paper the use of formal and informal matrix organizations in the South African construction industry are discussed; with the specific purpose of examining inter-personal and intra-personal conflict and of determining the psychological coping techniques of professional personnel in these organizations under stressful working conditions. The results of unstructured interviews with such professionals are presented in the form of case study material. The general conclusion is that although such organizations may be successful in the management of construction projects in South Africa, they do not always contribute to the psychological well-being of employees.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conflict; construction industry; coping techniques; matrix organization; organization design; stress |
| Index terms: | case study, construction industry, working conditions, coping, interview, personnel, South Africa, well-being, construction project |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing, management, Geography, production management, employment law, industry analysis, behavioral psychology |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Health and Safety |
| 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