Walker, A and Newcombe, R (2000) The positive use of power on a major construction project. Construction Management and Economics, 18(1), pp. 37-44. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Although reasonably well developed in the general management literature, the source and use of power in organizations has received little attention in relation to its effect on the management of construction projects. This paper reviews the literature on power and its relationship to both formal and informal authority, and its manifestation as organizational politics, and relates them to construction projects in general. Reward, coercive, expert and referent (prestige) power and the role of resources are covered in this general review. A closer examination is then made of power through a case study of the development of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, which identifies the positive use of power and its implications for the outcome of the project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | authority; case study; Hong Kong; power; project organization |
| Index terms: | case study, Hong Kong, politics, construction project, project organization, science |
| Subjects: | political science, production management, Geography, organizational theory, data collection methods, specialized education |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Governance, Education |
| 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