Fellows, R; Liu, A and Fong, C M (2003) Leadership style and power relations in quantity surveying in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics, 21(8), pp. 809-818. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The realization of construction projects brings together a diversity of individuals and organizations, variously forged into groups and teams, in which power is important in shaping leader/follower behaviour. Quantity surveyors, being primarily project cost consultants and procurement/contractual advisers, are employed both by the clients' and the contractors' organizations. This paper investigates aspects of leadership style and power within quantity surveying in both clients' and contractors' project 'teams'. The empirical work employed two questionnaires, developed from established instruments and completed by samples of team leaders and team members. Some differences emerged between quantity surveyors working for consultants' organizations (acting on behalf of the client) and those working for contractors' organizations. The results confirm the relationship orientation of clients' consultant quantity surveyors, who tend to adopt the supportive style of leadership. The directive style of leadership showed negative impact. Power distance was found to exceed that measured previously for Hong Kong and expert power was the most important power source.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | culture; leadership; power; quantity surveying |
| Index terms: | quantity surveying, Hong Kong, surveying, leadership style, project cost, construction project, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | Geography, production management, economics, leadership, profession, data collection methods, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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