Pries, F; Doree, A; Van Der Veen, B and Vrijhoef, R (2004) The role of leaders' paradigm in construction industry change. Construction Management and Economics, 22(1), pp. 7-10. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
As in other industries, firms in the construction industry need to become more client- and market-oriented. In the last decade, several initiatives have been taken to change the construction industry in that direction. The changes, however, seem to be slower than other industries and less forthcoming than projected. Old practices and patterns die hard. Fundamental changes in orientation, strategy and strategy deployment require shifts in the management paradigms (i.e. the 'frames of mind' that steer individual and collective behaviour). Management is seen as a crucial factor in these change processes, but can the new business be created by old management paradigms? Can the leaders in the construction industry shake off the old paradigms? An explorative quantitative study shows that the mainstream paradigm of construction industry leaders today is much as it was in the past: technology- and project-oriented. Acting out of this paradigm, issues as social-organizational change and strategic focus on the client - regarded as important for the industry - will probably not be addressed properly. Change initiatives could gain in success, when they create wider awareness of existence and persistence of incumbent and prevailing paradigms.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | barriers to change; construction industry; construction management; innovation; paradigms |
| Index terms: | strategy, organizational change, construction industry, paradigm |
| Subjects: | business, education and knowledge transfer, management, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| 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