Gorse, C A and Emmitt, S (2009) Informal interaction in construction progress meetings. Construction Management and Economics, 27(10), pp. 983-993. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
The small amount of published research into construction project meetings demonstrates some of the principal difficulties of investigating such sensitive business environments. Using the Bales Interaction Process Analysis (IPA) research method, data on group interaction were collected. A project outcome, namely whether the project was within contract budget, was used as a basis of enquiry between interaction patterns. Analysis was concerned with the socio-emotional (relationship building) and the task-based components of communication and the positive and negative socio-emotional interaction characteristics. Socio-emotional interaction was found to be significantly greater in the projects completed within budget. Socio-emotional interaction is used to express feelings in relation to tasks and it serves as the flux that creates and sustains the group's social framework, which is crucial in a project environment. The data provide an indication of the importance of informal communication in the maintenance of relationships within project meetings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | interaction; interpersonal communication; meetings; project success |
| Index terms: | construction project, project outcome, project success, interaction, process analysis |
| Subjects: | project completion, behavioral psychology, production management, project management theory and practice, management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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