Ness, K (2010) The discourse of 'respect for people' in UK construction. Construction Management and Economics, 28(5), pp. 481-493. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is mobilized to investigate some of the assumptions that lie behind the text of the Respect for People reports (2000, 2004), part of the 'Egan agenda' in the UK. The concept of respect is examined, contrasting the humanist view of people as ends in themselves with the instrumentalist view in which human beings are treated as means to an end. Conceptualizing people as an asset encourages this instrumental view. Similarly, the 'business case' argument for respecting people means that improvements to working conditions are judged purely in accordance with their contribution to efficiency and profitability rather than in terms of moral imperatives (not killing people) or fairness (not discriminating against them). Investigation of the structural, institutional and discursive context of the text reveals it to be a response to conditions at a particular historical moment: labour shortages; the desire to avoid or pre-empt regulation; changes in the wider prevailing discourse; and the need to give the impression that 'something is being done'. In conclusion it is suggested that, while the Respect for People discourse may be seen as a way of containing and defusing potential critique, it could also be drawn on by those seeking to improve working conditions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | discourse; human resource management; labour relations; respect for people; working conditions |
| Index terms: | working conditions, labour relation, critical discourse analysis, fairness, investigation, profitability, labour shortage, critique, efficiency, business case, respect for people, regulation, human resource management |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, ethical practice, economic analysis, strategic project management, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, leadership, political science, employment law, management, performance management, economics |
| Topics: | Governance, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Supply Chain Management, Human Resources, Quality Management, Legal Issues |
| 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