Caven, V and Diop, M (2012) Architecture: A 'rewarding' career? An Anglo-French comparative study of intrinsic rewards in the architecture profession. Construction Management and Economics, 30(7), pp. 513-523. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Careers in architecture are characterized by higher levels of job insecurity and lower levels of remuneration than other equivalent professions. Likewise, the 'traditional' rewards associated with professional employment-professional power, status and recognition-have been eroded. Raising the question of what are the rewards associated with an architectural career, the concepts of informal networks and relationships in particular are examined as compensation for the poor financial rewards. Drawing upon the rewards literature in conjunction with professional identity and career management data from 84 in-depth interviews with UK and France-based architects, adopting a grounded theory method within the interpretive paradigm, findings show these relationships provide a significant amount of intrinsic satisfaction and thus reward which has been hitherto overlooked. The importance of these relationships could not be foreseen nor can they be actively planned but exist as a powerful intrinsic reward.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architecture; France; intrinsic rewards; UK |
| Index terms: | grounded theory, architect, interview, interpretive paradigm, France, compensation, profession, career, employment, identity, comparative study, drawing, satisfaction |
| Subjects: | sociology, institututions, profession, data collection methods, dispute resolution, technical documentation, professional development, research design and methodology, project delivery, theoretical framing, management, Geography |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Information Management, Human Resources, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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