Sandberg, R; Löwstedt, M and Räisänen, C (2021) Working in a loosely coupled system: Exploring practices and implications of coupling work on construction sites. Construction Management and Economics, 39(3), pp. 212-226. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The conceptualization of construction as a loosely coupled system has been widely used to explain behaviour within the industry. In this article, we revisit the concept by exploring what it means to work at the micro-level within this system. Adopting a practice lens, this study focuses on the daily work of site managers, a category of workers who often have been described to have a hub-like role in construction projects. The findings highlight how their work consists of activities that can be seen as mundane, yet simultaneously fill an important coupling function in the projects, which we conceptualize as coupling work. Coupling work denotes a managerial work practice through which site managers use slack from the parent organization to tighten site-activities. However, they do so in a particular way that tightens the projects closer to their own authority which, in turn, sustains organizational loose coupling. The study contributes to debates on change and development in construction by showing how coupling work is produced and reproduced to preserve the autonomy and control of site managers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction site managers; coupling work; loosely coupled systems; managerial work practice |
| Index terms: | slack, practice lens, construction site, construction project, coupling, work practice, site manager, manager |
| Subjects: | practitioner, operations research, production management, management, work location, research design and methodology, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Site Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Time Control, Organizational Design |
| 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