Galea, N; Powell, A and Salignac, F (2023) The role of homosociality in maintaining men's powerfulness in construction companies. Construction Management and Economics, 41(2), pp. 172-182. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Over the last few decades, research has largely focused on the processes and practices that act against women in male-dominated industries and the effect this has on their career progression. However, men’s careers are under analysed. This paper flips the gaze, applying a feminist institutionalist lens to examine the practices and rules that shape and enable men’s career progression. This is critical if we are to understand how men’s power in organizations is maintained and perpetuated, arguably at the expense of women’s careers. It draws on data from a rapid ethnographic study of the Australian construction industry, specifically of construction professionals working in two multinational Australian construction companies. The paper finds that men’s career progression routinely operates through homosociality, instrumentally and expressively, via a “sponsor-mobility” principle whereby selected individuals receive higher levels of guidance, access to opportunities and advocacy from their managers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; feminist insitutionalism; gender inequality; homosociality |
| Index terms: | manager, construction company, career, mobility, inequality, construction professional, women, construction industry |
| Subjects: | organization, practitioner, sociology, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, professional development |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Ethics, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| 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