Naoum, S and Hackman, J O N (1996) Do site managers and the head office perceive productivity factors differently? Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 3(1-2), pp. 147-160. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper is based on a review of the literature on construction productivity and findings from a survey investigating, first, whether there are significant differences in opinions between head office personnel and site managers on factors that influence construction productivity and, second, to determine groups of factors that mostly influence site productivity. A critical discussion is structured under three general headings: (1) management factors; (2) employee motivation; and (3) experience and training. Twenty-nine factors were extracted from the above headings and were assessed by 19 head office personnel and 17 site managers. The survey indicated that both samples regard 'ineffective project planning' and 'constraints on a worker's performance' as the most crucial factors influencing productivity. Other highly ranked factors by both samples are 'difficulties with material procurement', 'lack of integration of project information', 'disruption of site programme', 'lack of experience and training' and 'exclusion of site management from contract meetings'. Ultimately, when the factor analysis technique was applied on the 29 factors, the result shows that Resource Management Effectiveness appeared to be the most dominant group of factors influencing construction productivity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | motivation; productivity; resource management; training |
| Index terms: | material procurement, integration, project planning, personnel, survey, motivation, programme, effectiveness, factor analysis, site manager, site management, resource management, construction productivity, productivity |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, control systems, practitioner, psychology, operations management, construction operations, contractual arrangements, management, performance management, organizational analysis, project controls, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Human Resources, Time Control, Site Management, Organizational Design |
| 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