Green, S D (1998) The technocratic totalitarianism of construction process improvement: A critical perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 5(4), pp. 376-386. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
The current research agenda for construction process improvement is heavily influenced by the rhetoric of business process re-engineering (BPR). In contrast to the wider literature on BPR, there is little evidence of critical thought within the construction management research community. A postmodernist interpretation is advocated whereby the reality of management practice is defined by the dominant management discourse. The persuasiveness of BPR rhetoric is analysed with particular reference to the way in which it plays on the insecurity of modern managers. Despite the lip service given to empowerment' and teamwork', the dominant theme of the re-engineering movement is that of technocratic totalitarianism. From a critical perspective, it is suggested that BPR is imposed on construction organizations to ensure continued control by the industry's dominant power groups. Whilst industry leaders are fond of calling for attitudinal and cultural improvement', the language of the accepted research agenda continually reinforces the industry's dominant culture of control and command'. Therefore, current research directions in process improvement perpetuate existing attitudes rather than facilitating cultural change. The concept of lean construction is seen to be the latest manifestation of this phenomenon.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business process change; research; corporate improvement; critical theory; lean construction; postmodernism; rhetoric |
| Index terms: | evidence, manager, lean construction, management practice, process improvement, process change, construction process, construction organization, movement, management research, business process re-engineering, cultural change, research agenda, teamwork, empowerment |
| Subjects: | management, research management, evaluation and assessment methods, sociology, business, building construction, research design and methodology, health behaviours and lifestyles, organization, practitioner |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Site Management |
| 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