Gilbert, G L and Walker, D H T (2001) Motivation of Australian white-collar construction employees: A gender issue? Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(1), pp. 59-66. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
As a result of sustained gender imbalance in the construction industry, research continues in the fields of attraction and retention of female employees. In Melbourne, Australia, an investigative survey was carried out to evaluate the relationship between motivation at work and gender. The survey also aimed to ascertain if professional men and women in the construction industry were motivated and demotivated by the same variables. The research concluded that there was no statistically significant difference in total motivation and demotivation levels between male and female employees. There were, however, significant differences with regard to the perceived attractiveness and unattractiveness of certain work place and job characteristics. Some characteristics were not gender discriminatory in their unattractiveness. Evidence presented in this paper can lead to a useful re-appraisal of how the construction industry can create a more attractive workplace environment that entices more employees of either gender to remain in the industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | demotivation; gender; management; motivation; workplace environment |
| Index terms: | survey, motivation, workplace environment, evidence, appraisal, retention, construction employee, Australia, gender issue, women, construction industry |
| Subjects: | industry analysis, sociology, Geography, factor and component analysis, management, psychology, practitioner, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Ethics, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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