Oswald, D; Sherratt, F and Smith, S (2019) Managing production pressures through dangerous informality: A case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(11), pp. 2581-2596. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: It is well-known that significant production pressures exist on many construction projects and previous studies have suggested that this pressure is a contributory factor in safety incidents on sites. While research has established that production pressures exist, less is understood about the construction practices that occur when projects are under such pressures and their repercussion for safety. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach: Through an ethnographic approach on a large construction project in the UK, these practices were explored and unpacked. The lead researcher was a member of the Health and Safety department, and undertook participant observation as a main research tool for three years. Findings: It was found that informal, covert and dangerous “piecework” strategies were adopted at the site level in direct response to scheduling demands. Construction workers were incentivised through extra finance and rest periods to finish the work quickly, which, in turn, prioritised production over safety. Unreasonable production pressures remain an unresolved problem in the construction industry and are, perhaps consequentially, being informally managed on-site. Originality/value: This study improves our understanding of the complexities involved in the unresolved demands between production and safety on construction sites, which marks a step towards addressing this substantial challenge that is deeply ingrained within the industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; construction safety; scheduling |
| Index terms: | large construction project, scheduling, health and safety, observation, strategy, construction site, construction project, methodology, complexity, construction safety, case study, contributory factor, construction worker, construction industry |
| Subjects: | practitioner, data collection methods, risk assessment, work location, operations research, production management, organizational theory, health safety and environment, research methods, management, environmental health, systems engineering, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Time Control, Site Management, Risk Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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