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.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 January 1996
Review Article|
January 01 1996
Do site managers and the head office perceive productivity factors differently? Available to Purchase
SHAMIL NAOUM;
SHAMIL NAOUM
South Bank University, School of Construction, Wandsworth, London SW8 2JZ, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
JON HACKMAN
JON HACKMAN
South Bank University, School of Construction, Wandsworth, London SW8 2JZ, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
Publisher: Emerald Publishing
Online ISSN: 1365-232X
Print ISSN: 0969-9988
© MCB UP Limited
1996
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (1996) 3 (1-2): 147–160.
Citation
NAOUM S, HACKMAN J (1996), "Do site managers and the head office perceive productivity factors differently?". Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 3 No. 1-2 pp. 147–160, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb021028
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Client Account
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
ICE Member Sign In
Log inPurchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.
Please enter valid email address.
Pay-Per-View Access
£32.00
Suggested Reading
Training and development climate and administrative employees' productivity in higher education
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education (December,2020)
TRAINING AND MANAGEMENT SUFFER IN CONSTRUCTION
Management Development Review (June,1993)
The Consumer Resource Exchange Model: theoretical development and empirical evaluation
Marketing Intelligence & Planning (April,1998)
An analysis of an incentive problem considering non‐monetary utility
Kybernetes (June,2003)
Productivity Improvements through the Use of Graphic User Interfaces
Industrial Management & Data Systems (May,1994)
Related Chapters
Exploring Motivations of Potential Space Tourists
Space Tourism: The Elusive Dream
Self-Directed Work Teams and Mining Workplace Productivity
Production, Safety and Teamwork in a Deep-Level Mining Workplace: Perspectives from the Rock-Face
Evaluation Noir: The Other Side of the Experience
Case Study Evaluation: Past, Present and Future Challenges
Recommended for you
These recommendations are informed by your reading behaviors and indicated interests.
