The discourse of ‘Respect for People’ in UK construction

Abstract

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is mobilized to investigate some of the assumptions that lie behind the text of the Respect for People reports (2000, 2004), part of the ‘Egan agenda’ in the UK. The concept of respect is examined, contrasting the humanist view of people as ends in themselves with the instrumentalist view in which human beings are treated as means to an end. Conceptualizing people as an asset encourages this instrumental view. Similarly, the ‘business case’ argument for respecting people means that improvements to working conditions are judged purely in accordance with their contribution to efficiency and profitability rather than in terms of moral imperatives (not killing people) or fairness (not discriminating against them). Investigation of the structural, institutional and discursive context of the text reveals it to be a response to conditions at a particular historical moment: labour shortages; the desire to avoid or pre‐empt regulation; changes in the wider prevailing discourse; and the need to give the impression that ‘something is being done’. In conclusion it is suggested that, while the Respect for People discourse may be seen as a way of containing and defusing potential critique, it could also be drawn on by those seeking to improve working conditions.Discourse, human resource management, Respect for People, working conditions, labour relations,

Innovate or Perish? Exploring some of the Myths of Construction Innovation

“…While authors such as Winch (2008) have questioned the empirical foundations of such claims and while others such as Ness (2010) and Ness and Green (2012) have argued that many innovations over that time have been counterproductive, there has nevertheless been considerable advancement in our understanding of how innovation works in the industry. While it is impossible here to cover this entire literature, we explore some of the main contributors and drivers below.…”

Perceptions of status and TMO workgroup cooperation: implications for project governance

“…Consider, for example, the Respect for People (2004) initiative in the UK, the core principles of which are also reflected in the Construction Industry Review Committee report (CIRC, 2001). When stripped of all the politics, cynicism, and power struggles associated with its introduction (see Ness, 2010), the two Respect for People foci of 'people as assets' and 'people as ends in themselves' are not inherently conflicting or contradictory. Instead, they entail two dimensions of human value (Kane, 1998): the former is consistent with economic or instrumental value; and the latter, with moral or ethical value.…”

‘Danger building site—keep out!?’: a critical agenda for geographical engagement with contemporary construction industries

“…Caplan 2007;Clarke 2006;Green 2011;Ness 2010;Sage, Brookes and Dainty 2010;Thiel 2010;Watts 2007). These studies develop critiques of problems not just identified by the industry itself (Murray and Langford 2003), but also government initiatives (e.g.…”

“…The rationale for my argument here is two-fold. First, contemporary construction industries have been repeatedly criticized for their adversarial and discriminatory working practices and cultures (Caplan 2007;Clarke 2006;Neale 2007a, 2001b;Fletcher and Watson 2007;Green and May 2003;Green 2006Green , 2011Murray and Dainty 2009;Ness 2010Ness , 2011Rooke, Seymour and Fellow 2004;Brookes 2010, 2012;Styhre 2006Styhre , 2011Thiel 2007Thiel , 2010Watts 2007). Second, and relatedly, without addressing such ethical and political matters of concern, future geographies of architecture risk failing to adequately consider their political and ethical implications, and indeed potential contribution.…”

“…Brown and Phua 2011;Clegg 1975;Fletcher and Watson 2007;Mcgrath-Champ, Rosewarne and Rittau 2011;Watts 2007) and the margins of mainstream, functionalist-positivist, Construction Management (e.g. Clarke 2006;Green 2011;Green and May 2003;Murray and Dainty 2009;Ness 2010Ness , 2011Sage, Dainty and Brookes 2010;Styhre 2006Styhre , 2011.…”