Does leadership in Construction need to be deconstructed?
Part 1: Innovation: a doctrine or a theatre?
The construction industry, which is the third fastest-growing sector in the UK but with one of the lowest productivity performances, is now looking towards technology adoption and innovation as a way to reinvent itself. This historically male-dominated industry is also under a lot of pressure to adopt a more relevant understanding of gender diversity and leadership. This research explores the relationship between poor performance in innovation, long-term sustainability, and the lack of gender diversity at the leadership level. This study further looks at the current leadership and innovation models, adopted by the industry, in order to deconstruct them and propose an alternative fit for a modern organisation. By applying a multi-method interpretive, an inductive approach through extensive literature review, an online survey, and qualitative interviews from the viewpoint of female leaders; this research reveals the underlying gender dynamics that govern the industry. It identifies key reasons behind the under-representation and low retention of female leaders in the industry and its following impact on the mental health crisis and sustainability within Construction. This study contributes to the literature by expanding our existing knowledge beyond binary gender concepts within leadership.
The unique research context
This research project was conducted in the advent of the UK leaving the European Union and in the midst of a global pandemic, making it a unique time and space in history. Although Covid-19 restrictions created various challenges, they also provided an unparalleled environment for honest and vulnerable conversations and reflections, which have been captured in this research. By removing the predictability of the assumed patterns due to the uncertainty in this unique time, this research was inadvertently placed on a new trajectory that required surrendering to the complex research process and letting go of preconceived ideas and expectations.
Digital Construction
In 1998 Sir John Egan released a report outlining the extent of Construction’s inefficiencies, waste, and associated accidental losses. The report states: “up to 30% of construction is rework, labour is used at only 40–60% of potential efficiency, accidents can account for 3–6% of total project costs, and at least 10% of materials are wasted” (1998, p.15). Egan sent a clear message to the industry — Construction could no longer function in its current state and had to be reimagined. With the introduction of the government-led transformation programme, the building information modeling (BIM) was introduced, and with it, the birth of digital construction (Industrial Strategy, 2016). According to Builder’s Profile, “Digital Construction is the business model that puts digital tools at its heart to improve the process of delivering and operating within the built environment” (2019). Aligning with the global trends of digitisation, the model itself, however, appears to be problematic for Construction.
From the perspective of data science, Soman et. al (2020) identify major challenges in construction projects, such as interoperability, information loss, accessibility, and consistency, when using software-based technology. This quantitative research is supported by a qualitative piece by Harty and White (2010). Harty and White explore the sociological aspects of the tensions between existing ways of working and the introduction of new coordination tools through the lens of actor-network theory. Hetemi et. al (2020) look at the tension between the adoption of BIM technologies, and internal power dynamics between different actors within inherit complex institutional frameworks. The main theme distilled from the outlined literature review, oscillates around the various initiatives of digitisation, as key drivers towards the future of the industry. The questions arising from the initial review are around the effectiveness and the driving force of these initiatives, be it political, commercial, or improvements of efficiency. Is the digital transformation transformative enough? The 2015 MIT Sloan report argues that “digital transformation isn’t really about the technology” but the diversity of thought, of strategy, and of leadership (Gerald C. Kane et. al, p.3). To understand this paradox, the innovation theories need to be explored next.
Innovation
In the last decade, innovation has become synonymous with digitisation and technology adoption in the construction industry. Although digitisation is a part of the innovation story, it is not the whole story. Taylor’s research on the history, definitions, and models of innovation gives an in-depth exploration of the subject, proposing contextual alternatives to a single definition.
It suggests that it is not the technology, but change that is at the heart of innovation; disrupting rather than mechanizing the status quo. Cidik et. al (2019) study on the technology productivity paradox in Construction, concludes that in order for meaningful productivity improvements to take place, systemic changes must occur in parallel to digital initiatives. Changes related to structures and processes, as well as redefining the leadership itself through gender-diverse management, are indeed a key to innovation and digital transformation success (Østergaard, Timmermans & Kristinsson, 2011, Deloitte 2013; 2015, Hewlett et al, 2013, MIT 2002,). According to Blanc (2019), “what organizations need is an Innovation Doctrine that addresses culture, mindset, and process and guides the organization’s efforts to achieve real innovations”. Blanc observes that what organisations often choose instead is “innovation theatre” by introducing a new process that gives an appearance of innovation but produces no tangible outcomes (2019). Vicky (2020), warns that “innovation theatre” not only has no value but impedes innovation while preserving the status quo and should be avoided at all cost. In the most recent research presented at The ISPIM Innovation Conference — Innovating in Times of Crisis, Dobler et. al (2020) argue that “innovation is a cultural challenge rather than a technological one” (p.8). This mix-method research identifies digital leadership and cognitive diversity as relational concepts. It explores innovation theories that connect success and performance improvements with the presence of gender diversity (Dobler et al 2020 cited Ostergaard et al, 2011; Yang & Konrad, 2011; Hewlett, Marshall & Sherbin, 2013). The conclusion of the explored research material is that innovation can not be decoupled from diverse leadership.
Innovation theatre
89% of questionnaire participants agreed that the gender imbalance in leadership has a negative impact on innovation. Further interviews and case studies substantiated the data with accounts of individual experiences. One of the case study participants shared her observations on the subject, ” We are creating a habitat for people, and I don’t believe we can do that well unless our workforce is representative of the population. I also think the best ideas come from groups of people with different experiences and backgrounds — Diversity breeds innovation” (Roma Agrawal, CCS, 2017). The general opinion amongst the questionnaire and interviewed participants was echoing the secondary research on innovation theories, around the diversity of thought and perspectives. Moreover, there was a general consensus that the lack of diversity at the leadership level, translates as a lack of balance of mixed views affecting effective problem-solving. One of the questionnaire participants shared, ” fewer women leaders would mean you failed to identify or progress innovation opportunities”. The data strongly supports that the lack of diversity translates as the lack of conditions in which true innovation can occur. This in turn can lead to practicing ‘innovation theatre’, which not only is costly and ineffective, but detrimental to promoting diverse leadership. One questionnaire participant describes this problem as follows, “Lack of diversity at the innovation level doesn’t translate to the diverse teams on the ground, sending the wrong message that only a certain type can influence and impact”.
If you would like to read the whole research report: “Does leadership in Construction need to be deconstructed? A study of gender imbalance in leadership and its impact on innovation and sustainability in the UK construction industry.” please contact the author.
