Search results

This study aims to examine how masculinities are (re)produced in project-based organizations. The authors first investigate the doing of masculinities in everyday work practices in construction project management. Second, the authors investigate whether there are opportunities to perceive, or do, gender differently in this specific context.

Data are elicited from a case study of construction project managers working on a infrastructure project. The project managers were interviewed through semi-structured informal interviews regarding their experiences of project work. The analysis was inspired by the competing discourses and practices of masculinity in organizations outlined by Collinson and Hearn (1994).

The results showed how multiple masculinities coexist and overlap in the project organization and in the everyday practices of project management. Both male and female project managers must adjust to these masculine discourses and act in accordance with a particular context. But the results also showed opportunities to challenge the masculine norms by doing gender differently.

The results of this study highlights opportunities for creating a more gender-equal work environment in the construction industry. The multiple ways of doing masculinity, by both men and women, highlights the possibilities to balance between doing it well and differently. Such knowledge can be used in policy and strategies for equal opportunities for men and women in organizations.

This study provides insights into the (re)production of multiple masculinities in construction project management. This study contributes to the criticism of the normative conceptions that have characterized the literature on project management. The authors add to the tradition of organization studies by arguing that the gender analysis of project management is important to increase understandings of how projects are managed and, in this case, how masculine discourses affect everyday work.

The purpose of this study is to identify temporary workers' (temps') expected conditions for learning when they are leased to a client company (CC) for numerical flexibility.

The analysis is based on a phenomenological approach containing 121 transcribed interviews with employees and managers who were active in more than 10 CCs' in seven industries and from seven temporary work agencies.

One important finding is that the CC expects temps not to learn something about the surrounding organization, but to limit themselves only to the concrete tasks assigned to them. Another is that temps' opportunities to influence organizational conditions in the CCs seem to be cut off in a strategic way.

Results are valid for interviewees' expressed thoughts and expectations about temps' workplace learning, not about an actual separation between knowledge and actions in the working conditions.

CCs associate temps with learning backgrounds that allow them to perform subordinate tasks, such as routine, instructional, or regulatory duties. They associate regular staff with more advanced learning backgrounds and tasks more directly related to occupation and workplace. CCs could benefit from accepting the exchange of knowledge and competence between temps and the company, rather than neglecting it.

The originality of this paper lies in its contribution to the relatively unexplored topic of workplace learning and leaders and employees' expectations of temps.