R E S E A R C H

COBRA ‘96

Realising the client’s strategic requirements: motivating

teams

James Somerville, Glasgow Caledonian University, and Bob

Stocks, Heriot-Watt University

ISBN 0-85406-894-5
 REALISING THE CLIENT’S STRATEGIC REQUIREMENTS;
MOTIVATING TEAMS

Dr. James Sommerville PhD. MSc. MCIOB MIMgt. MAPM

Department of Building and Surveying, Glasgow
CaledonianUniversity

Bob K Stocks MSc. BA[Hons.] BA. MBSA

Department of Building Engineering and Surveying
Heriot-Watt University

1. Introduction

A Client needs a particular type, level and standard of management service in order that he
can define and obtain the building required for his purposes. Project Management is such a
service delivery, providing the overall planning, control and co-ordination of a project in the
production of that required building. The client requires a service which covers the period
from inception to completion, usually stated in terms of completion on time, within cost and
to the required quality standards.

A major goal for the project team is, therefore, project success defined within the parameters
of meeting the budget and programme successfully , thus resulting in client satisfaction.
An ever increasing commercial environment within which project team professionals operate,
will view this success as measured in profits for their respective organisations, and future
work from a satisfied client.

Successful completion of a project will heavily depend upon project team factors such as
group cohesiveness, individual commitment, leadership and, importantly, motivation.

2. The Project

A Project is “a sequence of activities which are connected , conducted over a limited period
of time and targeted to generate a unique but well defined outcome”.(Baguley, 1995). They
may be complete in themselves, such as the construction of a tunnel, or those which
represent a series or programme of products or projects, e.g. an aircraft. Every project
follows the sequence of ; pre-feasibility, feasibility, design and contract recognition,
implementation, handover and in-service support.
Kerzner(1992) notes that project success should be measured to include completion; within
the allocated time period, within the budgeted cost at the proper performance or specification
level, and acceptance by the customer or user with minimum or mutually agreed-upon scope
changes, without changing the corporate culture. The task of management is to co-ordinate
these functions within the processes of the project.

Projects are people-centred (Baguley), and rely upon the skills and abilities to create, plan
and manage the processes. It is the team rather than individuals or techniques which
translate the brief into reality, and the leader must be supported by an effective team.
Furthermore, the successful motivation of people is essential to the achievement of project
objectives.

Within a person-centred approach to project performance, people become more accountable

and responsible for their own growth and advancement. With fewer constraints, people will
work harder, have more enthusiasm, be more creative, and motivate themselves.
This compares with the traditional approach where there is a centralised control of individuals
and groups, with its predictability, measurement, documentation and well-defined rules and
procedures(Thomas 1995).
3. Project Teams
Professionals working within a Project team, are concerned with their own responsibilities
while independent and inter-related with each other in the achievement of a completed
project.
Reciprocal Interdependency (Thompson 1967), which dominates within the construction
industry, is a situation where the output of each part of a process becomes the input for
others, with the process moving through its necessary stages. It is the most difficult to
integrate and is only achieved when team members form a close association, and with
specific objectives at the forefront

As the building team is set up specifically for it’s single project, there arises an important
factor which may be problematical(Stocks 1984.). Members of the team, particularly
professionals, are most likely to be involved with more than one project at any time, and
therefore hold simultaneous membership of several teams. The possibility at least may be
considered, that this situation might reduce commitment to any one particular team or
project, and the relative failure or dissatisfaction with one team may be cushioned by the
participation in other projects, (fig.1).

Chief Executive Officer

Finance Construction Marketing Personnel

Director Director Director Manager

Project A

Project B

Project C

Project D

Project E
Figure 1. A Typical Matrix Organisation Structure Chart

The factors which impinge upon the performance of group members (Fig. 2) means that the
leader therefore requires to realise that dependency and expertise is required, in order to
motivate and commit people in the group to integrate into a team situation, so that they will
achieve project goals.
 Ability and Skill Role Clarity

Motivation Feedback

Human
task Performance Stress

experience Environment

Personality Other Factors

Figure 2. Factors Affecting Human Performance (Fryer, 1990, )

4. Groups
Shaw (1981) defines a group as two or more people who interact and influence one another.
The time factor involved in the formation of norms and cohesiveness restricts this
description, and the definition that a group `first of all is any collection of people who
perceive themselves to be a group' (Handy, 1980) overcomes this limitation.
Permanent formal groups exist with the knowledge that they are unlikely to be disbanded.
Project teams, although they are temporary formal groups and will cease to exist at some
time in the future, can remain for a lengthy period.
A Team is seen to be distinct from a group when it has ; a common purpose, a team identity,
interdependent functions and agreed norms or values.

Groups are seen to progress through four stages of Development (Bennis & Shepard 1965,
Jewell and Reitz 1981), and Tosi et al (1990) depict this evolution. However, we can extend
the development stages to incorporate the particularity of the building team, ( Fig.3 ), to
highlight the feeling of insecurity which can be experienced as a project is completed and the
temporary team is disbanded.
 Immature Maturity
Performing

(Effective Structure)

Norming

(Cohesion)

Storming
Mourning
Openness (New project)
(Conflict)
Flexibility

Forming Roles
Helping each other
Consensus
(Orientation) Successful performance
Accepting leader
Interdependence
Co-operation
Disagreement Paranoia
Accepting standards
Hostility/tension Job security

Resistance Change
Resentment
Defining Goals Challenge to leader
Fresh demands
Appraising Sub-grouping
Making contacts
Defining rules
Uncertainty
Figure 3. Group Development Stages

At the forming stage the collection of individuals is not yet a group but a number of persons
full of uncertainty with this initial orientation. The conflict stage which then follows is one of
general challenges which will hopefully result in an environment of trust carried forward to a
later group cohesiveness. The cohesion which only begins with the third stage shows a
consensus in areas such as work patterns, leadership, standards and behaviour. Only when
the previous three stages have been successfully completed will there be a fully effective
structure where cohesiveness has developed to appoint where members feel they have a
common bond. Team members know what is and what is not acceptable behaviour and
standards for one who is a member of the team.
The stages of development outline the path through obstacles of uncertainty and
disagreement over power, authority and interpersonal relationships, towards the final
cohesiveness of team maturity. It is the attractiveness of the team to members, the
motivation to remain, and resistance to leaving (Paulus 1983).

It is suggested that not all groups go through all stages and that not all reach the final stage
of maturity signified by efficiency and effectiveness, e.g. works groups differ in terms of
maturity and cohesiveness. They will also differ in one other important area, that of the
position of leadership.
Whereas a group will itself exercise influence over its own members, leadership provides the
official and functional responsibility for, and authority over, the group.

A Team is a group in which individuals have a common aim and where the jobs and skills of
each member fit in with those of others. To neglect the group development processes and
insist on immediate performance, without any time to develop trust and inter-relatedness, will
lead to preconception being the rule of team members (Handy 1992).
The development of trust is vital, even although the temporary nature of a project team may
not provide time-developed long-term trust and interpersonal relations.

5. Leadership
The supervisor of a work group has two basic roles, that of task direction and group
maintenance; i.e. to get the job done and to look after the team and its individual members.
Within the team, a leader will carry out functions which include maintaining group norms and
cohesiveness, and motivating members towards the performance of their tasks.

The earliest approach to research on leadership was to identify the distinguishing or peculiar
features which leaders were seen to have; so called traits theories. and may only be able to
explain one small part of leadership effectiveness.
Two basic types of leader can be identified and positioned throughout later studies, and
which encompass much more than individual characteristics, are the autocratic and
democratic polarisation.
Likert (1961) saw these two dimensions of leadership in terms of either job centred or
employee centred supervisors. Likert however puts forward a wider perspective in suggesting
four types of leadership

In the mid 1960's a Contingency Theory of leadership was postulated by Fielder (1967) as a
development of his earlier studies. Contingency theories of leadership attempt to account
systematically for situational factors and leadership effectiveness. That is to say, the context
within which the team and its leader-function affect the leader's style and effectiveness; trait
and behavioural approaches are not sufficient on their own.
Fielder saw that certain situational variables moderate the effectiveness of leadership style
and proposed three major determinants of the leadership situation i.e. leader-member
relations, task structure, position power (Fig. 4).

GROUP SITUATIONS

LEADER-MEMBER RELATIONSHIPS
If leader is attractive to members then the situation is favourable.
Classify attitudes within group.

TASK STRUCTURE
Structured tasks were favourable for leader i.e. he can and does show what is to be done and
exactly how to do it.

LEADER POSITION POWER

If leader's position is powerful then situation is favourable. i.e. it is easier to manage in this
situation.

NOTE: All three relate to the favourability of the situation from the leader's point of view.
Figure 4. Fiedler’s Situational Approach

Combining these three dimensions and positioning each in either a favourable or

unfavourable light, produces eight different kinds of situations (Octant) for Fielder(Landy &
Trumbo 1980). The theoretical assumption is that these groups require different approaches
to the leadership process in order to be effective (Miner, 1980).
Fiedler has maintained that it is unrealistic to try and change the style of leadership of an
individual, because it is too deep-rooted and stable. Changing the situation is more feasible
by making alterations among the three determinants of the situations with the leader able to
develop a situation in which is style of leadership will be most effective.

When a client assembles a project team of human resources in order to complete project
objectives, a driving force must be produced to create a motivation within the group. This
driving force exists within individuals by which they attempt to achieve some goal in order to
fulfil some need or expectation. The manager or leader can strongly affect this internal force
by adopting the relevant leadership style, which in turn affects the commitment and effort of
team members

6. Motivation
Motivation can be viewed as a management process in that every manager should undertake
the motivation of employees. On the other hand it is also a psychological concept relating to
the behavioural state of an individual. In any event motivation is seen to be allied to
productivity, thus necessitating the need for managerial motivation strategies.
It is proposed that any motivation theory has both the aim of accounting for the reasons of
the behavioural state and of the processes which cause that behaviour and most theories are
seen to concentrate on either but not usually both these areas of study (Tosi et al).

7. Need Theory
Both of the following theories can be broadly classified as need theories, and Maslow as a
major figure in this area proposes that `all individuals have basic sets of needs that they
strive to fulfil' (Landy & Trumbo). His need Hierarchy Theory sets out five basic sets of
needs. ( Fig. 5 ).
Maslow argues that these needs are arranged in a hierarchy of prepotency. The individual
seeks to move up the hierarchy attempting to satisfy the next higher level, and this as yet
unsatisfied need becomes the most important. Individuals will always try to satisfy basic
needs first, and the progress upwards in a very systematic fashion. `When a need is
satisfied if disappears for all practical purposes as a motivating force and is replaced by
needs at a higher level; the individual continues to be motivated but the nature of that
motivation changes' (Miner,1980).
This process would suggest the next need in the hierarchy takes precedence and so on.
However, as Maslow points out, this is not what the theory states. As one need on the scale
is satisfied the next need will attain a proportionately greater influence over behaviour.
However not everyone is the same and the 5 needs may only be applicable to the `average
person'' (Maslow, 1943).
Additionally, if the individual is again deprived for that realised need, it will once again
become the current need which again requires to be reasonably well satisfied.

Self-actualisation

Esteem
Security Social

Basics

The River of Needs

Figure 5. Maslow's Needs Theory

8. Two Factor Theory

Research by Herzberg et al (1959) concluded that there are in fact two sets of factors
relevant to the workplace and each of which operate in different ways. Herzberg labels these
two sets as Hygiene Factors and Motivators respectively ( Fig. 6), the former of which relates
to the context of the job and the latter associated with job content.
Hygiene Factors create dissatisfaction if they are not present and the alternative title for this
set of factors is `maintenance'. If these factors are present, dissatisfaction will be reduced,
but satisfaction will only be maintained up to a point and it will require the motivating factors
to provide positive job feelings and high levels of performance. If the motivators are not
present this will not produce dissatisfaction for most people; providing the maintenance
factors are in position.

FACTORS
Achievement Company Policy
Recognition Administration
Work itself Supervision
Responsibility Salary
Advancement Interpersonal Relations
Working Conditions

MOTIVATORS HYGIENE
Figure 6. Herzberg's 2 Factor Theory

If worker dissatisfaction is seen as the major problem, then the hygiene factors must be
improved, but to improve performance the manager must work on the motivators and this
means changing the nature of the work to make it more challenging and intrinsically
rewarding' (Tosi et al).

9. Additional Theories

Expectancy Theory puts forward the notion that individuals carry out activities which will lead
to results, known as outcomes, which they desire. The theory posits that individuals carry out
an assessment of the costs or benefits of different alternatives which they have and then
select the one with the best payoffs. Vroom (1964) applies the term Valence to this feeling
about specific outcomes.
There are two kinds of expectancies. Effort-Performance expectancy is the person's belief
about the level of effort expended and the resultant performance this effort will realise.
Performance-Outcome expectancy `is the expectation about the relationship between a
particular level of performance and attaining certain outcomes' (Tosi et al) Rewards for high
performance need to be obtained for the individual to expend the level required for high
performance.

Equity Theory is primarily associated with Adams (1965) and simply put, the individual
carries out his own cost benefit analysis on the basis of input to the job, measured against
the valued outcomes he receives from the workplace. The individual, having thus formed his
own inputs-to-outputs ratio measures the value of the ratio against that of `significant others'.
If the ratios are seen to be equal then the individual perceives the situations as equitable and
tension does not exits. If there is a discrepancy between the two ratios, either as a minus of
plus inequity, then tension exists for the individual who will be motivated to reduce it.
The following methods for reducing inequity tension are put forward (Miner,) :- Altering
inputs, altering outcomes, distorting one's own inputs and outcomes, leaving the field, acting
on the reference source, changing the reference source.
Various later studies were carried out following Adams work. Goal-setting theory,
achievement-power theory and reinforcement theory are further inputs in the attempt to
explain the topic of motivation.
Herzberg developed his theory of job enrichment as related to his motivation - hygiene
theory. Lawler and Hackman (1991) developed an alternative approach to enrichment, allied
to Lawler's and Porter’s interest in expectancy theory ( Fig.7). Hackman, without giving any
central role to expectancy theory, developed a further alternative to his job characteristics
theory.

Value of
reward

Perceived
equitable
Ability to reward
do a specific
task
Intrinsic
Satisfaction
award
Performance
Effort
accomplishment
Extrinsic
award

Perception
of
task required

Perceived Effort
effort-award
probability

Figure 7, Porter & Lawler Motivation Model (source:- H. Weilrich & H. Koontz, 1993)

Tampoe (1989) identifies four motivated states :-

Motivated Behaviour - is achieved by meeting the combination of the three motivators
desired by professional employees, i.e. achievement, responsibility and autonomy, having
already obtained a satisfactory salary and job security.
Supervised Behaviour - a combination of responsibility through personal growth and
achievement, while excluding autonomy. This recognises the fact that members are still
working in a supervised environment. Two of the three motivators are met, therefore the
situation is still seen as motivational.
Employee-centred Behaviour - a combination of autonomy and responsibility while
excluding achievement, and is motivating in that the employee has the freedom, and control
to a certain degree, of his own position and course of action. This removes the dominance
which often prevents effectiveness.
Organisation-centred Behaviour - is a combination of autonomy and achievement,
excludes personal responsibility and corresponds with the member who requires goals and
objectives to be clarified in order to deliver the project. In order for the leader to utilise this
framework, he must be able to identify individual personality type, and at what stage is his
career. The leader should then apply the style of management which will fit with the
motivational needs of the individual.
 1900

Scientific Management
wage incentives

Human Relations
Lewin & Tolman
economic, security
expectancy concerns
conditions

Maslow Vroom
hierarchy of needs valence / expectancy

Festinger & Homes Heider, de Charmes, & Bem

Herzberg Porter & Lawler
cognitive dissonance cognitive evaluation
hygiene factors performance and satisfaction
exchange self perception

Kelley & Rotter

Alderfer Lawler Adams
attribution / locus of
GRE needs E-P & P-O expectancy equity
control

present Contents Theories Process Theories

Work Motivation Models

Figure 8. The theoretical Development of Work Motivation (Luthans, 1992)

10. Case Studies

Introduction :
A study involving 2 questionnaire surveys, together with a number of additional interviews,
was carried out to examine the motivational characteristics of construction and property
industry professionals (Baxter 1995).
Drawing on motivation theories, the surveys aim to identify the following key motivators :-
• High pay
• Advancement
• Pleasant companions
• Autonomy
• Security
• Responsibility
• Status
• Achievement

Most of the respondents in both studies work within the commercial and retail sectors of the
industry, but with the surveyors predominant within the housing market. All the 6 interviewees
are employed at director level in their respective companies, and all are actively involved in
team projects.
The first stage consists of an investigation of the individual characteristics of 100
professionals, who completed a questionnaire which included a prioritisation of the above
factors.

A breakdown into professions of these 100 respondents is shown as follows :-

Architects 23
Engineers(civil,electrical,mechanical) 26
Surveyors(building,quantity) 22
Contracts Managers 15
Project Managers 14
The follow-up study, involved the completion of questionnaires by a further 143 industry
professionals, with the addition of 6 interviews and is concerned with individual and team
motivation.
A breakdown of these professions is as follows :-
Architects 26
Engineers(civil,electrical,mechanical) 33
Surveyors(building,quantity) 51
Contract Managers 17
Project Managers 16

This represents a 71.5% return from 200 initial questionnaires, broken down as follows in
relation to the above : 65%,83%,73%,68%,64%.

Findings
Among the main findings of the two surveys in this study are the following -
• Achievement/responsibility is seen to be middle ranking, although more important to the
managerial side of the professions.
• Status was found to be the least important to all of the professions.
• Autonomy as a motivator received only 11% of the total.
• Pleasant companions ranks higher than status, and Architects rank it higher than do any
of the other professions, although status was ranked lowest.
• The analysis of results shows little variation between professions other than :- Project
Managers/Contract Managers place more emphasis on achievement and responsibility
than do the professionally recognised occupations. Also, they both place greater
emphasis upon advancement compared to Architects who ranked this factor in fifth
position.

The overall ranked position of the 8 key motivators highlights these findings :-

Rank Order
High Pay 1
Advancement 3
Pleasant Companions 7
Autonomy 6
Security 2
Responsibility 5
Status 8
Achievement 4

11. Discussion

An individual attempts to satisfy motivational needs through work and the relationships
therein. Work groups can provide the attainment of these needs for some people, and the
individual may also perceive this as a means to personal goal accomplishment.
With every new construction project there is the requirement to build a new team for this
unique undertaking.
During the life-cycle of projects therefore, leadership style, and individual and team
motivation, are enjoining issues in relation to the commitment by team members with every
new project. Motivation is primarily an individual characteristic which is linked to team
motivation, which in turn may be allied to project success.

Tampoe and Thurloway (1993) identify key motivators from their survey within the
construction industry, and which they characterise as follows :-

Mutuality - reflecting the need for mutual support and encouragement between line
management and project managers, as well as the personal loyalty of project managers to
their organisations and profession.
Recognition for personal achievement - which is having the opportunity for personal
development, and of recognition for personal achievement through financial rewards,
incentives and status.
Belonging - reflects the needs of individuals for supportive, cohesive and friendly team
relationships. Also, clear communications both within the team and with the wider
organisation, and the need for explicit information and project goals.
Bounded power - is related to the need for authority and control over project resources and
people, personal accountability and challenge. Also, the ability of individuals to influence
decisions which affect them and the project, and opportunities for personal growth and
development.
Creative autonomy - which expresses the need for individuals to have opportunities to use
their creativity and potential during the course of a project, and to enjoy good working
conditions.

They question the goal-directed approach which is endemic to the management of projects
and which may be utilised more by authoritarian leaders, compared to a style which
discharges accountability and responsibility to team members ; although they do not dispute
that the goal-directed approach can be motivational in a rather coercive way.

Their findings show that resources were often not available, project team members did not
have influence over decisions which affected their work, personal career opportunities were
limited, management provided insufficient encouragement and the likelihood of sharing in
the rewards of success was improbable.

11. Conclusions
Projects are goal orientated and with specific objectives to be achieved. The industry is
perceived as maintaining a goal-directed style of management. If this is extended and
utilised as a means of delegating project accountability and responsibility to the team, an
element of motivation may be provided

The main theories of motivation explain what drives individuals to high levels of
performance. Some theories focus upon the needs of individuals such as pay, security,
recognition, advancement etc.. Other theories suggest that people’s motives are conscious
acts which focus on specific goals, i.e. cognitive or process theories, such as expectancy
theory.

The notion is that people can be motivated through a reward system designed to satisfy
personal needs, which in turn will lead to behaviour focused on the achievement of goals.

The holding on to accountability and responsibility by the project leader becomes a

demotivator for the team member due to a lack of participation, low self-esteem and non-
affiliation. Salary and job security are shown to be at the lower end of motivational needs,
and considered to be achievable by leaders, managers and professionals for example, with
the higher needs therefore taking on more importance.
The Individual and Team Surveys in this study, tend to suggest otherwise, with both of these
lower needs ranked highest by the professionals surveyed. This may be due to the
recessional state of the industry, or perhaps a short term effect which hopefully would last for
at least the project length.

Motivation requires a goal and an expectation of future rewards, therefore recognition,

belonging to a group and participation would be ranked highly ; as seen from the survey
carried out by Tampoe and Thurloway (1993) within the construction industry. However, the
ranking by individuals within the Surveys presented here, highlights the significantly lower
need placed on pleasant companions. Indeed, as shown, the majority emphasise money and
security as the prime motivators. Within the context of Herzberg,s 2 Factor theory,
notwithstanding the critique of this model, these factors would only prevent dissatisfaction but
not provide performance enhancing motivation.
Team members automatically develop a commitment to a project, especially if they have
previously worked together. Switching loyalties between projects is seen by respondents to
be a necessary talent.
As Tampoe(1989) would suggest, the team leader must play to the other motivators within a
team environment, but also, he requires to identify the personality types of team members.

It was stated within both of the surveys, that too often within a project scenario , motivation
was not considered to be a major concern and teams do not have the time to contemplate
individual motivation.
11.1 Areas for future research

The question of motivation being seen as the important factor of team work and team
success, given e.g. personality traits, leadership style, professional power etc. suggests areas
for wider research.
Communications, leadership style and group theory (formal and informal) are additional
sources of interest within the wider concern of group effectiveness.
More directly concerned with the findings of this paper is, for example, the reasons for the
ranking order of motivational factors. The relative positions of pay and security in this
respect, requires further investigation.

References
Adams,J.S., Inequity in Social Exchange, in Berkowitz,L.(ed.),Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, Vol.2, Academic Press, 1965.

Baguley,P. Managing Successful Projects. Pitman Publishing, 1995.

Baxter,P.Q., Motivation of the Project Team to achieve Project Success, unpublished M.Sc.
Dissertation, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 1995.
Bennis,W.G., and Shepard,H.S., A Theory of Group Development, Human Relations, 9
pp.415-457,1965.

Culp,G., and Smith,A., Managing People (Including Yourself) for Project Success, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992.

Fiedler,F.,A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness, McGraw Hill, London, 1967.

Hackman,J.R. and Lawler,E.E., Employee Reactions to job Characteristics, Journal of

Applied Psychology, Vol.55 pp.259-286,1991.

Handy,C.B. Understanding Organisations, Penguin, London, 1980.

Herzberg,F.,Mauser,B. and Snyderman, B., The Motivation to Work, John Wiley, New York,
1959.

Jewell,I.N., and Reitz,H.J., Group Effectiveness in Organisations Objectives, Scott

Foresman,Glenview,Illinois,1981.

Kerzner,H., Project Management, A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and

Controlling, 4th. Edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992.

Landy,F.J., and Trumbo,D.A., Psychology of Work Behaviour, The Dorsey Press, Holmwood
Illinois, 1980.

Likert,R. New Patterns of Management, McGraw Hill, London, 1961.

Maslow,A.H., A Theory of Motivation, Psychological Review, 1943, 50 ,pp.370-396.

Miner,J.B., Theories of Organisational Behaviour, The Dryden Press, Hinsdale Illinois, 1980.
Paulus,B., Basic Group Processes, Springer-Verlag Inc., New York, 1983.

Stocks, R.K., The Building Team, An Organisation of Organisations, unpublished M.Sc.

Dissertation, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 1984.

Tampoe,M., Project Managers do not deliver Projects, Teams Do, Journal of Project
management, Vol.7, No.1, pp.12-17,1989.

Tampoe,M., and Thurloway,L., Project Management: The Use and Abuse of Techniques and
Teams., International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp.245-250, 1993.

Thomas,G.J., Managing the Behaviour of People Working in Teams, International Journal of

Project Management, Vol.13, No.1, pp.33-38,1995.

Thompson,J., Organisations in Action , McGregor-Mill,1967.

Tosi,H.L., Rizzo,J.R. and Carroll,S.J., Managing Organisational Behaviour,

2nd.Edition,, Harper and Row, New York, 1990.

Vroom,V.H., Work and Motivation, John Wiley, New York, 1964.

Bibliography
Fryer,B., The Practice of Construction Management,2nd. Edition, Blackwell Scientific
Publications, 1990.

Luthans,F. Organisational Behaviour, McGraw Hill, 1981.

McClelland,D.C. Human Motivation, Cambridge University Press,1988.

Motivation, Building and Environment, Vol.24,No.3.

Mullins,L.J.,Management and Organisational Behaviour, Pitman,1993.

Olomolaiye,P.O.andPrice, A.D.F., A Review of Construction Operatives,1989.

Porter,.W. and Lawler, E.E., Managerial Attitudes and Performance, Irwin, 1968.

Weilrich,H. and Koontz,H., Management A Global Perspective, McGraw Hill, 1993.