Navorsingsartikels • Research articles

Theo Haupt & The image of the

Nishani Harinarain construction industry
and its employment
Prof. Theo C. Haupt, School of
Engineering, Construction Studies attractiveness
Programme, University of
KwaZulu-Natal, King George V
Avenue, Durban, 4041, South Peer reviewed and revised November 2016
Africa. Phone: +27 (0)31 260
2687, Abstract
email: <haupt@ukzn.ac.za>
As the construction industry does not seem to enjoy a
Dr Nishani Harinarain, School of positive image, it is not necessarily the career of choice
Engineering, Construction Studies when compared with other industries. This study
Programme, University of examines the image of the industry in order to establish
KwaZulu-Natal, King George V what the perception of the industry is, the effects of that
Avenue, Durban, 4041, South perception, and how the image of the sector could be
Africa. Phone: +27 (0)31 260 improved. A mixed approach is used that involves a
2687, questionnaire survey of a purposive sample of high-
email: <harinarain@ukzn. school students, employers and employees in the
ac.za> Greater Durban area of KwaZulu-Natal province as
well as a focus
The author(s) declare no conflict of
interest for this title and article.
group of employers. The findings of the study
DOI: http://dx.doi. are important if the image of the construction industry is
org/10.18820/24150487/ to be improved so that it can become the career of
as23i2.4 choice for larger numbers of high-school students and
ISSN: 1023-0564 other potential new entrants. The study is confined to the
KwaZulu- Natal province and high schools in the
e-ISSN: 2415-0487 western suburbs of Durban.
Acta Structilia 2016 23(2): Keywords: Image; career choice, school leavers,
79-108 employers
© UV/UFS
Abstrak
Dit blyk dat die konstruksiebedryf se beeld tans negatief
is. Dit het tot gevolg dat minder mense hierdie beroep
betree of dit as ‘n aanvaarbare beroepskeuse beskou.
Hierdie studie ondersoek die beeld van die bedryf ten
einde vas te stel wat die persepsie van die bedryf is, die
gevolge van daardie persepsie en hoe om die beeld van
die sektor te verbeter. ‘n Gemengde benadering is
gebruik om ‘n vraelysopname van ‘n doelgerigte
steekproef onder hoërskoolleerlinge, werkgewers en
werknemers in die groter Durban-area van die KwaZulu-
Natal provinsie, asook ‘n fokusgroep van werkgewers te
doen. Die bevindinge van die studie is belangrik om die
beeld van die konstruksiebedryf te verbeter sodat dit die

1
Acta Structilia 2016: 23(2)

loopbaankeuse vir meer hoërskoolleerlinge en ander potensiële nuwe toetreders kan word. Die
studie is slegs gedoen in die KwaZulu-Natal provinsie en hoërskole in die westelike
voorstede van Durban.
Sleutelwoorde: Beeld, loopbaankeuse, skoolverlaters, werkgewers

1. Introduction
The construction industry is an economically important industry in any country.
According to Wibowo (2009: 1), it contributes by supplying the infrastructure
and physical structures of a country to house other industries; by creating jobs;
by contributing to a country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and by providing
basic needs such as housing, for example, to the population.
The construction industry contributes significantly to the South African economy
(Cumberlege, 2008: 50). In 2012, the construction industry contributed
R59,422m to the GDP at 2005 price levels, an amount of R112,631m at current
prices. This figure was translated into 3.5% of the South African GDP (Stats SA,
2013: 8). In September 2012, the construction industry employed an estimated
433,000 employees, roughly 5.1% of the South African workforce (Stats SA,
2012: 11). The South African government has declared the industry a strategic
national asset and it was convinced that the construction industry could be used
to achieve economic growth and improve the quality of life of the population
(Didiza, 2008: 4). It was, therefore, important that the industry was growing and
attracting new entrants.
Despite the industry’s importance, it was noted globally that the construction
industry had been suffering from a poor image for a long time (ILO, 2001: 1;
Pearce, 2003: ix; Rameezdeen, 2007: 76; Makhene
& Twala, 2009: 130; Clarke & Boyd, 2011: 1; Chan & Connolly, 2006: 2).
According to Rameezdeen (2007: 77), the construction industry has become
synonymous with low-quality work, high cost as well as poor health and safety
statistics. Recently, many spectacular accidents involving loss of life, limb and
property have occurred on construction sites in South Africa and have been
popularised by the media. These have created negative impressions of the
industry.
In their study, Amaratunga, Haigh, Lee, Shanmugam and Elvitigala (2006) cited
the image of the construction industry as one of the main barriers that prohibited
women from choosing a career in construction. The image problem could,
therefore, be extrapolated to include both genders, as it was a barrier that
affected the career choice of the young adult population. According to the ILO
(2001: 58), the construction industry’s workforce and potential workforce also
had negative perceptions of the industry. The poor image was due
to the nature of the work being physically demanding, dirty and dangerous.
People only applied for a job in construction as a last resort (DG Enterprise,
2000: 6).
In a study, the majority of the respondents, who had personal experience with the
construction sector, were the most negative about the image of the industry. This
personal experience had a greater impact on the public’s perception than the
media had (Rameezdeen, 2007: 80). In an earlier study, Skitmore (1991: 3)
found that the respondents’ personal experiences, or a close relative’s
experiences with the construction sector had influenced their perception of the
industry the greatest.
Given the poor image of the construction industry, it is infrequently the career of
choice when compared with other industries, which arguably had more positive
images. Without addressing this negativity, the industry will continue to struggle
to attract new entrants, especially considering the continuing chronic skills
shortage in the industry. This article reports the results of a study done to
• Establish the image of the industry from the perspective of high-school
students, employers and employees;
• Compare the perceptions of high-school students, employers and
employees, and
• Recommend actions that might help improve the image of the industry.

2. Image of the construction sector

Several factors or perceptions influence the image of the construc- tion sector.

2.1 Less prestigious than other industries

Construction workers were viewed as blue-collar workers synonymous with low-
status jobs (ILO, 2001: 13). Young people viewed any career that involved
manual labour as a low-status career due to the low wages in comparison with
other industries, and the lack of clear career paths (Tucker, Haas, Glover,
Alemany, Carley, Rodriguez & Shields, 1999: 1). Young people viewed the
status of a career as an important factor in deciding on a career path. According
to Schella (2010: 3), parents and teachers saw a job in construction as a last
resort when a job could not be found elsewhere.

81
2.2 Few career-advancement opportunities
Career-advancement opportunities in the construction industry are unclear.
Makhene and Twala (2009: 130) stated that there was a lack of well-defined
career paths in construction. In an earlier study, young people were of the
opinion that it was not possible to make a career out of construction; they
generally did not know about the career opportunities that were available
(Tucker et al., 1999: 25).

2.3 Construction jobs do not pay as well as other industries

The potential salary and overall income package are important to young people
when choosing a career (Chileshe & Haupt, 2007: 8). Makhene and Twala (2009:
130) stated that it was a general opinion that jobs in construction were paying
less than jobs in other industries. Labourers in the manufacturing industry were
paid more than construction labourers, resulting in young people preferring
careers outside of construction (DG Enterprise, 2000: 5).

2.4 Poor health and safety records

Despite the recent efforts to improve the health and safety performance of the
industry, there are still alarming numbers of site accidents and work-related
deaths (Pearce, 2003: 37). The CIDB (2002: 16) stated that the prominent
number of site accidents was largely due to lack of training and unregulated
practices. The construction industry had the highest total amount of fatalities
when compared with other industrial sectors. Furthermore, the industry caused a
significant amount of non-fatal injuries (Pearce, 2003: 37). Young people were
less likely to enter an industry that endangers their lives.

2.5 Fraud and corruption

It was generally known that fraud and corruption occurred within the
construction industry (Pearl, Bowen, Makanjee, Akintoye & Evans, 2005: 4; Vee
& Skitmore, 2003: 118). Construction companies formed cartels in order to
monopolise a sector or geographical area. These cartels increased the tender
prices submitted. The Competition Commission, a statutory body founded by the
Competition Act No. 89 of 1998 (RSA, 1998: 2) who controls and exercises fair
competition and business practices, and the Hawks, the Directorate of Priority
Crime Investigation who investigates serious charges of commercial crime and
corruption, are currently investigating alleged corruption during the procurement
stages of the 2010 FIFA World Cup stadia and related infrastructure. Several of
South Africa’s largest construction
companies have admitted guilt, while others are currently claiming innocence
(Visser, 2013). According to CIDB (2011: ii), the barriers to quality in
construction were “corruption, political interference and institutional barriers”.
These barriers were becoming more apparent in South Africa. The CIDB was
adamant that fraudulent behaviour and corruption were some of the main factors
contributing to poor construction quality (CIDB, 2011: 19).

2.6 Sensitivity to economic conditions

According to Mukucha, Mphethi and Maluleke (2010: 39), the construction cycle
changed more slowly than the ordinary business cycle. The impact of the recent
recession was experienced by the construction industry later than it affected other
industries. However, in order to survive or reduce costs, construction companies
had retrenched some of their permanent labour force, and opted for employing
cheaper unskilled immigrant labour (Mukucha et al., 2010: 20). Snyman (2009:
121) stated that the cycle in construction was more pronounced than in other
industries. The construction industry was slow to recover from the recent
recession, as the current business confidence level had deteriorated to 36 in the
fourth quarter of 2012 (CIDB, 2012: 3). This figure was indicative of 36% of the
respondents who were of the opinion that current business conditions were
“satisfactory” (CIDB, 2012: 1).

2.7 Little being done to promote the construction industry

Steps had to be taken to encourage construction companies to promote the
industry at school level (Chan & Connolly, 2012: 9). Rameezdeen (2007: 80)
stated that the industry’s image could be improved by promoting Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR). The concept of CSR refers to professionals
conducting business in an ethical manner, with special reference to socio-
economic sustainable practices. Companies were encouraged to consider the
community and the quality of life of their workforce. The image of construction
could also be improved by promoting “quality of products, time cost and safety
management, and education and training programmes” (Rameezdeen, 2007: 84).
CSR could be used as a tool to counter negative publicity (Vanhamme &
Grobben, 2009: 275). DG Enterprise (2000: 7) stated that young people needed
to be attracted to a career in construction by promoting the industry. A positive
image was needed to attract employees and investors to firms. If there was a
perception that the firm, or industry, was operating unethically, it would not
attract any employees, investors or customers. Firms often used public relations
to dispel any negative
perceptions about them (Friedman, 2012). There was a general lack of promotion
done by the various councils and associations in the built environment. People
outside of the industry were not subjected to these governing bodies. The CIDB
was mandated in terms of the Construction Industry Development Board Act
with promoting an efficient and stable industry, and its contribution to meeting
economic strategies (RSA 2000: 2).

3. Research methodology
The research approach adopted for this study included both quantitative and
qualitative methods. The data for the study were collected using samples of
employers, employees and high-school students as well as a focus group of
industry practitioners. It is well known that, when using a questionnaire survey,
the nature of the research questions determines the research design. To be
effective, the survey approach should include appropriate questions to
respondents in order to gain information, a well-systematised data- collection
technique, and results that are generalisable to the larger population. In the case
of this study, they had to be easy to understand by high-school students,
employers and employees; ensure a good and reliable response level, and be
quick to complete.
The high-school student survey aimed to determine the students’ perception of
the industry and whether they thought a career in construction was a viable
career choice. The employer and employee surveys sought to establish their
views on the industry.
The survey instruments contained attitudinal Likert scales, sometimes referred to
as semantic scales. Likert scales are popular scoring schemes for attempting to
quantify the opinions of respondents on different issues (Bishop & Herron,
2015: 297). In the minds of respondents where the number of items making up
the scale is odd instead of equal, there would be a balance with equidistant
response options to the left or right of the central neutral value (Bishop &
Herron, 2015: 298). The Likert scale, which can have a variety of items ranging
from four to seven, for example, allowed the researcher to calculate central
measures of tendency (Boone & Boone, 2012; Hartley, 2013: 84). The points on
the scale were equidistantly spaced as a prerequisite for an accurate
measurement.
When using Likert-type scales, the most widely and frequently used Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient for internal consistency reliability for any scales or subscales
was used (Gadermann, Guhn & Zumbo, 2012: 1). Using Cronbach’s alpha under
circumstances that violate
its assumptions or prerequisites might lead to deflated reliability estimates
(Gadermann et al., 2012: 1) that might entail some misinformed inferences.
Reliability is the extent to which a measuring instrument is repeatable and
consistent. For this particular article, the internal reliability of variables was
tested using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of reliability. The number of items in
the scale is not prescribed and is arbitrary (Boone & Boone, 2012; Hartley, 2013:
84). A 5-point Likert scale was used in all survey instruments.
A number of employers were involved in a focus group about their perceptions
of the construction industry. The key findings are reported after content analysis.

3.1 Data collection

The student instrument was piloted among high-school students in Grades 10 to
12 at a career day held by the KwaZulu-Natal branch of the Master Builders
Association South Africa (MBASA). These students were typically between the
ages of 15 and 18 years when they gather information and make decisions about
their post-school careers. The pilot instrument became the final instrument,
because there were no changes necessary. The responses from the pilot study
were, therefore, included in the final data set of responses from 179 students.
Convenience sampling techniques were used in the case of the employer and
employee samples. Personal contacts as well as a list of companies made
available on the MBA website were utilised in order to boost responses. The
researcher contacted 116 construction companies located in the Greater Durban
area in KwaZulu-Natal. Of the 116 companies, 36 responses were collected from
the construction companies, showing a response rate of 31%. A sample of 24
employees was surveyed. The views of a focus group of four industry
practitioners was held, their responses were recorded and transcribed. Selected
responses are included in this paper.

3.2 Interpretation of findings

Table 1 shows the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the scaled responses of each
of the samples. There is an acceptable degree of internal consistency for the
scales used for all the constructs, namely a Cronbach alpha statistic that is greater
than the rule-of-thumb 0.700 for acceptable internal scale consistency, except for
the students’ attitude to the industry at slightly less than 0.700. Therefore there is
between 72.0% and 64.0% probability that each of the constructs measures a
single underlying concept with an error of at most 5%.
The scales used to measure the two selected areas of image of the industry are,
therefore, acceptable in their measure of the reliability of the constructs.

Table 1: Reliability statistics

Construct Students (n=179) Employers (n=36) Employees (n=24)

Attitude to industry 0.640 (11 items) 0.736 (25 items) 0.707 (15 items)

Knowledge of industry 0.720 (6 items)

4. Findings

4.1 Student survey

Table 2: Profile of student sample (n=179)

n %
Grade 10 61 34.1
Grade Grade 11 69 38.5
Grade 12 49 27.4
Male 83 46.4
Gender
Female 96 53.6
Parent 25 22.9
Sibling 11 10.1
Knowing someone in construction Uncle 19 17.4
Friend 27 24.8
Other 27 24.8

Table 2 shows the profile of the high-school student sample, which was drawn
from nine schools in the Greater Durban area. The majority of the students were
in Grade 11 (38.5%), female (53.6%) and knew someone in the industry
(75.2%).

Table 3: View of the industry (n=179; nm=83; nf=961)

1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
All students 1.1 1.1 41.3 41.3 15.1 3.68 0.78
Males 1.2 - 41.0 36.1 21.7 3.77 0.83
Females 1.0 2.1 41.7 45.8 9.4 3.60 0.73

1 The bold responses refer to those from the sample of 179 students, the italicised responses refer to
the 83 male students and the normal text responses refer to the 96 female students.
The responses of the students in Table 3 indicate how they viewed the
construction industry on a 5-point scale, where 1=extremely negative,
2=negative, 3=neutral, 4=positive, and 5=extremely positive. It is evident that
they tended to have a positive view of the construction industry (mean=3.68).
Female students were less positive than their male counterparts. However, a
large proportion (~41%) of the students were neutral, suggesting that, if efforts
were made to promote the industry better than it has to date, it is possible that
more students would decide one way or the other about careers in the industry.

Table 4: Perceptions of industry (n=179; nm=83; nf=96)

Statement 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
3.03 0.65
Prestige of industry 3.02 0.67
3.12 0.68
8.4 15.6 47.5 23.5 5.9 3.01 0.97
A career in the construction
industry is prestigious 9.6 19.3 47.0 20.5 3.6 2.89 0.97
7.3 12.5 47.9 26.0 6.3 3.11 0.96
It is not better to work in an office 26.3 9.5 26.3 16.8 21.2 2.97 1.47
than it is to work outside on site 20.5 13.3 25.3 14.5 26.5 3.13 1.47
16.7 18.8 27.1 6.3 31.3 3.17 1.47
A career in the construction industry 18.4 27.9 39.1 8.9 5.6 2.55 1.06
is better than a career in other 18.1 32.5 34.9 10.9 3.6 2.49 1.03
industries
18.8 24.0 42.7 7.3 7.3 2.60 1.10
3.24 1.05
Career/opportunity 3.16 1.03
2.70 1.06
There are more career- advancement 7.8 14.0 28.5 24.6 25.1 3.45 1.23
opportunities in the construction 7.2 18.1 21.7 22.9 30.1 3.51 1.29
industry
20.8 26.0 34.4 10.4 8.3 2.59 1.17
21.8 19.0 21.2 11.2 26.8 3.02 1.50
The construction industry is not a
male-dominated industry 19.3 25.3 25.3 14.5 15.7 2.82 1.34
36.5 8.3 17.7 13.5 24.0 2.80 1.62
3.53 0.78
Remuneration/reward 3.47 0.81
3.32 0.71
A career in the construction industry 2.2 10.1 29.1 31.3 27.4 3.72 1.04
is fulfilling as results can be seen 3.6 8.4 30.1 31.3 26.5 3.69 1.07
1.0 11.5 28.1 31.3 28.1 3.74 1.03
1.7 8.9 39.7 27.9 21.8 3.59 0.98
A career in the construction
industry is rewarding 1.2 9.6 39.8 28.9 20.5 3.57 0.96
2.1 8.3 39.6 27.1 22.9 3.60 1.00
 Statement 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
4.5 8.4 31.8 34.6 20.7 3.59 1.05
The construction industry
pays well 3.6 13.3 24.1 41.0 18.1 4.33 2.00
5.2 5.2 38.5 28.1 22.9 3.58 1.06
14.5 11.2 30.7 20.1 23.5 3.27 1.33
A job in an office does not pay more
than a job on site 16.9 12.0 30.1 20.5 20.5 3.15 1.35
26.0 19.8 31.3 10.4 12.5 2.63 1.31
3.22 0.75
Health and safety 3.26 0.73
3.14 0.74
15.6 10.6 21.8 17.3 34.6 3.45 1.45
Construction is not an industry
suited for disabled persons 18.1 8.4 20.5 20.5 32.5 3.41 1.47
13.5 12.5 22.9 14.6 36.5 3.48 1.44
9.5 18.4 32.4 22.9 16.8 3.19 1.20
The construction industry is not too
physically demanding 7.2 21.7 27.7 25.3 18.1 3.25 1.20
15.6 20.8 36.5 15.6 11.5 2.86 1.20
8.4 21.2 42.5 16.8 11.2 3.01 1.08
Working in the construction
industry is safe 6.0 20.5 39.8 22.9 10.8 3.12 1.05
11.5 11.5 45.8 21.9 9.4 3.06 1.08
3.69 1.21
Fraud and corruption 3.88 1.16
2.46 1.25
6.1 9.5 27.9 21.8 34.6 3.69 1.21
There is corruption in the
construction industry 3.6 9.6 22.9 24.1 39.8 3.87 1.16
30.2 19.8 32.2 9.4 8.4 2.46 1.25
3.61 0.88
Economic conditions 3.76 0.87
2.99 0.83
5.6 8.9 34.1 17.9 33.5 3.64 1.19
There are many jobs available in
construction 3.6 8.4 27.7 21.7 38.6 3.85 1.15
29.2 14.6 39.6 9.4 7.2 2.51 1.21
There are a great deal of problem- 7.3 10.6 27.9 26.3 27.9 3.57 1.21
solving opportunities in 6.0 14.5 16.9 30.1 32.5 3.69 1.24
construction projects
8.3 7.3 37.5 22.9 24.0 3.47 1.17
3.55 1.07
Promotion 3.52 1.00
3.58 1.12
3.4 12.3 31.8 30.7 21.8 3.55 1.07
The construction industry
enjoys a positive image 2.4 13.3 31.3 36.1 16.9 3.52 1.00
4.2 11.5 32.3 26.0 26.0 3.58 1.12

The students were presented with 16 statements within seven constructs about
their perceptions of the construction industry and
were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a 5-point scale, where
1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, and 5=strongly agree. Their
responses are shown in Table 4. All the means were <4.00 and ranged between
2.25 (tending to disagree) and 3.50 (tending to agree).
It is evident that, with respect to the industry being less prestigious than other
industries, female students tended to agree more strongly with the statements
presented to them. They tended to agree less than their male counterparts about
the opportunities for career advancement. This finding echoes the findings of
Makhene and Twala (2009: 130) and Tucker et al. (1999: 25). While females
agreed less about the financial rewards of working in the industry, they agreed
most negatively about the claim of the industry paying well. Makhene and Twala
(2009: 130) and DG Enterprise (2000: 5) found similar sentiments in their
respective studies. Similarly, females agreed less that the industry had a good
health and safety performance record, feeling most negatively about the industry
being too physically demanding [for them]. In their studies, Pearce (2003) and
the CIDB (2002) found that the health and safety performance record of the
industry was poor. As a consequence, the industry had a bad image. Female
students felt more negatively about whether there was fraud and corruption in the
sector. The CIDB (2011) concurred that fraud and corruption characterised the
industry. Female students agreed less that economic conditions impacted on the
industry. Snyman (2009) found that the economic cycle affected the construction
sector more than other sectors. The female students tended to agree with their
male counterparts that the industry had a positive image. Of concern are the large
numbers of high-school students who were neutral about the various perceptions
presented to them. Several authors such as Chan and Connolly (2012) and DG
Enterprise (2000) argued for more promotional activities to improve the image of
construction in order to attract new young entrants.

Table 5: Aggregated means of perception constructs (n=179; nm=83;

nf=96)
Construct Mean Std Dev.
3.69 1.21
Fraud and corruption 3.88 1.16
2.46 1.25
3.61 0.88
Economic conditions 3.76 0.87
2.99 0.83
 Construct Mean Std Dev.
3.55 1.07
Promotion 3.52 1.00
3.58 1.12
3.53 0.78
Remuneration/reward 3.47 0.81
3.32 0.71
3.24 1.04
Career/opportunity 3.16 1.03
2.70 1.06
3.22 0.75
Health and safety 3.26 0.73
3.14 0.74
3.03 0.65
Prestige of the industry 3.02 0.67
3.12 0.68

Table 5 shows the aggregated means for each of the constructs that make up their
attitude towards the industry.
It is evident that high-school students tended to agree most strongly with the
perceptions that the industry is subject to fraud and corruption and it being a
victim of economic conditions. They agreed least with the perceptions that the
industry was a prestigious one and that it was a healthy and safe one to work in.
The overall high-school student attitude towards the construction sector was
calculated from the mean of the aggregated means which was 3.00 and standard
deviation of 0.42 indicative of the impact of the large neutral cohort of students
in the sample on the mean attitude which can best be described as lukewarm.
Female students (mean=3.04) tended to have a marginally more positive view of
the industry than male students (mean=2.97).
The constructs were tested for significant correlations using Spearman’s rho non-
parametric test for strength and direction of the relationships. There is evidence
of associations between several of the constructs, which were significant at
either the 0.01 level or the
0.05 level. Table 6 shows the correlations that are significant.
Table 6: Significant correlations (n=179)

Fraud
Prestige

Economics
Reward

Promotion
Career advancement

Health and safety record

Correlation
1.00 -0.02 0.37** 0.03 0.32** 0.12 0.17*
Prestige coefficient
- 0.785 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.12 0.03
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
Career -0.02 1.00 0.10 0.26** 0.11 0.11 .04
coefficient
advancement 0.79 - 0.20 0.00 0.15 0.14 0.65
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
0.37** 0.10 1.00 0.13 0.12 -0.01 0.19*
Reward coefficient
0.00 0.21 - 0.08 0.10 0.88 0.01
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
Health and 0.03 0.26** 0.13 1.00 0.01 0.11 -0.12
coefficient
safety record 0.69 0.00 0.08 - 0.86 0.13 0.10
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
0.32** 0.11 0.12 0.01 1.00 0.11 -0.08
Fraud coefficient
0.00 0.15 0.10 0.86 - 0.16 0.27
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
0.12 0.11 -0.01 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.20**
Economics coefficient
0.12 0.14 0.88 0.13 0.16 - 0.01
Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlation
0.17* 0.04 0.19* -0.12 -0.08 0.20** 1.00
Promotion coefficient
0.03 0.65 0.01 0.10 0.27 0.01 -
Sig. (2-tailed)

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The strength of the positive association between Prestige and Reward, Fraud and
Promotion is weak and very highly significantly different from zero (P<0.001;
P<0.05). In other words, 37%, 32% and 17% of the variation in Prestige is
explained by Reward, Fraud and Promotion, respectively. The strength of the
positive association between Career advancement and Health and safety record is
weak and very highly significantly different from zero (P<0.001). In other
words, 26% of the variation in Career advancement is explained by Health and
safety record. The strength of the positive
association between Reward and Promotion is weak and very highly significantly
different from zero (P<0.05). In other words, 19% of the variation in Reward is
explained by Promotion. The strength of the positive association between
Economics and Promotion is weak and very highly significantly different from
zero (P<0.05). In other words, 20% of the variation in Economics is explained by
Promotion. While not shown in the paper, where positive associations exist, they
are stronger and highly significantly different from zero (P<0.001; P<0.05) in the
case of female students than their male counterparts.
The students were quizzed about their knowledge of various participants in the
construction process on a 5-point scale, with 1=nothing, 2=little,
3=average, 4=some knowledge, and 5= everything. Their responses are shown
in Table 7.

Table 7: Knowledge of participants in construction process (n=179; nm=83;

nf=96)
Participant 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
7.3 1.7 7.8 17.3 65.9 4.33 1.16
Architect 8.4 1.2 6.0 21.7 62.7 4.29 1.19
6.3 2.1 9.4 13.5 68.8 4.36 1.14
5.0 5.6 24.6 27.4 37.4 3.87 1.13
Project manager 4.8 8.4 21.7 28.9 36.1 3.83 1.16
5.2 3.1 27.1 26.0 38.5 3.90 1.12
11.7 14.5 24.6 17.9 31.3 3.87 1.13
Main contractor 10.8 14.5 21.7 20.5 32.5 3.49 1.36
12.5 14.6 27.1 15.6 30.2 3.36 1.38
20.7 14.0 21.2 22.3 21.8 3.11 1.44
Civil engineer 18.1 19.3 16.9 22.9 22.9 3.13 1.44
22.9 9.4 25.0 21.9 20.8 3.08 1.44
24.0 15.6 22.9 13.4 24.0 2.98 1.49
Subcontractor 24.1 14.5 24.1 10.8 26.5 3.01 1.52
24.0 16.7 21.9 15.6 21.9 2.95 1.48
28.5 18.4 19.6 18.4 15.1 2.74 1.43
Quantity surveyor 25.3 19.3 18.1 22.9 14.5 2.82 1.42
31.3 17.7 20.8 14.6 15.6 2.66 1.45

Table 7 clearly shows that high-school students claimed to know almost

everything about what an architect does. They had some knowledge of what
project managers and main contractors do. They had average to hardly any
knowledge of civil engineers, subcontractors and quantity surveyors. Except for
knowledge about
architects, female students knew less about all the other participants than male
students.
To establish a sense of the knowledge of the participants in the construction
process, an aggregated mean was calculated, namely
3.41 with standard deviation of 0.86. This finding suggests average to some
knowledge of the participants. The aggregate mean of female students
(mean=3.19) with respect to their knowledge of the participants suggests that
they knew slightly less than their male counterparts (mean=3.26).
Table 8 shows the responses of high-school students to what they would like to
become if they considered a career in construction.

Table 8: Career choice (n=179; nm=83; nf=96)

Career choice %
31.0%
Civil engineer 39.5%
21.2%
9.9%
Quantity surveyor 7.9%
12.1%
35.2%
Architect 31.6%
39.4%
4.2%
Contractor 5.3%
3.0%
19.7%
Project manager 15.8%
24.2%

It is evident that architecture was the most popular career option for the entire
student sample. However, the most preferred career choice of female students
was architecture (39.4%), while it was civil engineering (39.5%) for male
students. The least preferred option was becoming a contractor.
When asked about how attractive the industry was to them on a 5-point scale,
where 1=totally unattractive, 2=unattractive, 3=neutral, 4=attractive, and
5=extremely attractive, high-school students responded as shown in Table 9.
Table 9: Attractiveness of industry (n=179; nm=83; nf=96)
1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
17.3 10.1 33.0 22.9 16.8 3.12 1.30
Attractiveness of career 18.1 16.9 22.9 26.5 15.7 3.05 1.34
16.7 4.2 41.7 19.8 17.7 3.18 1.26
12.3 13.4 30.2 24.0 20.1 3.26 1.27
Influence of perception 10.8 15.7 27.7 31.3 14.5 3.23 1.20
13.5 11.5 32.2 17.7 25.0 3.29 1.33

The students had average views about the attractiveness of a career in

construction and how much that perception influenced their career choice.
Female students found the industry slightly more attractive than male students,
and their perception influenced their career choice more.
Furthermore, the responses of high-school students about whether they wanted
to work in the construction industry are shown in Table 10, where 1=most
definitely not, 2=hardly, 3=maybe, 4=somewhat, and 5=most definitely. It is
evident that they had less than average sentiments about working in construction.
Female students were less willing to work in the industry than male students.

Table 10: Willingness to work in construction (n=179; nm=83; nf=96)

1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
17.3 10.1 33.0 22.9 16.8 2.79 1.43
21.7 15.7 26.5 21.7 14.5 2.92 1.35
32.6 13.7 25.3 9.5 18.9 2.68 1.48

4.2 Employer survey

Table 11 shows the profile of the employer sample. Most of the sample consisted
of contractors (45.2%), civil engineers (16.1%), and subcontractors (12.9%).

Table 11: Profile of employers (n=31)

Role in industry N %
Contractor 14 45.2
Civil engineer 5 16.1
Subcontractor 4 12.9
Quantity surveyor 2 6.5
Construction manager 2 6.5
Property developer 2 6.5
 Role in industry N %
Electrical engineer 1 3.2
Project manager 1 3.2

Table 12 shows that the level of membership of the MBA was 58.1%. Evidently,
other disciplines saw the need to join the MBA. It is likely that with more effort
this number could increase.

Table 12: Membership of MBA (n=31)

Yes No Not applicable
18 (58.1%) 12 (38.7%) 1 (3.2%)

The employers were asked to respond to a series of 26 statements within seven

constructs about their perceptions of the construction industry and were asked to
indicate their level of agreement using a 5-point Likert scale, where 1=strongly
disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, and 5=strongly agree. Their responses
are shown in Table
13. Rather than discuss the findings relative to each statement within each
construct, the aggregated means are presented in Table 14 and discussed.

Table 13: Perceptions of employers (n=31)

Statement 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
Prestige/reputation 2.17 0.47

The perception people have about an industry

influences their decision to follow a career 6.5 6.5 3.2 83.9 - 3.64 0.88
therein

The poor image is the main reason why there is

a critical skills shortage due to the industry’s
unattractiveness as a career choice 7.1 21.4 17.9 32.1 21.4 3.29 1.26

There are many young people currently

employed in the construction industry 12.9 32.3 22.6 32.3 - 2.74 1.06

The public perceive the construction

industry as a positive one 16.1 48.4 12.9 22.6 - 2.42 1.03

The construction industry enjoys a

positive image 16.1 54.8 23,6 6.5 - 2.19 0.79

Career/opportunity 3.45 0.43

Skilled labour is difficult to find. - 9.7 6.5 64.5 19.4 3.94 0.87
Construction companies are currently
suffering from a shortage of skilled labour - - 19.4 71.0 9.7 3.90 0.54

People applying for work can expect to be

hired if they suit the requirements - 16.0 6.5 71.0 6.5 3.68 0.83
 Statement 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
There are career-advancement
opportunities in my firm - 16.1 12.9 71.0 - 3.54 0.77

The lack of skilled labour prevents

companies from growing - 22.6 19.4 48.4 9.7 3.45 0.96

I would encourage my children to pursue

a career in construction 14.3 21.4 17.9 39.3 7.1 3.04 1.27

Construction companies are currently

growing in capacity and workforce 9.7 41.9 35.5 12.9 - 2.51 0.85

Remuneration/reward 2.90 0.54

The average age of the workforce is over 40
years - 22.6 32.3 38.7 6.5 3.29 0.90

Jobs in construction pay well 6.5 32.3 22.6 38.7 - 2.93 1.00
Construction workers generally enjoy job
security - 61.3 29.0 9.7 - 2.48 0.68

Health and safety 3.25 1.06

Working on construction sites is safe - 35.5 12.9 41.9 9.7 3.25 1.06
Fraud and corruption 2.35 1.31
Construction contracts are transparent and
fraud free 35.5 29.0 - 35.5 - 2.35 1.31

Economic conditions 4.06 0.50

Construction companies are strongly
affected by changes in the business cycle - - - 51.6 48.4 4.48 0.58

Construction companies only employ part-

time labourers according to the amount of - 12.9 16.1 64.5 6.5 3.65 0.80
work in the pipeline
Promotion 2.90 0.71
Media campaigns targeted at the youth could
attract them to work in the industry - 16.1 6.5 67.7 9.7 3.71 0.86

Improving the quality of construction

products could improve the image - 7.1 14.3 67.9 10.7 3.12 0.72

My company regularly promotes

careers in the industry 7.1 39.3 - 53.6 - 3.00 1.12

The industry regularly promotes itself in the

media - 53.6 21.4 25.0 - 2.71 0.85

I interact regularly with high-school

students 10.7 60.7 7.1 21.4 - 2.39 0.96

I attend career fairs and events to promote my

company and the industry 28.6 46.4 - 25.0 - 2.21 1.33

I regularly visit high schools to inform

them about careers in construction 46.2 38.5 7.7 7.7 - 1.77 0.91

The means of the various responses were aggregated as shown in Table 14.
Table 14: Aggregated means of employer perception constructs
Construct Mean Std Dev.
Economic conditions 4.06 0.50
Career/opportunity 3.45 0.43
Health and safety 3.25 1.06
Remuneration/reward 2.90 0.54
Promotion 2.90 0.71
Fraud and corruption 2.35 1.31
Prestige of the industry 2.17 0.47

It is evident that employers agreed most strongly with the perception that the
industry was a victim of economic conditions. They tended to agree that the
industry provided career opportunities considering the overall skills shortage and
that it was a healthy and safe one to work in. Employers tended to be neutral
about the remuneration and promotion constructs. They tended to disagree that
the industry was corrupt and that the industry was a prestigious one.
The overall employer attitude towards the construction sector can also be
described as neutral or lukewarm, with an overall mean of
3.11 and standard deviation of 0.39.

4.3 Employee survey

Table 15: Profile of employees (n=24)

N %
Tradesman 5 20.8
Apprentice 4 16.7
Category of employment
Operator 4 16.7
General labourer 11 45.8
18-25 8 33.3
Age 25-40 7 29.2
40-60 9 37.5
Full-time 13 54.2
Employment status
Part-time 11 45.8

Table 15 shows the profile of the employee sample. The majority of the
employees included general labourers (45.8%), those between the ages of 40 and
60 years (37.5%), and full-time employees (54.2%).
The employees were asked to respond to a series of 17 statements within five
constructs about their perceptions of the construction industry and were asked to
indicate their level of agreement using a 5-point Likert scale, where 1=strongly
disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, and 5=strongly agree. Their responses
are shown in Table 16.
Table 16: Attitudes of employees (n=24)
Statement 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Mean Std Dev.
Prestige/reputation 2.75 0.59
Construction workers are respected in the
29.2 33.3 20.8 16.7 - 2.25 1.07
community

There are few women working in

construction 8.4 20.8 20.8 41.7 8.3 3.21 1.14

The public perceives the construction

industry as a positive one 12.5 33.3 41.7 12.5 - 2.54 0.88

Many people want to work in

construction 8.3 33.3 37.5 16.7 4.2 2.75 0.99

There are many young people working in

construction 8.3 29.2 25.0 29.2 8.3 3.00 1.14

Health and safety 3.10 0.57

Construction work is too hard and
physical - 29.2 25.0 37.5 8.3 3.25 0.99

Working on construction sites is safe 4.2 33.2 29.2 29.2 4.2 2.95 1.00
Career/opportunity 3.05 0.55
People applying for work can expect to be
hired if they suit the requirements - 20.8 54.2 25.0 - 3.04 0.69

I want to work here when I am older 4.2 16.7 29.2 41.7 8.2 3.33 1.01
I would encourage my children to pursue
a career in construction 16.7 37.5 29.2 16.6 - 2.45 0.98

I would encourage other people to work in

construction - 12.5 43.8 35.4 8.3 3.37 0.82

Remuneration/reward 3.11 0.39

I can get promoted in my company - 12.5 33.3 45.9 8.3 3.50 0.83
A job in construction pays well 4.2 37.5 41.6 16.7 - 2.71 0.81
I enjoy working in construction - 16.7 50.0 29.1 4.2 3.21 0.78
I know I will not lose my job soon 4.2 29.2 29.2 37.4 - 3.00 0.93
The average age of construction
workers is over 40 years - 25.0 37.5 37.5 - 3.13 0.80

Promotion 3.29 0.95

Media campaigns targeted at the youth
could attract them to work in the industry 4.2 12.5 41.7 33.3 8.3 3.29 0.95

All the means were <4.00 and ranged between 2.25 (tending to disagree) and
3.50 (tending to agree). The means of the various responses were aggregated as
shown in Table 17.

Table 17: Aggregated means of employee perception constructs

Construct Mean Std Dev.
Promotion 3.29 0.95
Remuneration/reward 3.11 0.39
 Construct Mean Std Dev.
Health and safety 3.10 0.57
Career/opportunity 3.05 0.55
Prestige of the industry 2.75 0.59

Overall employee perceptions ranged between being neutral and disagreeing

about the constructs. It is evident that employees tended to be neutral about the
perception that the industry would benefit from active promotion. They agreed
least with the perception that the industry was a prestigious one.
The overall attitude of employees towards the construction sector, although they
were not presented with the constructs of fraud and corruption and economic
conditions, was the most negative of the three samples. The overall mean of 3.06
with standard deviation 0.37 is indicative of the large proportion of employees
who were neutral about the perceptions presented to them, as shown in Table 16,
ranging from 20.8% to 54.2%.

Table 18: Comparative aggregated means of perception constructs

Students
Employers Employees
(n=179; nm=83; (n=31) (n=24)
Construct nf=96)
Std Std Std
Mean Dev. Mean Dev. Mean Dev.
3.69 1.21 2.35 1.31
Fraud and corruption 3.88 1.16
2.46 1.25
3.61 0.88 4.06 0.50
Economic conditions 3.76 0.87
2.99 0.83
3.55 1.07 2.90 0.71 3.29 0.95
Promotion 3.52 1.00
3.58 1.12
3.53 0.78 2.90 0.54 3.11 0.39
Remuneration/reward 3.47 0.81
3.32 0.71
3.24 1.04 3.45 0.43 3.05 0.55
Career/opportunity 3.16 1.03
2.70 1.06
3.22 0.75 3.25 1.06 3.10 0.57
Health and safety 3.26 0.73
3.14 0.74
 Students
Employers Employees
(n=179; nm=83; (n=31) (n=24)
Construct nf=96)
Std Std Std
Mean Dev. Mean Dev. Mean Dev.
3.03 0.65 2.17 0.47 2.75 0.59
Prestige of the industry 3.02 0.67
3.12 0.68

From the data in Table 18, it is evident that all cohorts of respondents were most
negative about the reputation and prestige of the construction sector. The student
cohort as a group was slightly more positive about the health and safety record of
the industry. However, despite tending to be neutral to negative about all
perceptions of the industry, employers were most positive about the perception
that the industry was subject to economic cycles. Employees and students tended
to be neutral about all perceptions of the industry. Of the three samples,
employers were the most negative about all the perceptions of the construction
industry, except for the impact of economic conditions. Employees were more
negative than students about the five perceptions to which they responded. This
is possibly due to their first-hand experience of the industry.

Table 19: Comparison of aggregated attitudes

Sample N Mean Std dev.2
Students 179 3.15 0.44
Employers 31 3.08 0.38
Employees 24 3.06 0.37

By comparing the aggregated means of the five constructs that were common to
all the samples in Table 19, it is evident that all the means ranged between 3.15
and 3.06, suggesting that overall the perceptions of the construction industry
were neutral or lukewarm. This finding suggests that a great deal still needs to be
done in order to change these perceptions of high-school students, employers and
employees.

2 Standard deviations were included to show the extent of congruence of sentiments expressed
around the mean. They were also useful when the means were the same, but the level of
congruence was different
4.4 Focus-group responses
The focus group consisted of four industry employers. In response to what they
perceived the image of the construction industry to be, they expressed that the
following issues had a negative impact on the image of the sector:
• Corruption;
• Lack of promotion;
• Poor economy;
• Poor image, and
• Health and safety record.

Comments from the group include:

Corruption:
… the industry has a lot of work to do to rebuild the image after the recent
media stories regarding the [corruption] during the World Cup. They got
some repair work to do.
… the last story in the newspapers where the construction industry got
together to fix the bid prices did us extreme harm.

Lack of promotion:
… nothing is said like, ‘Look at this beautiful bridge that is being built’.

Poor economy:
… not a lot going on because of the economy of the country.

Poor image:
… I would think it is negative because there are not a lot of job
opportunities.
I don’t think the industry has a good image.

Health and safety record

… But for the last year or so we hear about buildings under construction
collapsing and killing workers.
They were also asked about what they thought contributed to the negative image
of the construction industry. The following issues contributed to the negativity:
 • Fraud and corruption;
• Poor promotion and publicity;
• Poor economy, and
• Site accidents.
Comments from the group include:
… we’ve had a lot of negative publicity.
… the fixing of bid prices, it is a corrupt industry and tender processes …
… buildings collapsing and deaths on site will never motivate people to join the
industry.
Participants reported that there were more people leaving than entering the
industry.
They also reported that, when vacancies were advertised, the applicants were
poor quality, either had no training or experience. They had to always train
applicants.
With respect to what was needed for a sustainable industry, they responded
that business partnerships, more investment and improving the image of the
sector were critical through media campaigns and improving the quality of
products. They agreed that there was a direct relationship between the image of
the industry and the number of new entrants into the industry. The poorer the
public image of the industry, the less likely that it would attract greater numbers
of new entrants who choose construction as a career path.

5. Conclusions
This study aimed to determine the image of the South African construction
industry from the perspective of high-school students, employers and employees
currently working in the construction industry. The image of the industry was
evaluated in terms of its attractiveness relative to careers in the construction
industry.
Against the backdrop of skills shortages in the industry and reducing numbers of
new entrants, the findings of this study present several challenges and
opportunities to the sector. It appears that the industry’s poor image discouraged
students from wanting to work in the industry. The lack of new entrants in the
industry could potentially worsen the industry’s current skills shortage. For the
large cohort of neutral students, for example, to include in their choice of career
the construction industry which has been identified by the South African
government as the vehicle for job creation, poverty alleviation, and
infrastructure delivery, demands that the industry markets itself as one that
provides sustainable and financially rewarding employment in an environment
characterised by good working conditions and opportunities for career
advancement and lifelong learning. Agencies such as the Construction Industry
Development Board (CIDB), the Construction Education and Training Authority
(CETA) and the industry learned and professional societies need to embark on a
vigorous marketing campaign to promote the construction industry. This task is
made more daunting by several major considerations.
For example, high-school and guidance teachers are clearly ineffectual agencies
to influence career choices, especially in the construction industry. Due to the
students’ general lack of knowledge about the industry and the careers therein, it
appears that the current curriculum in the education system is falling short of
preparing high-school students adequately for careers in the construction
industry. The opportunity exists, in the face of the large cohort of students who
have a lukewarm perception of the industry for education officers, to directly
promote the industry in high-school classrooms and to use forums such as career
exhibitions at schools in this effort. Such an intervention becomes more critical,
considering the lack of knowledge about what the various participants in the
construction process are and actually do. Organisations such as the MBASA, the
Association of South African Quantity Surveyors (ASAQS), and the South
African Council of the Project and Construction Management Professions
(SACPCMP) have much to do to promote their particular disciplines, which are
underrepresented in the choice of built environment consulting professions.
Consideration for choosing contracting itself as a career in the sector presents a
special challenge to the industry, since it ranks poorly on the list of careers that
high-school students consider for themselves. Perceptions that construction is
dangerous, hard, physically demanding, experiences economic cycles or ‘bad
times’ and requires long working hours for hardly any money, exacerbate the
challenges facing the industry.
The majority of the employers surveyed were of the opinion that the industry did
not enjoy a positive image and that the public did not perceive the industry in a
positive light. Of concern is the lack of involvement of employers in promoting
careers in the industry. They did not attend career fairs or interact with high-
school students. The industry is perceived as indifferent about the industry and
its employees. It was important that the positives of the industry were portrayed
to the public and the image improved. The lack of promoting the positives about
careers in the industry has contributed to the unattractiveness of the industry as
a career choice. It was
apparent that events such as career fairs have a positive impact on students and
their choice of careers. Schools and some of the key construction companies
must create a programme where students are given the opportunity to visit
construction sites on a regular basis in order to expose them to the professions
and inner workings of the industry.
Similarly, employees currently working in the industry had negative perceptions
of the construction industry. Employers need to be conscious of these
perceptions and introduce interventions that will improve the working
conditions and, in particular, the health and safety of employees, while paying
them adequately with clear career paths and promotion opportunities. These
employees potentially influence others in choosing to work in the sector based on
their experiences of the industry.
While high-school students, employers themselves and construction workers
perceive the industry negatively, a concerted effort needs to be made at all levels
to improve perceptions of the industry and consequently its image.
While this study was confined to the KZN province of South Africa, it reflects
the outcomes of other studies done in other provinces such as the Western Cape.
However, it is recommended that a national comparative study be done to
determine the pervasiveness of the findings of this particular study in other
provinces.

6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Mr Jurgen Human for his
assistance in data collection.

References list
Amaratunga, R.D.G., Haigh, R.P., Lee, A.J., Shanmugam, M. & Elvitigala, N.G.
2006. Construction industry and women: A review of the barriers. In:
Proceedings of the 3rd International SCRI Research Symposium, 3-7 April 2006,
Delft University, The Netherlands. Salford: University of Salford, pp. 559-571.
Bishop, P. & Herron, R. 2015. Use and misuse of the Likert item responses and
other ordinal measures. International Journal of Exercise Science, 8(3), pp. 297-
302.
Boone, H.N & Boone, D.A. 2012. Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension,
50(2), pp. 1-5.
Chan, P.W.C. & Connolly, M. 2006. The role of schools careers advisers in
encouraging new entrants into construction. In: Boyd, D. (Ed.) Proceedings of
the 22nd Annual ARCOM Conference. Birmingham, U.K., 4-6 September 2006.
Reading: Association of Researchers in Construction Management, pp. 811-820.
Chileshe, N. & Haupt, T.C. 2007. Gender influences on factors affecting career
decision making within the South African construction industry. In: Proceedings
of the 3rd Annual Built Environment Education Conference (BEECON), 12-13
September 2007, University of Westminster, London, England, (no page
numbers).
Clarke, S.N. & Boyd, B.J. 2011. Youths’ perceptions of the construction
industry: An analysis at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. In:
Sulbaran, T. (Ed.) Proceedings of the 47th Annual International Conference of
the ASC (Associated Schools of Construction), 6-9 April 2011, Nebraska,
U.S.A., (no page numbers).
Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB). 2002. Agenda 21 for
sustainable construction in developing countries. Pretoria: CIDB. [online].
Available from: <http://www.cidb.org.za/documents/kc/
external_publications/ext_pubs_a21_sustainable_construction.pdf> [Accessed:
24 June 2015].
Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB). 2011. Construction quality in
South Africa: A client perspective. Pretoria: CIDB. [online]. Available at:
<http://www.cidb.org.za/Documents/KC/cidb_
Publications/Ind_Reps_Other/Construction_Quality_in_SA_Client_
Perspective_2010_06_29_final.pdf> [Accessed: 19 November 2015].
Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB). 2012. SME business
conditions survey: 4th quarter. Pretoria: CIDB. [online]. Available at:
<http://www.cidb.org.za/Documents/KC/cidb_Publications/Ind_
Reps_Other/ind_reps_cidb_SME_Business_Condition_Survey_2012_ Q4.pdf>
[Accessed: 13 February 2016].
Cumberlege, R.C. 2008. The effectiveness of the Joint Building Contracts
Committee Series 2000 Principal Building Agreement. Unpublished MSc thesis.
Port Elizabeth: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University.
DG Enterprise. 2000. Competitiveness of the construction industry:
Recommendations for improvement. Bruxelles: DG Enterprise. [online].
Available from: <http://www.ceetb.eu/docs/Reports/ training.pdf> [Accessed: 11
January 2016].
Didiza, T. 2008. Sustainable development through leadership building. Address
by the Minister of Public Works on the occasion of the South African Women
of Construction summit. [online]. Available from:
<http://www.publicworks.gov.za/PDFs/Speeches/Minister/SAWIC_
Summit.pdf> [Accessed: 28 February 2016].
Friedman, H.H. 2012. Advertising, publicity and sales promotion. [online].
Available from: <http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/eco-
nomic/friedman/mmadvertising.htm> [Accessed: 19 September 2015].
Gadermann, A., Guhn, M. & Zumbo, B. 2012. Estimating ordinal reliability for
Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical and practical
guide. Practical Assessment, Research and Education, 17(3), pp. 1-12.
Hartley, J. 2013. Some thoughts on Likert-type scales. International Journal of
Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(1), pp. 83-86. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70040-7
International Labor Organization (ILO). 2001. The construction industry in the
twenty-first century: Its image, employment prospects and skill requirements.
Geneva: ILO. [online]. Available at: <http://www.ilo.
org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb283/pdf/tmcitr.pdf> [Accessed: 11
January 2016].
Makhene, D. & Twala, W.D. 2009. Skilled labour shortages in construction
contractors: A literature review. In: CIDB (Construction Industry Development
Board), 6th Postgraduate Conference on Construction Industry Development.
Johannesburg, South Africa, 6-8 September 2009. Pretoria: CIDB, pp. 128-136.
Master Builders Association South Africa (MBASA). 2013. MBASA Corporate
Paper. [newspaper]. Durban: MBASA, p. 3.
Mukucha, C., Mphethi, R. & Maluleke, M. 2010. The impact of global economic
recession on the construction industry of South Africa. In: Proceedings of the
RICS COBRA 2010 Research Conference, 2-3 September 2010, Paris, France.
London: RICS, (no page numbers).
Pearce, D. 2003. The social and economic value of construction: The
construction industry’s contribution to sustainable development. (London:
nCRISP). [online]. Available at: <http://www.cidb.org.
za/documents/kc/external_publications/ext_pubs_soc_ec_value_
construction.pdf> [Accessed: 11 January 2016].
Pearl, R.G., Bowen, P.A., Makanjee, N., Akintoye, A. & Evans, K. 2005.
Professional ethics in the South African construction industry: A pilot study. In:
Sidwell, A.C. (Ed.) The International RICS Foundation COBRA
1995 Proceedings, Queensland University of Technology Research Week,
Brisbane, Australia, 3-7 July 1995. Brisbane: RICS.
Rameezdeen, R. 2007. Image of the construction industry. In: CIB (International
Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction), Revaluing
construction: A W065 ‘Organisation and management of construction’
perspective. Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 7-10 May 2007. Rotterdam: CIB.
Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1998. Competition Act, Act 89 of 1998.
Government Gazette, Vol. 400, No. 19412, 30 October, Cape Town.
Republic of South Africa (RSA). 2000. Construction Industry Development
Board Act, Act No. 38 of 2000. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Schella, C. 2010. Improving the construction industry image. Montreal:
Canadian Construction Association. [online]. Available from: <http://
www.meritalberta.com/dnn1/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=5viJIiA_ aOI
%3D&tabid=109> [Accessed: 15 April 2015].
Skitmore, M. 1991. The image of the construction industry: A cross- sectional
analysis. Building research and information. The International Journal of
Research, Development and Demonstration, 19(5), pp. 301-310.
Snyman, J. 2009. From the short to the long term: History and development of
leading indicators and building cycles. In: Ruddock,
L. (Ed.) Economics for the modern built environment. Oxford: Taylor & Francis,
pp. 130-152.
Statistics South Africa (Stats SA). 2012. Quarterly employment stats: September
2012. Pretoria: Stats SA. [online]. Available from: <http://
www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0277/P0277September2012.pdf> [Accessed:
28 February 2016].
Statistics South Africa (Stats SA). 2013. Gross domestic product: 4th Quarter
2012. Pretoria: Stats SA. [online]. Available from: <http://
www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0441/P04414thQuarter2012.pdf> [Accessed:
28 February 2013].
Tucker, R.L., Haas, C.T., Glover, R.W., Alemany, C., Carley, L.A., Rodriguez,
A.M. & Shields, A. 1999. Key workforce challenges facing the American
construction industry: An interim assessment. Report No. 3. Austin: Centre for
Construction Industry Studies.
Vanhamme, J. & Grobben, B. 2009. “Too good to be true!”. The effectiveness of
CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2),
pp. 273-283. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-008-9731-2
Vee, C. & Skitmore, R.M. 2003. Professional ethics in the construction industry.
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 10(2), pp.117-127.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980310466596
Visser, A. 2013. Construction companies tight-lipped as HAWKS probe deal.
Business Day, 5 February 2013. [online]. Available from: <http://
www.bdlive.co.za/business/industrials/2013/02/05/construction- companies-
tight-lipped-as-hawks-probe-deals> [Accessed: 6 February 2016].
Wibowo, A. 2009. The contribution of the construction industry to the economy
of Indonesia: A systematic approach. Semarang: Diponegoro University.
[online]. Available from: <http://eprints.undip. ac.id/387/1/Agung_Wibowo.pdf>
[Accessed: 28 February 2013].