Employee perceptions of the solid waste management system operating in a large Australian contracting organization: implications for company policy implementation

Abstract

A survey of employees' perceptions of a large contracting firm's waste management system was conducted. Results were factor analysed and an eight-factor model of the waste management climate was identified. Perceptions were found to differ between employee groupings. Managerial staff had a less positive perception of the waste management climate than did site workers. Qualitative interview data were analysed using a content analysis approach. Managers were found to perceive environmental issues as being less important than cost, time or quality objectives. Construction workers believed environmental issues to be of greater importance than these other objectives. Differences in perceptions of managers and site workers have implications for the implementation of any company waste management policy. There is a need to involve workers in identifying waste management solutions, to provide more information to all employees about practical aspects of waste management, and for managers visibly to demonstrate commitment to waste management policy objectives.Construction And Demolition Waste Organizational Climate Solid Waste Management,

Attitudes towards waste minimisation amongst labour only sub‐contractors

“…Firstly sub-contractors may consider main contractor management support and encouragement to be lacking in terms of such matters as positioning of skips, goal setting and feedback. This supports both Lingard et al (2000) whose operative survey found "management supportiveness of waste management" was the major issue to affect waste levels on a construction site and Teo et al (2000) who concluded "The ability of operatives to contribute to waste reduction activities is dictated largely by managers interest in waste management and their willingness to commit resources to it. " A second interpretation is that the respondents simply considered how well a site was managed by the main contractor in terms of such matters as materials storage and ordering of correct materials.…”

“…Apart from the very large response in favour of Proposition 4, many of the responses to this group of propositions tend to support Teo et al (2000), Lingard et al (2000) and McDonald and Smithers (1998) in their findings that the attitude to waste reduction is generally positive.…”

“…This is in contrast to the perceived high level of knowledge and involvement in waste management cited by Lingard et al (2000).…”

“…They reported that "site operatives appeared to be highly motivated with regard to the waste management plan" with reductions of 15% in the volume of generated waste and 43% in waste sent to landfill. Lingard et al (2000) noted that operatives placed a higher importance on environmental issues than did managers who were more interested in cost, time and quality objectives.…”

“…The large scale of construction waste has also been recognised as a problem in Australia (McDonald and Smithers (1998), Lingard et al (2000), Teo and Loosemore (2001)), the USA (Alexander (1993) and Helper (1994)) and Canada (Kalin, 1991)). …”