1 Introduction
Contractors play a crucial role in construction project management due to their direct involvement in the execution and delivery of projects. As the main implementer, they manage challenges related to timelines, budgets, resource coordination, and adherence to safety and quality standards, which are vital to the project’s success. However, contractors have consistently been criticized for unethical practices. For instance, Amoah and Steyn (
2023) reported that contractors in South Africa often engage in unethical practices to win contracts, contributing to a high prevalence rate of corruption in this industry. Lukhele et al. (
2023) noted that contractors may prioritize economic opportunities over ethical practice, such as by using cheap and inferior materials that fail to meet acceptable standards, which harms the health and safety of workers. Other validated negative impacts of unethical behaviors of contractors in construction project management include cost overrun, deterioration of the environment, and damage to the industry’s reputation (
Inuwa et al., 2015). Furthermore, as moral exemplars, contractor managers’ ethical failings can trigger unethical behaviors among other project participants (
Oladinrin and Ho, 2015;
Ho and Oladinrin, 2019;
Fang et al., 2022), such as subcontractors, suppliers, engineers, and workers. Consequently, reducing unethical conducts of contractor managers and enhancing ethical management practices are of paramount importance in construction project management.
Although numerous studies have investigated unethical practices in the construction industry worldwide, there seems to be no comprehensive framework to systematically categorize and characterize unethical behaviors of contractors in construction project management. Available studies largely categorize unethical behaviors based on industry experience and have not provided a rigorous theoretical rationale for these classifications (
Amoah and Steyn, 2023;
Coffie et al., 2023). Existing research may use diverse descriptive terminologies for the same ethical concerns. For instance, “kickbacks and illegal commissions” can be viewed as forms of corruption or fraud, while some studies categorize them separately or as alternatives to corrupt practices (
Fan and Fox, 2009). Some studies investigate “bid shopping,” “bid cutting,” and “bid rigging” as separate issues (
Aigbavboa et al., 2016), while others classify them under the same category (
Abdul-Rahman et al., 2014). Additionally, most studies adopt merely questionnaire surveys to assess the “frequency” and “seriousness” of unethical behaviors, except for a few (
Abdul-Rahman et al., 2011;
Mukumbwa and Muya, 2013;
Abdul-Rahman et al., 2014;
Gicheru, 2018). The questionnaire responses undergo standardized processing and fail to delve deeply into the underlying causes of these unethical behaviors. The absence of deep understanding of the institutional factors, industry norms, and managerial perceptions limits the development of effective intervention strategies. Overall, relevant literature to date is fragmented and atheoretical, lacking a comprehensive framework to elucidate the boundaries of unethical behaviors and a coherent understanding to characterize their causes.
This paper aims to fill the theoretical gaps by addressing the following research questions:
RQ1: How can a systematic framework for unethical behaviors of contractor managers in construction project management be developed?
RQ2: What are the underlying causes of these different unethical behaviors?
The primary contribution of this paper to the existing knowledge is to develop a theoretical framework for systematically categorizing and characterizing unethical behaviors of contractors in construction project management for the first time, which offers a vocabulary to describe the key features of unethical practices (
Foy et al., 2011), forms foundations for understanding and generalization in different cultural contexts, and provides a unified conceptual basis for both theoretical and empirical research. Practical contributions include providing a tool for managers and regulators to understand, identify, and assess contractor unethical practices prevalent in construction projects, and offering recommendations for effective ethical management based on the causes of different unethical behaviors.
The structure of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 outlines the foundational concepts and theories underpinning the development of the proposed framework. Section 3 introduces the research methodology for data collection and analysis. Section 4 reports the findings related to the research questions. Finally, Section 5 presents a discussion and practical recommendations for enhancing ethical management practices in the construction industry.
2 Theoretical underpinnings
2.1 Definition and categorization of unethical behaviors
Ethical concerns arise where a person’s behaviors may harm or benefit others when freely performed (
Jones, 1991). The person performing the ethical behavior is therefore referred to as the ethical agent. In the field of business ethics, the term “ethical behavior” is used broadly to include both ethical and unethical behavior (
Treviño et al., 2014). Treviño et al. (
2006) proposed three categories of “ethical behavior”: unethical behavior that is not morally acceptable in society, routine ethical behavior that reaches the minimal moral standard, and extraordinary ethical behavior that exceeds moral minimums. Therefore, the unethical behaviors examined in this study encompass both “bad behavior” that violates broadly accepted ethical norms in construction project management (e.g., corruption, fraud) and the failures to engage in actions that exceed minimal ethical standards (e.g., failing to proactively adopt environmentally sustainable technologies, failing to engage in whistleblowing against unethical practices). This suggests two pathways for identifying unethical behaviors in this study: summarizing unethical conducts directly noted in empirical literature and using ethical guidelines as a baseline to determine potential unethical practices, as discussed in subsection 2.2.
Stakeholder theory provides a suitable lens for dimensional categorization (
Derakhshan et al., 2019). Kaptein (
2008) suggests that the relationships with stakeholders and the ethical responsibilities toward them serve as the basis for defining unethical behaviors, as clustering actions by this approach have similar causes, impacts, or control measures. According to Freeman (
2023), stakeholder refers to “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of an organization’s purpose.” In construction project management, commonly considered stakeholders for contractors include clients, designers, subcontractors, supervisors, government authorities, and end users. Recently, nonhuman entities have also been incorporated into the scope of stakeholder research, as they may have influences on construction activities (
Franklin, 2020;
Kortetmäki et al., 2023). Examples of nonhuman stakeholders include the environment, resources, geography, physical structures, etc.
It is necessary to distinguish between the corporate social responsibility (CSR) of contractors and the unethical behavior of contractor managers. Corporate social responsibility emphasizes a company’s moral obligations toward society beyond basic legal and economic duties (
Lantos, 2001). Also grounded in stakeholder theory, modern CSR posits that a company’s responsibilities encompass not only shareholder interests but also the welfare of all stakeholders, including employees, customers, suppliers, and the broader community (
Freeman and Dmytriyev, 2017). Many construction firms have implemented CSR strategies as an opportunity for differentiation and competitiveness, such as promoting occupational health and safety, environmental protection, and community engagement (
Avotra et al., 2021;
Fotiadis et al., 2023;
Zhang et al., 2023). Recently, the concept of megaproject social responsibility (MSR) has expanded traditional CSR to megaprojects (
Cottafava et al., 2024), in response to their characteristics of huge investment and profound impacts (
Ma et al., 2021). However, the main distinction between contractor CSR and the unethical behaviors of contractor managers focuses on the ethical agent: the former operates at the corporate level, while the latter occurs at the individual level. CSR is viewed as a strategic issue, whose successful implementation requires managers to exercise ethical behaviors in their daily practice (
Fatima and Elbanna, 2023).
The three-level perspective of engineering ethics is also adopted. Li (
2010,
2012) proposed the micro-meso-macro framework, where professional ethics constitutes a significant part of micro-level engineering ethics, meso-level ethics addresses corporate, project, or industry issues, and macro-level ethics covers national and global concerns. Halder and Batra (
2024) again classified ethical discourse in construction into micro (individual), meso (organizational/project), and macro (national/societal) levels. Many studies have adopted this three-level approach as a foundation for understanding and categorizing ethical concerns in engineering management (
Johri and Hingle, 2022;
Rodriguez-Nikl and Schaff, 2023).
Combining the stakeholder theory and the three-level distinction, this study proposes a theoretical framework to depict unethical behaviors of contractor managers that encompass micro, meso, and macro levels. This framework progressively expands the scale from contractor managers themselves to other stakeholders within the construction industry, and finally to the social environment.
2.2 An overview of unethical behaviors in the construction industry
This section establishes the preliminary taxonomy framework for unethical behaviors of contractor managers through two pathways: directly reviewing identified unethical behaviors from empirical studies since 2000, and using codes of ethics as baselines to generate potential unethical behaviors, as suggested by Kaptein (
2008). Table 1 presents an overview of potential unethical behaviors from the two sources. The empirical literature selected encompasses a wide range of construction professionals (including architects, quantity surveyors, engineers, managers, consultants, and workers) from different construction organizations (including contractors, designers, clients, subcontractors, and suppliers) worldwide. The codes of ethics are issued by 13 professional associations and standards organizations, including the Project Management Institute (PMI), Construction Management Association of America (CMAA), Association for Project Management (APM), International Project Management Association (IPMA), American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), American Institute of Architects (AIA), Public Construction Commission of the Executive Yuan, Taiwan, China (PCC), Society of Construction Law (SCL), Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), and Master Builders Association of New South Wales (MBA NSW). Given the different classification approaches and terminologies used, we conducted a preliminary categorization of the unethical behaviors from the existing literature and codes of ethics, grouping them into 24 themes, as shown in Table 1. The framework was refined through expert consultation and informal discussions with industry practitioners.
The empirical literature investigated unethical behaviors across different cultural backgrounds, covering developed (e.g., Australia, the USA, the UK) and developing (e.g., China, South Africa, Ghana, Nigeria, Zambia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Kenya) countries and regions. However, the findings share some commonalities. The unethical practices such as “bribery and corruption,” “conflicts of interest,” “confidentiality and propriety information,” and “dishonesty and fraud,” are key concerns addressed by most countries. In particular, numerous empirical studies report that “bribery and corruption” is one of the most prevalent unethical practices in the construction industry (
Aigbavboa et al., 2016;
Gicheru, 2018;
Zulu and Muleya, 2019;
Kuoribo et al., 2023). Also, although codes of ethics vary in cultural contexts, the core ethical values they are built around are consistent to some extent. For instance, the PMI code is founded on four values that were identified as most important to the project management community: responsibility, respect, fairness, and honesty. The SCL code advocates for seven core values: honesty, fairness, fair reward, reliability, integrity, objectivity, and accountability. These values are reflected in various forms across the other codes of ethics.
Therefore, we believe the proposed taxonomy framework has applicability across diverse cultural contexts for three reasons. First, the summarized themes of unethical behaviors share similarities across empirical studies from various countries, although the rankings of specific unethical behaviors may vary by region. For example, the unethical conduct of “kickbacks and illegal commissions” is mentioned only in studies from certain countries, while the overarching theme (i.e., “bribery and corruption”) remains highly prevalent. Second, the moral values and ethical principles advocated in codes of ethics largely possess societal consensus. This is because these codes are public documents typically developed through intensive stakeholder consultation with the help of academic experts and consultants (
Kaptein, 2008). Third, the taxonomy framework demonstrates a degree of comprehensiveness, as codes of ethics can highlight potential unethical behaviors not yet identified in empirical research. For example, the ASCE code mentions the expectation to consider limitations of emerging technologies, and the NSPE code emphasizes the protection of intellectual property and prohibits implying credit to an author for work performed by others—issues seldom examined in empirical studies.
3 Research methodology
3.1 Data collection
The study adopted qualitative research approaches, primarily using semi-structured in-depth interviews for data collection. Qualitative research is suitable for exploring new areas where issues are not yet understood or properly identified (
Hancock et al., 2009). Interview methods can provide deep insights into the experiences, meanings, and perspectives of participants (
Hammarberg et al., 2016), therefore suitable for this study.
Purposeful and snowballing sampling methods were adopted. We contacted seven construction companies and identified 20 interviewees. The backgrounds and demographic profiles of the interviewees are presented in Tables 2 and 3. The interviewees include senior and middle managers mainly from contractors. They have an average of 23 years of experience in the construction field. Therefore, they are believed to possess a deep understanding, offer valuable insights, and make accurate judgments regarding ethical practices in this industry. Interviewees also include four managers from the owner and one from the third-party supervisor, who provide external and objective perspectives on the unethical practices observed in contractor management. Interviews were conducted between August and December 2022. Due to the pandemic, five managers were interviewed via video conference using Tencent Meeting, one manager through email, and the remaining interviews were conducted face-to-face. The interviews took an average of approximately 140 min. This substantial time commitment ensured that researchers had profound conversations with interviewees to investigate their viewpoints and attitudes in greater depth.
The interview was divided into three parts. The first part focused on the interviewees’ backgrounds, including their years of experience and management roles in construction projects. The second part comprised 24 questions (as shown in Table 1). For each theme, interviewees were asked, “Have you ever experienced or witnessed this type of unethical behaviors? Please describe in detail how they manifest in construction project management practice using specific examples.” After discussing the 24 themes, an open-ended question was posed in the third part, inviting interviewees to add any unethical behaviors beyond those mentioned above. Pilot interviews with contractor managers were conducted before the main interviews to refine the content and assess its feasibility (
Alshenqeeti, 2014). To promote the validity and authenticity of the interviews, researchers introduced the research objectives and related concepts to the interviewees and clarified any misunderstandings at the beginning. Interviewees were asked to base their responses on the broader industry experience and various management activities, rather than on individual or company-specific perspectives to avoid bias. The anonymity and confidentiality of interviewees’ responses were assured and interviews were audio-recorded with the consent of interviewees.
3.2 Data analysis
Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts. It is a method for the interpretation of text data through the systematic classification process of coding and identifying themes or patterns (
Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). Coding is a heuristic and exploratory analysis technique (
Saldaña, 2013). It involves assigning descriptive or inferential tags or labels (i.e., codes) to units of meaning in the raw data and forming a codebook (
DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011). This study adopted a hybrid method to develop the codebook, combining the data-driven inductive approach with the deductive a priori framework (
Fereday and Muir-Cochrane, 2006;
DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011), which is believed to balance reliability and validity (
Namey et al., 2008).
The interviews were transcribed verbatim and the interview transcripts were coded in NVIVO V.11. The coding analysis followed these specific steps: (1) The 24 themes of unethical behaviors from the interview outline serve as the initial coding scheme, which was assigned to corresponding segments from different transcripts, consolidating discrete text pieces for in-depth analysis (
Namey et al., 2008). (2) The transcripts were inductively coded line-by-line to extract specific forms of unethical behaviors and capture the interviewees’ opinions regarding them. According to Saldaña (
2013), “action coding” was employed to pinpoint unethical behaviors. This was an iterative process involving repeated examination of transcripts to complement the initial coding scheme with newly emerged forms of unethical behaviors. (3) Cross-checking was conducted to ensure coding reliability. Two different coders developed codes independently on one randomly chosen transcript at a time and compared the results. Discussions were held in response to inter-coder disagreements, where code definitions and boundaries were clarified, and redundant or overlapping codes were eliminated (
Hruschka et al., 2004). The final codebook was established after all transcripts were reviewed and discrepancies were resolved. (4) Frequency analysis and causation coding were conducted (
Saldaña, 2013). Researchers adopted various strategies to ensure the authenticity and accuracy of the results, including triangulation, rigorous and well-defined analysis procedures, peer debriefing, and rich and thick descriptions (
Creswell, 2014).
Drawing from the experience of similar qualitative studies regarding sample size, the 20 interviews conducted in this study are considered adequate (
Guest et al., 2006;
Ho and Oladinrin, 2019). Furthermore, no new codes emerged in the last three interview transcripts, suggesting that data saturation has been achieved (see Table 4) (
Francis et al., 2010;
Hennink and Kaiser, 2022).
4 Results
4.1 Theoretical framework for unethical behaviors
After the rigorous coding and analysis procedures, a three-level, five-dimensional, and 18-theme framework for unethical behaviors of contractors in construction project management has emerged, as shown in Fig. 1. Referring to the theoretical premises in Section 2, unethical behaviors can be categorized into five dimensions across three levels from the stakeholder theory perspective: the professional dimension at the micro level; the organizational (involving colleagues, employers, clients, peers, etc.) and engineering (involving engineering knowledge, technology, objectives, etc.) dimensions at the meso level; and the societal (involving the public and government) and environmental (involving natural and cultural environments) dimensions at the macro level.
Compared to the 24 themes in the preliminary taxonomy framework in Table 1, the reintegration through the coding process of qualitative content analysis eliminated conceptual overlaps and intersections, categorizing unethical behaviors into 18 themes that are more distinct in their ethical values. Within this refined framework, “discrimination and favoritism” are presented as violations against the value of fairness and thus are categorized under the theme of “fairness and justice.” “Whistleblowing against improper demands” is considered part of managers’ ethical responsibility, hence it is classified under the theme of “negligence.” The theme of “gray areas” denotes ambiguities surrounding legal thresholds, thus being merged into the theme of “compliance and exceedance of laws and regulations.” “Information and warning disclosure” pertains to public risk communication and is allocated to the theme of “public safety, health, and welfare.” “Cultural relic damage,” relating to the preservation of historical and cultural environments, is categorized under “environmental damage.” In the case of “conflicts of interest,” the concerns expressed by interviewees encompass problems such as contract negotiations, community disturbances caused by engineering activities, and unfair reward mechanisms, suggesting a multifaceted dimensionality. This indicates that “conflicts of interest” do not belong to fundamental ethical values or standards, hence the associated behaviors are divided into themes of “fairness and justice” and “public safety, health, and welfare.”
This section elucidates each dimension and its encompassing ethical themes, delineating the most prevalent three forms of unethical behaviors identified within each theme (Table 5). The complete codebook of unethical behaviors is available upon request from the corresponding author.
4.1.1 Dimension 1: Professional dimension
A profession can be defined as “a group of people organized to serve a body of specialized knowledge in the interests of society” (
Vee and Skitmore, 2003). Professionals are distinguished from other ethical agents in terms of knowledge, opportunity, and expectation. Professional ethics sets morally permissible standards of conduct for individual members of a profession, as well as the moral ideals the profession pursues (
Davis, 2003;
Lukhele et al., 2023). In this study, the professional dimension examines the unethical behaviors of contractor managers related to breaches of their professional commitments and ethical responsibilities. This dimension covers four themes of unethical behaviors.
The first theme is professional qualification and competence. In construction project management, evaluating the competency levels of managers is essential for appointing management personnel, allocating managerial tasks, and undertaking construction projects. Explicit criteria for competency include qualification certificates and evidence of previous project experience (in the form of contract documents, award notifications, and end-user evaluations). Additionally, a posteriori evaluation is based on managerial performance in actual work undertaken. However, managers may not be adequately qualified or competent. The most frequently cited form of this issue is qualification rental, as shown in Table 5. The second salient form is the discrepancy between qualifications or past performance and actual managerial competence.
The second ethical theme is negligence, which means the failure to exercise the degree of care and attention considered reasonably expected for the tasks undertaken (
Adnan et al., 2012). This degree of reasonable care involves taking precautions to avoid harm resulting from one’s actions and is proportional to the centrality of one’s role in producing that harm (
Alpern, 1983). Thus, in addition to the basic liability responsibilities imposed by contractual provisions and managerial positions, managers should also assume positive and forward-looking ethical responsibilities, which emphasizes what to do to achieve or prevent future outcomes, rather than looking backward at who was responsible for past events (
Ladd, 1982). For example, managers are expected to refuse and, where necessary, blow the whistle on unethical managerial directives. Regrettably, only three interviewees mentioned this problem (PM1, PM2, O1), indicating a lack of awareness among current construction industry managers. The three most frequently cited forms of negligence are impacts from personal affairs, ineffective correction, and work evasion or procrastination.
The third theme concerns corruption and abuse of authority. Corruption is defined as the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain (
Zhang et al., 2017). The construction industry has been identified as the one of the most corrupt industries worldwide (
Zhang et al., 2017). Such assertions align with the perspectives shared by our interviewees. While some interviewees believe that corruption is not exclusive to construction (HP1, HS1, HS2), they acknowledge it is prominent and pervasive in this industry (PM3, HP1, HC2, O3) and permeates throughout all project phases (HC1). Additionally, five managers have observed notable improvements in curbing corruption in China in recent years. The three most frequently cited behaviors are construction designation, nepotism, and regulatory leniency. Notably, due to the sensitivity of this theme, interviewees indicated that direct exchanges of benefits were seldom witnessed or experienced; rather, more subtle forms like “guanxi-based corruption” prevail (
Luo, 2008), as proposed by PM1 and PM2.
The fourth theme is confidential information and privacy protection. Respecting and maintaining the confidentiality of information acquired through professional relationships is essential to the expected conduct of construction practitioners (
McCarthy, 2012). For managers, this not only applies to specific confidential projects but also to any other information gathered during their professional engagements that might affect stakeholders’ interests, encompassing business details, technical data, organizational management information, and personal privacy. The three most cited breaches of information and privacy are misdisclosure of tender information, personal information, and quotation information. Corrupt behaviors and breaches of confidentiality may occur simultaneously, especially during the tendering or bidding stages. Seven interviewees stated that revealing tender information to help others win projects is a form of corruption.
4.1.2 Dimension 2: Organizational dimension
The organizational dimension pertains to how contractor managers navigate ethical relationships with other industry practitioners with diverse interests, including owners, subcontractors, designers, suppliers, and competitors. Contractor managers may perform unethical practices in seven aspects.
The first ethical theme is intellectual property, regarding the failure of managers to respect and safeguard the intellectual property of others in the construction industry. The most frequently mentioned forms of this issue are scheme plagiarism, patent infringement, and nominal authorship.
The second theme is dishonesty and concealment, pertaining to dishonest behaviors in construction project management. The three most frequently mentioned forms are deception in settlement, quality concealment, and false documentation.
The third ethical theme is occupational safety and health, concerning managers failing to safeguard the safety and health of project members in the workplace. The three most frequently mentioned misconducts are lack of personal protective equipment (PPE), unsafe procedures, and inadequate rest periods for project personnel.
The fourth ethical theme is breach of commitment, which concerns managers failing to honor their commitments, whether formal or informal. Formal commitments usually encompass engineering contracts and other written documents with legal binding, while informal commitments mainly pertain to verbal assurances that are unenforceable. The three most frequently mentioned unethical behaviors are payment default, breach of management directives, and milestone delays. In construction projects, “The contract serves as the foundational reference for management activities” (O3). However, many changes that exceed the stipulated scope of contracts frequently arise during the construction engineering management. Such unenforceable agreements inherently carry higher risks of breach. This is because that “adherence to promises may not always be absolute when profits are at stake. Keeping one’s word often depends on individual conscience, which makes it difficult to monitor” (HS1). Furthermore, these breaches are seldom “addressed through formal channels” (O3). This highlights the importance of formalized contract management.
The fifth ethical theme is respect and care. Dillon (
1992) proposed the concept of “care respect for persons.” “Respect” implies fully recognizing the basic human rights and rational autonomy of others, while “care” entails empathetically understanding others’ situations and seeking to enhance their well-being (
Dillon, 1992). The three most frequently cited unethical behaviors in the construction industry are disrespecting autonomy, disrespecting dignity, and neglecting work difficulties.
The sixth ethical theme is fairness and justice, which has traditionally been considered one of the four cardinal virtues. The notions of fairness and justice first signify equality and impartiality in guaranteeing each individual’s most extensive basic rights and liberties (
Rawls, 1971), and embody the principle of “no respecter of persons” (
Godwin, 1842). The related unethical behaviors include discrimination and managerial favoritism. From the perspective of distributive justice, “to render to each his due” (
Miller, 2022) should be upheld as a guiding principle for the reciprocal exchange of interests and harms in construction project management. Relevant unethical practices of contractor managers include failing to provide remuneration proportionate to stakeholders’ contributions, not assuming responsibilities aligned with their powers, and distributing risks and benefits unjustly (
Van de Poel and Royakkers, 2011). Justice also serves as a remedial principle, activated when injustice arises from faulty behaviors (
Miller, 2022). It seeks to restore a balance of fairness and justice by adjusting the relationships among rights, responsibilities, and interests through reasonable compensation (
Fang et al., 2020). Relevant concerns for contractor managers include the punctuality of engineering claims and providing appropriate compensation to individuals who sacrifice for the collective good. Finally, procedural justice is also a critical aspect. Related unethical behaviors include disregarding stakeholders’ opinions in decision-making and failing to accurately disclose essential decision-related information (
World Health Organization, 2016). Overall, the three most frequently mentioned forms of misconducts are engineering discrimination, unfair engineering claims, and unfair engineering pricing.
The seventh theme is improper competition, which entails unethical practices aimed at gaining competitive advantages in the construction industry. Four interviewees noted the prevalence of such practices, particularly during the tendering or bidding stages (PM3, PM7, HS1, O1). The three most frequently mentioned forms are collusive tendering, unreasonable underbidding, and false allegations and defamation.
4.1.3 Dimension 3: Engineering dimension
This dimension examines how contractor managers address ethical challenges associated with construction activities. These challenges come from three core aspects. First, construction activities involve the integration of diverse forms of knowledge, including empirical, scientific, and technical knowledge. Second, construction activities are guided by value-oriented objectives to deliver useful products and services to society and generate economic and social benefits; however, these objectives and values sometimes conflict. Third, a construction project operates within certain constraints, such as natural, resource-related, social, economic, and technical conditions (
Yin, 2012). Unethical behaviors in this dimension are clasified under three themes.
The first theme is respect for science, which entails honoring the established and systematically recognized knowledge about construction engineering. Moreover, when considering technical aspects, it is vital to adapt them to the unique requirements of specific engineering scenarios, rather than rigidly adhering to predetermined specifications. Thus, “seeking truth from facts” should be inherently woven into the idea of “respect for science.” In construction project management practices, the three most frequently cited forms of disregard for scientific principles are improper scheduling, procedural violations, and layperson intervention.
The second ethical theme is reasonable innovation. Engineering innovation is a primary driver of productivity (
Yin, 2012). Interviewees agree that such innovation can enhance efficiency and reduce costs (PM6, HP2, O3), improve safety (PM6, O3), promote industrial development (HS2), and align with the construction industry’s macro-policy direction (O4). However, these benefits stem from reasonable innovation. The interviewees mentioned three types of problems: innovation risks, improper innovation, and inadequate innovation support. As one manager stated, “
Most innovations during the construction process are reactive and accommodating, rather than being proactive” (PM2). Another concern raised was “
the reluctance of decision-makers to take responsibility for potential innovation failures” (PM3), which tends to steer innovation decisions toward conservatism.
The third theme concerns objective conflicts. Contractor managers commonly encounter conflicting objectives, particularly between quality and safety goals versus cost and schedule targets. If not properly addressed, these conflicts may hinder the successful delivery of the project. These conflicts are generally presented in three distinct ways: trade-offs among competing objectives (such as compromising project quality and safety to meet deadlines or budget constraints), individual targets versus overall goals (such as personal career development versus project progress), and short-term versus long-term objectives (such as undertaking high-risk projects solely for short-term revenue boosts).
4.1.4 Dimension 4: Social dimension
This dimension focuses on how contractor managers deal with the external stakeholders of the construction project, specifically the government and the public.
The first theme involves the compliance and exceedance of laws and regulations. Government laws and regulations provide the foundation for construction project management. However, these represent the minimum requirements of the ethical norm system. Contractor managers are expected to conduct their practices not only in compliance with the law but also in pursuit of ethical excellence. Therefore, in addition to legal and regulatory violations, we identified two other forms of unethical behaviors: exploiting regulatory loopholes and the minimal compliance mindset. Examples include selecting construction materials that are not recommended and accepting gifts in gray areas where the lines between acceptable gifts and corruption are blurred (
Gordon and Miyake, 2001). The emergence of new ethical concerns and transformations in ethical values can shape the revision of existing laws (
Liu, 2002). When these new ethical values are embedded in legal provisions, the overall standard of social norms is raised (
Bodenheimer, 1999). This underscores the importance of fostering ethical excellence among contractor managers beyond regulatory compliance.
The second ethical theme is public safety, health, and welfare. Construction activities produce social benefits but also inevitably bring about certain negative impacts. The public, considered as external stakeholders, can be categorized into two groups. One group comprises the end users, whose safety, health, and welfare might be compromised by inferior quality or functional deficiencies in the built environment. The other group includes the surrounding community, who may endure adverse effects caused by the construction activities. The three most mentioned impacts include construction disturbance, traffic inconvenience, and environmental deterioration. Failing to appropriately mitigate these impacts can intensify tensions with the public. Relevant unethical behaviors of contractor managers include inadequate information disclosure (such as construction progress and potential hazards), neglecting public inclusion in decision-making, and insufficient compensation for public disturbances (such as noise disturbances).
4.1.5 Dimension 5: Environmental dimension
This dimension examines contractor managers’ ethical responsibilities toward the natural and cultural environments, encompassing two themes of unethical behaviors.
The first theme addresses unethical practices that result in damage to natural environment and cultural heritage. The three most frequently mentioned forms are air pollution, wastewater pollution, and solid waste pollution occurring during the construction process. Twelve interviewees believe that current construction practices adhere to procedures for the exploration and emergency protection of cultural and historical relics, thereby minimizing substantial damage to them. However, two interviewees noted that decisions about cultural heritage preservation typically lie within the purview of government authorities, making it challenging to address such issues at the project level.
The second ethical theme is resource wastage, focusing on unethical behaviors related to resource inefficiency and excessive energy consumption in construction projects. The three most frequently mentioned forms are rework wastage, inefficient resource utilization, and unnecessary cost overruns.
As presented in Table 5, each ethical theme is characterized by prominent forms of unethical behaviors. Upon frequency of mentions, it appears that the most prevalent form of unethical behavior among contractor managers is “construction disturbance,” followed by “qualification rental” and “deception in settlement.” This indicates the key aspects where ethical improvements are most needed in contractors’ involvement in construction project management.
4.2 Causal analysis of unethical behaviors
This section explores the causes and consequences of different forms of unethical behaviors based on the interview data. The analysis is approached from two perspectives: the interrelationships between different unethical behaviors and the moral competency perspective based on Rest’s Four-Component Model.
4.2.1 From the interrelationships between unethical behaviors
The interrelationships between unethical behaviors are analyzed using causation coding to extract causal inferences from the interview data (
Saldaña, 2013). Figure 2 illustrates the most salient causal relationships, where arrows represent causal inferences made by the interviewees and numbers in parentheses indicate the frequency of each mention. The analysis reveals the complexity of the causes and consequences of contractor managers’ unethical behaviors, as evidenced by the intricate dynamics of power and responsibility underlying different types of unethical behaviors.
As depicted in Fig. 2, an unethical action may involve a complex causal chain that affects or is affected by other stakeholders. It is “a world of relationships, people, things, time, and space” (
Maslen et al., 2020) berween the contractor managers’ behaviors and their final consequences. For instance, the contractor’s unjust handling of claims with subcontractors can disrupt the subcontractor’s schedule, potentially impeding efficient construction workflow and professional coordination, leading to waste of both human and material resources. Likewise, the owner’s breach of payment obligations may intensify the conflicts between safety, quality, and cost management for the contractor managers, discouraging necessary investments in safety. Additionally, the unethical strategy that contractor managers deliberately underbid during the tendering phase heightens the risk of post-commencement defaults. Breaches of contract can also propagate along the supply chain, with five interviewees noting delayed payments trickling down from owners to contractors, subcontractors, and workers. This indicates that each unethical behavior is not merely the result of individual managerial decisions but rather reflects the power structures embedded within the construction supply chain (
Nurhayati et al., 2021). The intricate organizational and institutional frameworks within construction projects can limit the capacity of lower-tier participants to resist or rectify unethical practices.
Moreover, the collective and distributed nature of construction activities makes it challenging to assign ethical responsibilities, often leading to blame-shifting among stakeholders (
Herkert et al., 2020). For instance, although almost all interviewees recognized the negative impacts of construction on the public (e.g., all 20 interviewees mentioned construction disturbance), they considered this problem to be “
unsolvable” (PM4, PM7). Four interviewees cited the inevitability of noise production and the difficulty of managing construction techniques as reasons. Six interviewees noted that public obstruction of construction, especially malicious and profit-driven cases, complicates coordination efforts. Furthermore, the division of coordination responsibilities among various managers remains unclear. For example, some managers believe that “
compensation fees should be paid by the owner, but in many cases, it’s the general contractor” (HS1). Correspondingly, contractor managers often respond negatively to these conflicts, displaying indifference and acting only when complaints are received. As they noted, “
If it’s just for one night, we proceed forcefully because we will stop the next day, making any complaints from the public irrelevant to us. If this happens every day, we have to initiate negotiations promptly” (PM3). They believe that obtaining a construction permit from the government signifies compliance and therefore do not proactively show concern or understanding for public disturbances: “
We’ll post the permit publicly; even if it affects you, coming here to make trouble means you’re breaking the law” (PM4). The decision to provide compensation, as well as the amount, often hinges on public acceptance and tolerance: “
It’s a matter of negotiation... since residents around here are office workers and they don’t have time to deal with this issue, we might offer a symbolic compensation” (PM2). This reveals the inability of contractor managers to recognize their ethical responsibilities and the lack of ethical motivation to take proactive measures to prevent potential conflicts. On the other hand, construction project management is inherently a collective endeavor, so while emphasizing the role of contractor managers, the ethical responsibilities of other participants must also be considered. It’s essential to address potential power imbalances and foster ethical accountability across all levels and parties within construction projects.
Overall, the ethical themes of “fairness and justice” and “respect for science” have emerged as the most significant, as failures in these areas can trigger or intensify other unethical behaviors, as shown in Fig. 2. For example, seven interviewees mentioned that unfairness in engineering service fees, engineering claims, and risk allocation could lead to breaches of commitment. Eight interviewees noted that unscientific scheduling demands exacerbate conflicts between schedule and quality or safety objectives, pressuring contractor managers to sacrifice quality and safety to meet milestones. Moreover, three interviewees indicated that unfair economic or scheduling claims can escalate behaviors that disregard scientific principles. The causal inferences between unethical behaviors offer a strategic pathway to their reduction, highlighting the importance of addressing misconducts related to “fairness and justice” and “respect for science” to enhance the ethical performance of contractor management.
4.2.2 From the perspective of moral competencies
This section examines the underlying causes of various unethical behaviors through the lens of Rest’s Four-Component Model (
Bebeau and Thoma, 1999;
Bebeau et al., 2016). According to this model, ethical behavior occurs only when all four stages of ethical decision-making are activated (Fig. 3). The components are as follows: ethical sensitivity—recognizing how one’s actions may affect others and interpreting the situation as moral; ethical judgment—correctly assessing whether specific actions are morally justifiable; ethical motivation—prioritizing moral values over other competing concerns; ethical implementation—possessing the necessary skills and courage to act in accordance with moral choices. These four components are often viewed as moral competencies essential for moral intervention planning. Absence of one or more of the competencies can lead to moral failings. Based on the analysis of interview data, we identify and report on the moral competency deficits associated with different unethical behaviors.
The first cause lies in managers’ deficiency in ethical sensitivity, which prevents them from recognizing certain unethical practices. For instance, when discussing intellectual property, four interviewees noted that the construction industry, especially during the construction process, rarely encounters with this concern. Five interviewees reasoned that the industry’s reliance on mature experiential knowledge and conventional practices leads to a high degree of shareability of intellectual outputs. As one interviewee (HS2) put it, “There is rarely a type of output that must not be used by others.” Nonetheless, seven interviewees recognized a prevalent oversight in safeguarding outputs such as drawings and techniques. Some comments underscore this, for example, “Many don’t bother with patents. Some innovative solutions, once digitized, are open for anyone to replicate. It’s not something many are particular about” (PM7), and “even if your construction method is patented, it might still be widely employed with no one being held to account” (S1). It becomes clear that the boundary between intellectual property and professional knowledge sharing is ambiguous, revealing a lack of ethical awareness of relevant unethical behaviors in the construction industry. Additionally, regarding dishonest settlement practices, such as inflating project quantities or costs, four interviewees deemed such actions inconsequential or non-problematic, labeling them as “merely a commercial behavior” and “something everyone in the industry does” (PM3), or “business operation tricks” (O1). This illustrates how some unethical behaviors in construction practice can be hidden by vested interests, rendering them less perceptible.
Despite recognizing that some practices are unethical, some managers may still make incorrect ethical judgments. One situation is that managers do not perceive unethical behaviors as leading to negative consequences. For example, three interviewees mentioned that upper-level leaders designating or “recommending” construction teams due to vested interests or personal relations does not necessarily have negative impacts. Instead, it might be easier to establish stable cooperative relationships compared to unfamiliar bidding teams; as a result, they are inclined to accept such arrangements. As they noted, “Most of the teams introduced through personal relations are trustworthy, which makes us feel more reassured delegating task to them,” while “working with a team that strictly adheres to the contract can pose challenges for decision-makers” (PM2). “Thus, we prefer teams that come with a recommendation or endorsement from an acquaintance” (PM5). However, managers overlook the fact that construction teams recommended through personal relations, rather than being selected via open competition, may pose safety and quality risks due to potential incompetency, undermine fairness, and damage the company’s reputation.
Another situation is that managers fail to adopt higher ethical standards in their ethical judgments. For instance, 12 interviewees noted significant improvements in occupational safety and health conditions in the Chinese construction industry over the years, especially regarding on-site accommodation. Ten interviewees believed that there’s a growing trend among managers to respect and care for workers. However, some managers argued, “Although the accident rate has decreased in recent years, the construction industry remains accident-prone... and the construction environment is relatively poor” (HS1); “Compared to (some developed countries), domestic occupational health and safety measures are basic, with almost no high-standard measures being implemented” (HS2); “We emphasize humanistic care now, but I think it’s largely superficial... there are areas that need improvement” (HT2). What factors cause discrepancies in ethical viewpoints? As one manager (PM1) put it, “The real challenge with these problems (about occupational safety and health) is, what’s your benchmark or standard?” This suggests that if managers focus solely on existing improvements without actively pursuing ethical excellence, their ethical judgment may be somewhat biased.
The third cause of unethical behavior stems from the failure to prioritize ethical considerations, particularly when facing ethical conflicts or even ethical dilemmas. Ethical conflicts arise when two or more positive moral values cannot be fully realized at the same time (
Van de Poel and Royakkers, 2011). All interviewees acknowledged the presence of conflicts between different objectives and responsibilities in construction project management. For contractor managers, the conflicts between safety and quality versus schedule and cost are particularly pronounced. While the judgment of prioritizing safety and quality is acknowledged by most managers (PM3, PM4, PM5, PM6, HC1, HC2, HT1, O4), unethical behaviors that compromise safety and quality for the sake of schedule or cost are nonetheless prevalent in practice. Examples include, “
The tower crane must pass inspection before use. But due to tight schedules, it’s sometimes put into operation before the inspection is complete” (HP1); “
Under schedule pressures, (managers) overlook construction principles by adding layers before the concrete reaches adequate strength. This results in cracks in the slab, leading to water leakage, which in turn causes steel corrosion and ultimately reduces structural safety” (O2); “
Regulations are, of course, followed as long as costs are manageable. But when it’s not feasible, some (managers) may choose methods that are riskier but less costly” (HS2). This reflects that making correct ethical judgments does not necessarily lead to the formation of ethical intent. The disconnect between ethical judgment and intent warrants further exploration.
Finally, although ethical motivation has been formed, contractor managers can face various challenges in the actual implementation. For instance, some managers mentioned, “
Current construction schedule management rarely relies on scientific methods; rushed construction is just how it is and sticking to the scientific schedule is the exception” (O1). Contractor managers often face pressure from clients’ unreasonable timeline demands (O3) and administrative directives (HS2). Three interviewees noted that “
celebratory projects” frequently come with tight deadlines. These factors make it difficult for contractor managers to prioritize safety in ethical conflicts, ultimately leading to the neglect of scientific practices. Another example pertains to unethical competition among contractor managers in the construction industry. Four interviewees believed that improper competitive practices in bidding and procurement processes are widespread, and that winning contracts purely based on merit is nearly impossible (PM3). This environmental factor further incentivizes managers to engage in unethical competitive behaviors. Under the influence of organizational and industry environmental factors, managers are expected to reject—and, when necessary, report—unethical managerial directives according to certain codes of ethics. Regrettably, only three interviewees mentioned this problem (PM1, PM2, O1), indicating that reliance solely on managers’ moral courage may be insufficient to resolve such ethical dilemmas. It’s also crucial to cultivate an environment that encourages ethical behavior and provides the necessary support when conducting ethical actions becomes difficult (
Alpern, 1983). Only with such supportive measures can ethical practices of contractors in construction project management truly flourish.
5 Conclusions and discussion
Unethical practices of contractor managers in construction project management can adversely affect project quality, public safety, and the industry’s reputation. However, there seems to be no comprehensive framework to systematically categorize and characterize these unethical behaviors, posing challenges to consistent understanding and effective interventions. To bridge this knowledge gap, this paper develops a comprehensive theoretical framework encompassing three levels, five dimensions, and 18 ethical themes, based on in-depth interviews with 20 experienced construction project managers and qualitative content analysis. The causal analysis of the identified unethical behaviors was conducted from two perspectives: the interrelationships between various unethical behavior, and the moral competency perspective based on Rest’s Four-Component Model. The following findings can be drawn.
(1) Unethical behaviors of contractor managers can be categorized into five dimensions: professional, organizational, engineering, social, and environmental dimensions. Based on frequency analysis, the three most prevalent forms of unethical behaviors across all dimensions are “construction disturbance,” “qualification rental,” and “deception in settlement.”
(2) From the causal inference analysis based on the data of contractor managers, unethical behaviors are affected by the power structures embedded within the construction supply chain, while reducing unethical behaviors requires fostering ethical accountability across all levels and parties in construction projects. “Fairness and justice” and “respect for science” emerge as the two most critical ethical themes, with their failings potentially triggering or exacerbating many other unethical practices.
(3) Unethical behaviors of contractor managers can also be attributed to the lack of moral competencies. These include lack of ethical sensitivity (e.g., toward intellectual property protection), incorrect or sub-standard ethical judgments (e.g., in cases of power abuse during construction team appointment, regarding occupational safety and health), failure to form ethical motivation (e.g., toward conflicts between safety and quality versus schedule and cost objectives), and lack of courage in ethical implementation (e.g., unscientific scheduling directives from superiors). This also underscores the industry’s inadequacy in providing a supportive ethical environment for contractor managers.
5.1 Theoretical implications
This paper yields three contributions to the existing body of knowledge.
First, this work contributes to the current literature by establishing a theoretical taxonomy framework for categorizing and characterizing unethical behaviors of contractor managers. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first instance of such an endeavor in the realm of construction industry. This framework proposes a structured vocabulary for describing unethical behaviors of contractor managers, which enhances clarity in relevant ethical discussions. It offers a unified understanding that can be consistently applied across different cultural contexts. That is because the framework’s comprehensive coverage of five dimensions and 18 ethical themes delineates the spectrum of ethical responsibilities expected of contractor managers and aligns with universally acknowledged ethical values and norms within the construction industry. We believe cross-cultural differences mainly influence the prevalence and prominence of specific unethical behaviors, while the framework’s dimensions and themes remain universally applicable. The framework also offers a foundation for developing measurable constructs that can be used in future empirical research to assess, predict, and address unethical practices.
Second, this study extends the understanding of the inherent causal interconnections between different unethical behaviors in construction project management. Individual unethical behaviors have been studied separately in various studies with few discussing how they interact and cascade through the supply chain (
Coffie et al., 2023, Kuoribo et al.,
2023). The findings provide insights into how power dynamics and responsibility assumptions influence contractor managers’ unethical behaviors. This inspires a new theoretical perspective for ethical management research by framing ethical management as a systemic issue within projects rather than isolated aspects. The proposed propositions on causal inferences also lay the foundation for future empirical research on the mechanisms and consequences of specific unethical behaviors.
Third, the study contributes a novel and plausible explanation for the causes of unethical behaviors among contractor managers by integrating them with failures in the ethical decision-making process. Across the existing literature on factors inducing unethical behaviors in the construction industry, the role of moral competencies remains underexamined (
Liu et al., 2017;
Bimbola et al., 2020;
Liu et al., 2023). The introduction of Rest’s Four-Component Model provides a structured approach to pinpointing the failing link in the generation of unethical behaviors, thereby suggesting a targeted theoretical pathway for ethical management through the improvement of moral competencies.
5.2 Practical recommendations
The following practical suggestions are made for enhancing the ethical performance of contractor management in the construction industry.
For contractor managers, the proposed framework can serve as a tool to help identify and evaluate unethical behaviors within project management processes, enabling targeted interventions. It is recommended to incorporate ethics into the performance management systems. This can be achieved by conducting ethical audits to evaluate contractor managers’ ethical performance. Second, ethical training programs should be implemented to enhance contractor managers’ moral competencies. Different training strategies should be tailored to the specific characteristics of each unethical behavior. For instance, case studies can help managers recognize that many phenomena involve ethical concerns and correct their ethical judgments on commonly accepted practices such as power abuse in appointments.
For industry authorities, first, it is essential to establish ethical guidelines and codes in construction project management to regulate managerial behaviors. The ethical framework developed in this paper provides a basis for developing such guidelines. In addition to focusing on contractor managers, these guidelines should also address power structures in the construction supply chain to encourage ethical accountability among all stakeholders. Second, industry authorities should provide institutionalized support for contractor managers when they encounter ethical dilemmas, such as establishing helplines for guidance and avenues for anonymous reporting.
5.3 Limitations and future work
This study has some limitations. First, while in-depth interviews provide rich insights, the study’s reliance on qualitative data limits its ability to quantify the prevalence or severity of specific unethical behaviors. Future studies might employ quantitative surveys to provide a more comprehensive understanding of unethical behaviors of contractor managers. Second, the preliminary causal inferences between unethical behaviors are based merely on the frequency of mentions by the interviewees and shouldn’t be seen as definitive causal relationships. Future research could further investigate and verify these propositions.
PDF
(1881KB)
