Theoretical model for mental health management of project management practitioners in architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) project organizations

Abstract

Purpose

This conceptual paper aims to develop a multi-level mental health management framework for project management practitioners (PMPs) in architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) project organizations through organizational design theories to extend current knowledge on mental health by revealing organizational, project and external environmental factors contributing to mental health management in AEC project organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

A systematic literature review was adopted to propose a theoretical model that integrated five organizational design theories: institutional theory, agency theory, resources-based theory (RBT), contingency theory and complexity theory.

Findings

The model reveals permanent organization, project organization and external environment factors for mental health management in AEC project organizations. It further proposed hypothetical interrelationships between elements of permanent organization, project organization, external environment and mental health management indicators to unravel the resultant effects of the interactions on mental health of PMPs.

Originality/value

This research contributes to the body of knowledge by developing a multi-level mental health management framework that identify and shows how combination permanent organization, project organization and external environment elements impact mental health of PMPs in AEC project organizations. It offers a model that offers guidance to practitioners on permanent organization and project organization management practices that can be implemented to improve mental health.

Citation

Tijani, B., Jin, X. and Osei-Kyei, R. (2023), "Theoretical model for mental health management of project management practitioners in architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) project organizations", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 914-943. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2021-0247