BADGER

Construction management education today is challenged by a shortage of faculty with leadership skills. The 140 CM programs in the U.S. are staffed by 700 professors 100 to 200 more are needed. But programs struggle with many fundamental issues when trying to attract new faculty.

The perception continues that construction is primitive, outdated and inefficient. Constructors still need to be convinced that a more efficient industry will maximize profits. Academics in engineering and architectural schools must realize that CM research can create value that rivals their own.

Construction education has issues not unlike those in engineering. Academic programs want to create an engineer who is not just a commodity or a detail-oriented "equations" person, but rather a professional who brings value. Some CM professors, even young ones, seem to be oriented and trained to manage, control and inspect. Concepts of leadership, optimized use of resources and transfer of risk and control to increase accountability are underappreciated.

The dilemma appears to be in universities' traditional faculty hiring and promotion processes. These produce professors strong in management, control and direction at a time when industry needs graduates who are strong in people skills and leadership. CM professors' core values may not be in alignment with industry leadership's expectations of graduates' skills. Can faculty with management styles produce graduates with leadership styles? Logic and past experience tell us no.

University funding impacts programs in many ways, such as research assistant stipends and faculty salaries. This investment is driven by outdated perceptions and is often determined by the CM program’s organizational position within the university structure. Some programs are housed under architectural or engineering colleges that control budgets and allocate funds.

To illustrate the inequality of funding allocations, one engineering college was allotted $8,000 per year per engineering student. The CM program was given $3,000.

Related Links: Industry Mentoring Links Are Becoming Mutually Beneficial On-Line Learning Will Help Construction Practitioners Teach As New Tool Lands on More Campuses, Students Seek ‘A’ in BIM For Sustainability and Clean-Energy Majors, Global Warming Is Hot Hard-Hit Civil Engineers Recall Fatal Day, But Virginia Tech Moves On Viewpoint: Faculty Pipeline Is Running on Empty Viewpoint: Respect We Want Must Be Earned

Unfortunately, within some universities, individual budgets are not available for public scrutiny. More open budgets would promote discussion and be self-auditing from a fairness point of view. Construction industry efforts are required to change perceptions held by engineering and design academics and encourage them to invest in critical CM research and faculty areas.

A recent CM faculty search to alleviate the professor shortage generated only foreign-born Ph.D. candidates. They are willing to study under frugal conditions and are technically focused, hardworking and bring diversity. But many are challenged by culture in people skills and leadership.

We need to create conditions that will attract and retain enough domestic Ph.D. candidates to feed the faculty pipeline. If sufficient financial support is not available, U.S. candidates increasingly will opt for an industry career rather than one in academia. Experience has shown that a $25,000 annual supplement is needed to augment research stipends to retain an American Ph.D. candidate. Without it, teaching and research will continue to depend on foreign-born faculty.

Fortunately, universities and industry are revamping their hiring criteria to reflect that logical thinking and the realization that skill in motivating and leading teams is as valuable as experience. The teaching of leadership skills has become noticeable.

Industry has responded positively and expects today’s CM graduates to be well versed in technologies, to provide leadership and to create environments where employees "want to do things."

Change in CM education is under way: More programs are being elevated to "school" status in universities' organizational structure; industry investment in en­dowments is growing; more Ph.D. programs are being created; and leadership education and research is being recognized.

The greatest difficulty, however, will be coordinating and marketing these successful initiatives. The fragmented construction industry continues to talk with separate voices when it needs just one to clearly articulate that we all have the same challenge.

William W. Badger is a professor in the Del E. Webb School of Construction at Arizona State University, Tempe as well as the school’s former director. It is a unit of the Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering.

If you have an idea for a column, please contact Viewpoint editor William J. Angelo at william_angelo@mcgraw-hill.co