Improving the Mental Health Status of Project Management Practitioners in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Sectors during COVID-19 Pandemic

The consequences of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic have given rise to unforeseen psychosocial risks in project management (PM) practices in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) project organizations, resulting in a decline in mental health among PM-practitioners. This decline in mental health among PM-practitioners is considered to be a significant problem with substantial economic and social effects. Given the negative effects of poor mental health in projects, identification of causes and possible interventions to tackle this problem becomes vital. Several studies have been conducted to explore these risks and organizational interventions for poor mental health. However, the existence of COVID-19 related psychosocial threats causing poor mental health limits the capacity of traditional interventions. The development of organizational interventions requires the capture of the sources of the risks that can trigger instances of poor mental health. There is scant research focused on improvement of the mental health status of PM-practitioners in the AEC project organizations during and after the pandemic. This study aims to identify the mental health status of PM-practitioners in the AEC project organization and define ways to improve it. This is achieved through examination of COVID-19 psychosocial risks, organizational interventions and development of a psychosocial risk management framework. This research adopted the job demand resources (JDR) theory to underpin the psychosocial risk management framework. Literature reviews and expert forums were conducted to examine COVID-19 psychosocial risks and potential organizational interventions. Moreover, hypothetical relationships between COVID-19 psychosocial risks, organizational interventions and mental health were tested to develop a psychosocial risk management framework. Nineteen relevant COVID-19 psychosocial risks for the mental health in AEC projects were identified. Among the psychosocial risks, "Lacks leadership knowledge and skills", "Fears of losing job", and "Difficulty in balancing personal and work needs" are ranked as the three most critical COVID-19 psychosocial risks in the AEC project organization. The least critical COVID-19 psychosocial risks include "Difficulty in managing project cost", "Difficulty in managing project contracts" and "Disruption to supply chain". This study has found twenty relevant organizational interventions that are suitable for mitigating COVID-19 conditions that may lead to poor mental health. Out of the twenty organizational interventions, "Hiring additional PM practitioners to distribute project workload", "Providing training on how to balance work and family" and "Providing additional childcare supports" have been ranked as the three most effective interventions for promotion of mental health. In contrast, the least effective organizational interventions include "Enforcing the use of personal protective equipment", "Providing support for working remotely", and "Providing support for working remotely". Perceptions of PM-practitioners about their AEC project environment revealed that the three strongest indicators to stress during COVID-19 are "Not feeling confident about one's ability to handle problems", "Not feeling that one was on top of things", and "Unable to control irritations". In comparison, "Feeling that one was unable to control the important things", "Feeling difficulties in one's PM-oriented work", and "Feeling that one could not cope with all the things" are the least strong indicators to stresses for PM practitioners during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of the data analysis in this research revealed that the changed working environment due to the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted PM-practitioners' mental health. This study confirmed that organizational interventions positively supported PM practitioners and thereby further upheld the JDR theory. This study has also statistically ruled out the potential moderation effect of organizational interventions on the relationship between COVID-19 psychosocial risks and mental health.