Study on Circular Economy Implementation Propensity of Construction Companies in Context of Prevailing Management Styles

Abstract

The construction sector significantly impacts the environment. Buildings and non-building structures require natural resources and technical nutrients to be constructed and maintained. One of the most important challenges is the mitigation of their usage for construction projects. In the context of insufficient knowledge about the most effective leadership patterns for sustainable construction projects, one may wonder if there is one dominant style of management represented by construction companies. In turn, the challenges faced by these organizations can be related to how to effectively implement the circular economy (CE) concept, and thus reduce the negative externalities of the construction industry. Transition to sustainable construction requires the involvement of change leaders. In this article, based on a literature review and questionnaire, it was revealed that it is extremely difficult to distinguish one prevailing leadership style in construction companies. Besides, a path to CE maturity has been shown as a continual pursuit. The consistency enables effective promotion of the concept of CE in the construction company. The research allowed the identification of three explicit phases, disharmony, euphoria, and harmony, in becoming the CE-matured construction enterprise.

1. Introduction

Waste collected during construction and demolition phases is currently a priority for many policies at local, regional, and global levels [1]. Although many issues connected with energy efficiency are being widely studied in the building sector, methods of solving the pollution problem are still in their embryonic stage [2]. The concept that is gaining increasing recognition, especially among legislative decision makers in the European Union, is the circular economy (CE). Its applicability in different sectors is an evident advantage. In the construction industry, its implementation consists mainly of a new design philosophy in which different disciplines are integrated in advance to check their applicability and constructability.

The organization is the fundamental assumption on which the methodology of a system theory is based. In a systems approach, instead of dealing with individual segments of the organization separately, it is treated as a whole and a purposeful system composed of interrelated parts. Similarly, in the case of construction companies, apart from the main processes, there are also several side processes (managerial or supporting). A model of the CE-oriented construction company system is presented in Figure 1.

One of the key challenges for the construction industry is the transition from an extensive development model based on the concept of linear production, which treats the used product at the end of its life as waste [3], to a sustainable development model involving production in a closed circulation of resources. Process management in the context of circular economy is not limited only to waste management [4]. It should also cover human resources management, including motivating and inspiring employees’ behavior [5]. In the realities of construction, project management becomes an emanation of the aspirations for perfect planning and coordination of all processes, leading to the creation of a product in the form of a building or non-building structure.

Construction project managers are usually people with formal knowledge of project management. It is extremely rare to observe that this person has leadership skills at the same time. This may be due to the illusory belief that the most important functions of project management are focused on scope, schedule, budget, or quality requirements (the ‘iron triangle’), especially in large public sector development projects [6]. The conviction that it will result in a successful project is often very strong. However, a person who cannot mobilize and inspire team members (a good manager but not a leader) can often disappoint the project owner. Mainly, the determination and mobilization of employees provide the final effect and success of the construction project. The implementation of projects with even greater than average restrictions in terms of meeting the circular economy requirements requires a proven leadership model.

The project manager’s leadership style is perceived as a root source of construction project success [7]. Leadership helps influence and inspire others. Leaders can develop and retain the desired organizational culture, which may create an innovative climate by generating new shared values [8].

Although this matter seems very crucial, the Scopus database includes one document result reached by the following keyword mix: ‘Circular Economy’, ‘leadership’, ‘construction project’ [9], and none after the combination of ‘Circular Economy’, ‘leadership’, ‘construction company’. Therefore, due to a limited number of studies that take into consideration human and organizational behavior, as well as the leadership models and their influences on the sustainable built environment [10,11], this article addresses the issue of leadership as a prerequisite for the dissemination of knowledge about the Circular Economy in construction companies. The roles of individual stakeholders of construction projects in shaping corporate culture based on CE principles are explained in the manuscript.

The implementation of circular economy principles in construction companies requires appropriate project management techniques along with the most efficient leadership models. Somehow, a preliminary analysis of the literature reveals the presumed gap in this area.

Consequently, showing a changeable leadership ecosystem based on an evolutionary approach, and situational leadership theory developed by Hersey and Blanchard, were the final concerns of the research. All considerations were based on the desk research and survey methods.

2. Prevailing Management Styles in Construction Companies

Management is an important part of running a business. According to the definition, a manager is a person who supervises and directs the work of others. How management teams perform their functions is related to the company’s development. Given that human capital has the most valuable to an organization, a manager should have an appropriate influence on the employees which makes her/him a leader. The methods used here are important, as they give managers the power to inspire appropriate attitudes in workers. Moreover, relationships between managers and others, as well as an appropriate work culture, are significant too. A manager should be able to alter the level of employee involvement, motivation, or creativity. Proper communication between the manager and the subordinate results in diligent task performance and more effective goal achievement. Employees are often the source of many ideas; they can help to reduce costs, improve the product, or enhance customer service. They can also be intrinsically motivated to meet organizational goals [12].

The way the company is managed depends mainly on the leader’s character traits, therefore managers should be selected carefully. Each person has a specific personality that determines her/his style of behavior. Leaders must also remember that each subordinate has a set of features that define work motivation and expectations. The character itself can be considered as a combination of values, virtues, and personality traits. However, only truly good managers invest in both the competencies and character of all people in the organization—from leaders and managers to employees to enable equity, diversity, and inclusion in the workplace [13].

An application of the appropriate management style also depends on other conditions such as the level of self-discipline, responsibility, determination, and intentions of employees, the size of the qualification gap between the leader and the subordinate, technical factors, the risk of irreversibility of the consequences of poorly performed tasks, etc.

Therefore, management style is a relatively permanent and repeatable way of exerting the superior’s influence on subordinates to stimulate and coordinate their team activity aimed at achieving organizational goals efficiently and effectively [14].

A process of managing usually involves planning tasks of the others in a team and supervising their work. It has diverse meanings depending on the manager’s position and role in the organization. Most often, it refers to a level of the organizational structure (top management, middle management, operational management). Their roles depend mostly on how the organization is structured. It should also be noted that individual managerial posts usually demand some skills or qualification requirements, as well as formal and legal regulations including industry-specific features. For some functions, these regulations become a priority in the selection and evaluation of candidates. The position of a construction manager is symbolic. Legal regulations in different countries determine the technical perspective along with the legal and human safety issues. However, the problem of professionalization of this group of managers should also be considered from the economic and social perspectives. A modern construction site manager should properly organize the site and efficiently manage it to achieve the planned goals of a construction project. Its function is related to the entire construction process, from planning, managing, organizing and supervising the work of subordinates (mainly construction workers), to project closure.

If there are many goals in the project, and the project is comparably complex, a contract manager should be also hired, and when this is not enough, additional functional managers dealing with risk, occupational risk and safety, or circular economy issues are needed [15,16,17,18].

There exists an impression that in today’s organizations, where management is based more and more on the scientific principles of the theory of economy, as well as psychology and sociology, the concept of leadership becomes even more significant than ever before. Effective leadership models in such enterprises are becoming their key success factors [19].

Relationships between managers and employees have troubled researchers for decades. Whereas some reports maintain the term “leader” was first used in the 14th century, “leadership” has been known for more than three hundred years now. However, the scientific approach to the subject started in the 20th century [20]. In the 1930s, Kurt Lewin revealed the relationship between management and the atmosphere in a team. He also distinguished three basic styles of leadership—autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire— that should be perceived as a triangle [21]. This is the most typical division, and its approaches and theories are useful in many areas to this day [22]. This classification was treated as a baseline in subsequent parts of the work.

Another theory related to the manager’s approach to employees was described by Rensis Likert. The researcher identified four basic management style patterns—exploitive authoritative, benevolent authoritative, consultive, and participative [23].

In turn, the research of R. Blake and J. Mouton proved that managers do not have to limit themselves to steering based on one specific style. According to scientists, there are many intermediate styles, so they created and popularized a managerial grid built of two axes: vertical, which defines concern for people (scale 1–9); and horizontal, which illustrates concern for production (scale 1–9) [24].

The Life Cycle Theory of Leadership [25] by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard is based on the evolutionary relationship between task and relationship and “maturity”. The latter is defined as the relative independence and ability to accept responsibility [22]. The key to success is matching the leadership style to the employee’s level of maturity. Otherwise, the employee does not receive stimulation adequate to his needs, which can lead to frustration. Such a model of managerial behavior is also known as the situational leadership style.

Additionally, there are more classic leadership theories, including Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y [26], Fred Fiedler’s Leadership Contingency Model [27], or the 3-D Theory [28] by William J. Reddin. However, modern patterns of managerial behavior in contemporary times usually rely on the improvement, modification, and clarification of the existing classification systems.

Models of leadership in the construction industry have been somehow overlooked. In spite of this, some references reveal that situational leadership style is the best pattern one can apply to a construction project. It may allow team members to take responsibility for their work, as well as to participate in the decision-making process [29]. However, it has to be underlined that this sector is different from the others due to its several unique features (contractors are price takers, projects are fixed in location, there is a large number of stakeholders, a construction process is subject to many regulations, etc.) [30]. The changing circumstances for doing business (new legal regulations, pandemics, political conflicts, wars) and a turbulent environment determine a renewed vision of leadership and motivation to restore positive outcomes in construction companies.

This article tries to verify the dominant management styles in construction companies, compare them with existing patterns against the challenges related to i.a. sustainable development, and to show the direction of possible changes.

3. From Linear to Circular Economy in the Construction Sector

From the earliest times, people have produced specific goods or provided various services as influenced by the needs observed among potential buyers. Organizations of people and necessary resources (today known as enterprises) were created to react to this market demand. In this context, construction companies are businesses involved in the construction process of facilities (buildings/non-building structures) as well as their improvements related to construction works.

The construction sector is facing more and more ambitious investment projects. Their success depends on introducing innovations of a technological or managerial nature as quickly as possible. Nowadays, making the right decisions has become a key factor in taking a competitive advantage over other entities.

The execution phase of construction projects requires significant improvements. The largest contractors are most eager to introduce innovations as soon as possible, whereas smaller ones are about to observe and prepare for the implementation of new solutions in the future.

Besides, for major market players, ecology has become a key success factor. Improvements in the energy efficiency of buildings as well as alternative energy sources seem to be the hottest topics in this matter at the time. However, there are more challenges to be worried about. An ecology friendly construction phase is intended to reduce the amount of construction and demolition waste (CDW) and minimize energy consumption during the whole life cycle of the project including the production and transport of building materials. From this point of view, a life cycle assessment can be a useful approach for deriving a reliable comparison of building designs confronted with their environmental performance [31].

Additionally, new materials and technological solutions (including prefabrication) are expected to accelerate the construction process, make work quicker, mitigate the human factor, and minimize the environmental impact.

In construction, similar to other industries, there are two main types of material used in production processes: natural (timber, water, soil, aggregates etc.) and artificial (composite, plastic, etc.). These materials are frequently transformed in shape and composition to be inbuilt into structures. Nowadays, a majority of the used products go to landfill when they reach their end of life. However, a significant proportion of this waste should not end up there. There is usually a certain value that can be maintained in a cycle. The circular economy (CE) is the solution to this problem and helps to keep the circulation of the products, both renewables and finite materials, for as long as possible. To visualize the complexity of the challenge, the most important factors related to construction companies can be divided into three main groups: people, processes, design and technology. The details of the proposed scheme are presented in Figure 2.

A construction company that decides to implement the concept of abandoning the linear model in favor of the circular economy approach, with the appropriate use of the innovative potential, may achieve better economic results with lower environmental costs. According to Ellen MacArthur Foundation, the two main types of materials (natural and artificial) can be seen in biological and technical cycles. In the first material, the nutrients from biodegradable materials are finally returned to the Earth through composting or anaerobic digestion, which helps to regenerate the planet. In the second cycle, products are circulated through reuse, repair, remanufacture, and recycling processes so that they may never become waste [32]. This means that even the construction industry may become CE-friendly as long as certain requirements are met.

The term CE usually refers the philosophy of breaking from the current way of thinking about products based on a linear model and promoting a new production system created based on the perpetual circulation of resources. Due to the multitude of manufacturing processes within construction projects, many types of waste are generated in large quantities. When considering supply chain models in the construction industry, it should be borne in mind that they reflect the mutual relationship between stakeholders in construction projects in the field of material flow. As it has been reported in the literature, a reverse supply chain directly refers to the circular economy [33]. When it comes to adding value to customers, one can consider a model that is shaped in the form of a closed loop (Figure 3).

Each working package related to the implementation of a new production effect is characterized by standard material usage. It determines the quantity necessary to perform a unit of process or an element of the structure, under all applicable technical and rational, i.e., economical, material management standards. The standard of material usage includes not only the amount of material built into the building/non-building structure (basic consumption) but also the amount of waste and losses. Even the most restrictive set of procedures will not limit them to an absolute minimum. In addition, demolition processes provide waste, which is treated as worthless matter.

The circular economy, as an idea on the one hand, and as real action on the other hand, supports the construction industry by reducing its negative impact on the environment. Nowadays, mainly practical examples relating to concrete [35] and asphalt [36] technologies dominate the literature. However, this concept applies to every material and can be viewed from different angles represented by the various players involved in the construction project.

We can distinguish five phases throughout the whole life of a construction project. Usually, it starts with an idea that is refined in the pre-project. The next step is to create organizational, financial, economic, and technical plans. The architect is responsible for the latter. The selection of a contractor for construction works enables the construction stage to be completed, resulting in a product (building/non-building structure) that can be used for many years. The closure is the last phase of the project, deciding what will eventually happen to the construction material used in the project. The five-phase model is shown in Figure 4. It sets out the fundamental tasks of the project manager as related to circular economy.

As can be seen in the figure above, different stakeholders of construction projects are involved in different phases. The degree of their involvement in the circular economy is shown in

Table 1. Potential for using CE by various stakeholders of construction projects [16,34,37,38].

Stakeholder’s Name	First Phase of the Involvement	Last Phase of the Involvement	Potential Activities	Dominant Risks
Investor	− Pre-project phase initiation	Closure − end of project closeout and termination phase	− setting CE requirements for an architect, − setting CE-related requirements for a contractor, − selection of investment location enabling materials recovery,	− the unprofitability of investments in CE (financial risk), − an extension of construction time (schedule risk), − lack of suitable architects, contractors, and managers,
Contractor	− Execution the start of the contractor’s mobilization phase	Handover − end of contractor’s mobilization phase	− selecting ambassadors of the circular economy (ACEs), − setting ACEs in the organizational structure of the enterprise, − establishment of the CE training program, − promoting CE as a part of corporate culture, − carrying out the reorganization/reengineering processes, − search for new technologies for the recovery of building materials,	− resistance to changes among employees, − incorrect and inefficient training, − wrong organizational changes, − lack of appropriate technologies at the time of operation
Architect	− Start of planning and design phase	Execution − end of architectural supervision	− proposing CE-friendly design solutions, − design by CE, − analyzing the possibilities of reusing materials after their end-of-life,	− lack of appropriate competencies, − lack of appropriate tools for analysis
Project manager	Pre-project phase − definition of project	Closure − fulfillment of project goals	− selecting circular economy managers (CEMs), − setting CEM in the organizational structure of the project, − using measures of the degree of involvement in the idea of CE, − preparing response plans for CE-related risks, − selecting project partners according to their levels of CE maturity	− inappropriate project assumptions, − bad diagnosis of project status, − inefficient planning and risk management, − lack of knowledge about all project activities

. Additionally, the risks that should be considered at each phase were included.

The table above shows that CE can be considered on many levels, including both the construction company and the project. It has been noted that some risks give rise to uncertainty about future CE-related states.

Finally, it can be seen that a lack of knowledge and tools hampers adoption of the circular economy in the building sector, which in turn is treated as a macro-level transformation to a sustainable economy [39,40]. Therefore, to promote supply chains loops in construction projects, it seems inevitable to put stress on a controlled leadership. The specificity of the building sector implies the need for considering the attributes of business activity from the whole life-cycle perspective.

4. Materials and Methods

This part discusses the concept of circular economy in construction companies in the context of prevailing leadership styles from the point of view of scientific methods used in research.

An algorithm (Figure 5) starts with a collection of convictions among the authors about the combination of three areas: a construction company, its management processes, and circular economy. The next step culminates with the formulation of the scientific challenge. In the next phase, the available literature sources were analyzed. Sixty-four articles became the basis for the qualitative assessment of the studied subject, while twenty-five independently selected documents were used for the quantitative analysis of keywords. In the first iteration, the ScienceDirect database was used primarily, and the google.com search engine as a compliment, but in the second, the Scopus database was used. Both scientific databases contain information on published scientific works, with ScienceDirect showing their full versions from Elsevier’s journals, and Scopus covering abstract-only versions extracted from different major publishers.

The next step is to conduct a survey, develop the results, and formulate conclusions and generalizations. To implement the above, it is worth noting that the significant influence of the management staff on the development of a construction company. Leaders’ skills in managing human resources may impact the level of employee motivation, which will result in the conscientious fulfillment of duties. Three leadership styles described by Kurt Lewin were taken into account: autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire. A quantitative method of a questionnaire was used to collect the necessary information for the research. It consisted of 12 questions; in 9 questions, the respondent had to select the most accurate response on a scale (1–5), while the last three closed questions required one answer. The demographic questions concerned gender, seniority in a managerial position, and the size of the enterprise.

The questions asked were short, simple, non-suggestive, precise, and consistent. The questionnaire, focused only on building companies, was sent to 231 respondents from Poland by e-mail redirecting to the Microsoft Forms platform. The interviewed people completed the questionnaire electronically.

The study covered top and middle management, as well as site managers from Poland. They represented both general contractors, as well as entities carrying out construction works as subcontracting. These were construction enterprises of various sizes, ranging from micro-enterprises to large enterprises. Specific respondents were deliberately selected to cover all of the construction markets. The choice of candidates was accepted by experts in construction management. Thirty-two questionnaires were successfully received, comprising 13.8% of all sent requests.

5. Results

At first, the data from 25 records from Scopus, obtained by the following keyword mix ‘Circular Economy’, ‘management’, ‘construction project’ (available in Supplementary Materials Table S1), were filtered. One conference review was excluded from the list, so 24 documents (citation information, bibliographical information, abstracts & keywords) were finally exported to an external file (*.ris) and then the text analysis was performed in MAXQDA 2022, which is a software program designed for computer-assisted qualitative analysis of text and multimedia. Overally, 8560 words were analyzed, with all records not related to the topic of work excluded, and then a word cloud was created (Figure 6). The word frequencies can be found in the Supplementary Materials (Table S2). The most popular keyword was ‘construction’—182 cases. ‘Management’ was ranked fifth, and ‘project’, ‘waste’, and ‘circular’ were also in the top five.

The next step was to quantify the questionnaires. Out of 32 questionnaires, 23 were completed by men, which constitutes 72% of all responses, while 9 were completed by women (28%). The disproportion in the distribution of gender is quite significant here. Men dominate in managerial positions in construction companies. This result confirms the prevailing trend in companies. According to the “Women in Business 2020” report carried out by Grant Thornton, the proportion of women in senior management in the European Union is 30% while the global level is almost similar (29%) [41]. Of course, this is not a satisfactory result. Women in managerial positions are a minority also in the construction industry; the reasons include stereotyping, too little faith in their abilities to achieve success, modesty, or lack of courage.

Most respondents declared that they work in a managerial position in a micro-enterprise (47% of all surveyed people). In a small enterprise, 22% of respondents worked as a manager, and this proportion was similar in medium-sized enterprises. Only 9% of the respondents came from companies that employ 250 or more persons.

A significant proportion of respondents had been performing a managerial role for 6-10 years (74%). The result suggests that construction companies usually employ leaders with an average level of professional experience, and their seniority is equivalent to the needs imposed by the labor market.

To examine the prevailing leadership style in construction companies, the survey contained nine questions relating to the ways of managing the company, the possibility for employees to express their opinions, their responsibility for matters related to the company, motivating systems, and setting goals. For each question, a five-point scale was proposed, including answers of occurrence frequency (where ‘1′ means ‘never’ and ‘5′ means ‘always’). Later, a consensus was established about a distribution of the three leadership styles by Kurt Lewin on the scale proposed (

Table 2. Survey framework—questions, potential answers, and ranges of related leadership styles.

Question	Never (1)	From Time to Time (2)	Sometimes (3)	Usually (4)	Always (5)
Q1: I encourage employees to express their ideas and opinions	A	A	L-F	D	D
Q2: I leave the division of labor to the employees	A	A	D	D	L-F
Q3: I help employees to develop their strengths	A	L-F	L-F	D	D
Q4: I comment and evaluate the work of the team	L-F	L-F	D	A	A
Q5: I participate in the work of my subordinates	L-F	A	A	D	D
Q6: I avoid making decisions	A	A	D	L-F	L-F
Q7: I keep track of all bugs	L-F	D	D	A	A
Q8: I give orders and commands	L-F	D	D	A	A
Q9: I lead a very effective group	L-F	D	D	A	A

A—Autocratic, D—Democratic, L-F—Laissez-faire.

).

To verify the prevailing leadership style in construction companies, the survey contained questions relating to the ways of managing the company and its projects, if employees could express their opinions, how responsibility appeared in the company, questions about motivating systems, and setting goals. The results are presented in Figure 7.

There is a significant distribution of the respondents’ reactions to individual issues. Fortunately, thanks to the survey framework adopted above, it is possible to define an equivalent leadership style. It is useful to calculate a final score that is the frequency-weighted response of the answers on a scale of 1–5 (

Table 3. Survey summary—equivalent leadership style.

Question	Final Score	Equivalent Leadership Style
Q1	4.09	D
Q2	2.51	A/D
Q3	4.18	D
Q4	3.38	D
Q5	3.85	D
Q6	1.25	A
Q7	3.88	A
Q8	4.03	A
Q9	4.28	A

A—Autocratic, D—Democratic, L-F—Laissez-faire.

).

The survey summary shows that it is not always possible to precisely define the prevailing leadership style. However, one can note that the liberal pattern (laissez-faire) is not present on the list and hence it cannot be treated as dominant. On average, respondents taking part in the survey show an autocratic or democratic pattern, but it is impossible to indicate a dominant pattern for a whole sample.

6. Emerging Evolutionary Leadership Model

6.1. Basic Attributes of Models

The pursuit of a high level of perfection in mastering the management of the basic attributes of construction projects becomes a rudiment of the new leadership model. To ensure appropriate dissemination of knowledge about the CE, it is necessary to create a specific ecosystem based on the CE maturity [42], achieved through the appropriate strategy and corporate culture.

Figure 8 shows a situation in which there is a lack of harmony in the values represented by the employees of a given enterprise. A change leader is emerging—the so-called leader of the CE in a construction company, also known as the circular economy manager (CEM) [16]. Her/his competencies are indisputable; he/she can be a graduate or post-graduate studies in the field of CE in construction or a participant in training/workshops on such topics. At this time, only he/she and the top management (because they hired the employee) are aware of the advantages of managing construction projects under CE requirements. The beliefs and values of the leader are usually divergent from the beliefs and values of other employees. The CEM’s effort should be directed towards sharing these qualities with others and educating them. This stage is characterized by the evolution of CE maturity, and when it comes to the period it can be considered the adolescence of Circular Economy culture in a company. The success of this phase depends on the level of commitment of the leader, the belief in the correctness of matters, as well as the consistent pursuit of change.

The next stage is euphoria (Figure 9). After a monotonous period of internal organizational changes, employee training, discussions, consultations, reorganization, and sometimes reengineering in a construction company, the phase is reached where all beliefs and values of the leader and other employees become shared. This is not a state given once and for all; turnovers and periodic failures, as well as routine can lead to these qualities becoming diverged again. The CEM’s effort should be directed toward maintaining a state of euphoria. This moment, M(t₀), can be called CE-maturity equilibrium. Further actions must lead to the perfection of actions and the associated harmony.

The harmony (Figure 10) that can be observed in construction companies, related to achieving perfection in mastering procedures under CE principles by all employees, is the final stage of the pursuit. It crowns the efforts of CEM, as well as those of employees who have gained the conviction that their beliefs and values are common to all. The newly created corporate culture can be a condition for the success of a construction company that uses the advantages of the CE approach.

However, for the transformation described above to be realistic, it must be conditioned by appropriate leadership models.

6.2. Modeling Leadership

Effective business activities depend on the quality of individual employee’s behavior [43]. To effectively implement construction tasks, it is necessary to use appropriate tools to use power and cleverly influence the subordinates. Acting as a leader who should be equipped with sensitivity and diagnostic ability is not easy [44]. There are many leadership theories also covering various leadership styles (autocratic, democratic, laissez-faire). When choosing the right strategy, one can be guided by the achievements of modern science, including situational leadership theory [25]. The style, developed by Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard, is based on the following assumption: a good superior should provide his subordinates with what they need to effectively carry out the tasks set. Leadership is conditioned by the fact the boss should base his/her influence on subordinates not only on the professional hierarchy, but also on the authority he/she builds around him/her [45].

Therefore, at the beginning of activities aimed at transforming a construction company into an organization based on procedures under CE principles, some resistance from employees should be expected. A situational leadership model in a construction company is shown in Figure 11. It can be noted that an appropriate approach at the beginning is to use high discipline (manager—drill sergeant). One should gradually strengthen the instructions and transform the approach (manager—athletic coach).

Once all the rules are understood by most employees, one can begin to limit the discipline by replacing it with greater concern for the wellbeing of subordinates (manager—teacher-counsellor). As work is not a military training ground, it is necessary to balance management styles with the effects observed. When everybody starts to understand what CE is about, what the rules, are and why it is beneficial to keep it, the guidance can be limited and a relaxed attitude towards employees can begin (manager—buddy).

This model emerged based on parent–child relationships described in literature [46].

7. Discussion

Environmental issues have recently become the focus of consideration in the modern paradigm of management of construction companies [4,6,47]. Nowadays, it is believed they should achieve a sustainable transition to cleaner production as soon as possible [48,49]. Noticing the significant impact of these organizations, which participating in various construction projects, on the natural environment has become the beginning of changes in thinking about their resources [50]. It has become necessary to review the needs of enterprises, reduce the degree of consumption, and to develop new technologies [33] or methods of process management [4,51] following the principles of sustainable development [52,53,54]. One can note that ecological modernization is possible by scaling up the implementation of environmental management practices. Nevertheless, for construction companies of various sizes (from micro to large enterprises) to effectively implement the principles of sustainable development, including circular economy principles, they must be properly managed [15,53]. Organizations are people, and the human factor usually confers a significant source of risk [18]. Therefore, it is necessary to use relevant leadership models to motivate people [15,55].

Unfortunately, the current state of knowledge in the field of the implementation of the circular economy concept in construction companies presented in scientific journals mainly covers the issues of waste management and developing zero-waste strategies. There are also very specific challenges, such as BIM as a tool supporting sustainable construction, prefabrication as a solution for complex problems of deconstruction, as well as material engineering as a support for finding new and improved materials. However, there are few professionally applied issues relating to the selection of optimal management patterns at individual stages of a construction project. Of course, key market players should not be left without any support and allowed to quote their favorite phrase in the construction sector: ‘whatever will be, will be’. This article tried to fill this gap.

The main purpose of this study was to identify the dominant leadership models in construction companies. The answers given by the respondents in the survey were, in most cases, unambiguous, which allowed easy identification of the preferences related to leadership patterns. Taking into account the three main styles of management—autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire, almost no respondents behave liberally in business. It can be concluded that managers of construction companies do not respect behaviors followed by the lack of control over the group, avoiding making decisions, not participating in the work of their subordinates, or being unaware of mistakes [30].

Managers are aware that the laissez-faire style leads to ineffective work of subordinates. Most of the respondents participating in the survey showed autocratic or democratic preferences. In questions concerning encouraging employees to express their ideas and opinions, willingness to help with self-development, the division of labor between subordinates, and participation in the work of their employees, the respondents showed a democratic style of management. The above questions concerned mainly the relationship between the leader and the subordinate, which proves that managers try to maintain good relationship with employees. When asked about making decisions, tracking all errors, and issuing orders, the respondents described themselves as autocratic managers who were oriented towards the tasks and goals of the enterprise.

In the article, the project manager (PM) was assigned a unique role in shaping the circular economy culture. They perform various activities in different phases of a construction project. In the beginning, the PM is mainly responsible for setting overall CE measures for the project, setting initial CE requirements for the design phase, and setting provisionary CE-related requirements for the construction phase. During the planning and design phase, PM should prepare response plans for CE-related risks, supervise the most efficient location selection, hire CE managers, and perform CE procurement. During construction, the PM is responsible for supporting a constant CE improvement during construction, CE assurance to implement it as a part of corporate/project team culture, and helping in the reorganization/reengineering processes as needed. During the operation and maintenance phase, the PM manages CE-based maintenance systems, searches for new ways of sharing, and finds improved technologies for the reuse, recovery, and recycling of construction materials. Finally, during the decommissioning/closure phase, the PM supervises the deconstruction phase, checks if all the CE requirements have been met, verifies the CE measures set, prepares the lessons learnt, and performs a CE benchmarking. Each of these tasks requires the support of a project team, including the proposed CEMs.

The large number of investments around the world, as well as the multitude of construction project stakeholders, who are mainly construction companies responsible for erecting a building or constructing infrastructure, which have various impacts on the course of these processes [56], has raised concerns about the effectiveness of measures to reduce the negative externalities of business activity.

The risk of construction projects is of great importance, which determines the concern of enterprises for effective methods of planning their activities. This term is generally understood as the likelihood of diverging between plans and reality [57]. It may relate to various aspects, but particularly concerns issues of cost, time, scope, and quality. Risk perception is relevant too [58].

Transforming a construction company into an organization that cares about ecology and sustainable development, and which promotes behaviors based on circular economy principles is not easy. It requires time, experience, and persistence in pursuing the goal. It is not only about conducting a series of training sessions with certificates; it is not just about drawing up and enforcing new procedures. Instead, this transformation is a constant pursuit of harmony in which the beliefs and values of the corporation are the same as what the employee feels. Of the many leadership models, the situational one presented in this article seems to be the most rational [29,55].

Leadership may be a subject of criticism. Leaders may commit some mistakes too. They can resign from the values they praised before. People are just people, but in the end, one should trust them to achieve some goals.

The basic concept of situational leadership was adapted to new circumstances of effective knowledge diffusion of circular economy in a construction company.

8. Conclusions

Introducing the circular economy concept to construction companies is not a short-term and simple process. For this purpose, the most important factors can be divided into three main groups: people, processes, design and technology. The imperfections observed within the first and second groups were the motivation for this research.

The basic challenges of the construction industry in modern times are related primarily to the mitigation of the impact on nature. Environmental policy is currently one of the most important topics in the European Union. Initially, it was focused on the negative effects of pollution. Over time, it began to involve preventive measures too. The major sustainable development goal of the EU is to ensure—in the long term—a reliable path of economic growth and improvement in living standards that will not result in the deterioration of the natural environment.

Compliance with the principles of sustainable development concerning a construction sector means a proper delivery of design solutions for building/non-building structures, as well as methods and techniques of their implementation; however, this must be done in such a way that is friendly both to people and their natural environment. It is also necessary to search for determinants of the increase in the resource (materials, energy, water etc.) efficiency of the construction projects throughout their whole life cycle. The zero-waste approach emanating from circular economy becomes crucial, especially in times of economic and political uncertainty all over the world (pandemics, wars, etc.). The implementation of construction projects should therefore be considered from the perspective of their effectiveness in a global sense.

In the article, it was revealed that management plays a special role in the process of creating circular economy culture in construction companies. It was proved that management plays a special role in the process of creating a circular economy culture in construction companies. The project manager also takes part in creating and strengthening this culture. While supervising a construction project, PM may also require some changes in the subjective sphere. The position and performed functions affect not only the contractor, but also the investor, architect, and other stakeholders.

However, some weaknesses in the research could not be avoided. The survey that was carried out for the study was conducted on a relatively small group of respondents; therefore, the obtained results are estimates and do not allow for the generalization of the results to the entire population. However, it may constitute a basis for further research into management styles in construction companies and the sample can provide a clear insight into the matter and be helpful for managers to prepare conceptual plans for their companies. Based on the questions included in the questionnaire regarding the behavior of the manager in various circumstances, the survey shows how managers lead construction companies. It is worth emphasizing that it is difficult to find a leader who would fit into only one pattern. Usually, when certain traits dominate, a specific management style can be distinguished.

In the end, it can be concluded that a management style depends on the situation in which the construction company is at present. In critical circumstances, leaders adopt an autocratic attitude, while in situations in which the relationship between the employee and the manager is vital, they act democratically. Construction companies struggling with a crisis need autocratic leaders who will make decisions quickly, allocate tasks to employees or give clear orders, while a company that operates without major economic problems can afford to act in a democratic way. A good manager is characterized by the ability to choose the most suitable management style depending on the concurrent expectations related to adapting the construction company to the circular economy requirements.