Builders as sources of construction innovation

Slaughter, E S (1993) Builders as sources of construction innovation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(3), pp. 532-549. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Innovation in the construction industry occurs to a much greater extent than is usually recognized, and the sources of these innovations are more likely to be people working on-site rather than manufacturers or research laboratories. Thirty-four innovations to a single technology, the stressed-skin panel, are examined; and it is found that the vast majority of these innovations were developed by builders rather than manufacturers. In addition, these builder innovations were significantly different from those produced by the manufacturers. The builders' innovations explicitly integrate the panel into the total building system; the manufacturers' innovations are confined to the panels themselves. A third finding is that manufacturers commercialized few of the builders' innovations—particularly avoiding those that involved connection of the panels to other systems—despite their potential for substantial improvement in the performance of the panel overall. The implications of these results is that users of technologies can be important sources of technological innovations and improvements, and the design of products can explicitly accommodate the need for changes and innovations on-site.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: construction innovation, laboratory, manufacturer, builder, technological innovation, building system, construction industry
Subjects: practitioner, engineering systems, innovation and technology management, industry analysis, building construction, research management
Topics: Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Roles and Professions
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here