Ling, F Y Y; Hartmann, A; Kumaraswamy, M and Dulaimi, M (2007) Influences on innovation benefits during implementation: Client's perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(4), pp. 306-315. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This study investigates critical factors that significantly affect the benefits of an innovation to the clients and the project as a whole during implementation from the perspective of construction clients. A survey was conducted in Hong Kong, and data from 35 projects that had adopted innovations were collected via mailed questionnaires from project clients. The questionnaire requested respondents to provide specific data about their projects, the type of innovations adopted, and the enablers and barriers to innovation. We found that innovative solutions were particularly beneficial if they were mainly intended to solve technical difficulties in projects and if they were implemented by forming separate implementation teams and by establishing coordination and monitoring mechanisms at the project level. Moreover, we found that the construction clients' technical capabilities, provision of special training opportunities, and management interests before and after the innovation was implemented were also factors in attaining innovation benefits.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | benefits; innovation; owners |
| Index terms: | owner, construction client, critical factor, Hong Kong, implementation, coordination, monitoring, survey, project client, questionnaire |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, risk assessment, data collection methods, practitioner, control systems, sociology, management, Geography |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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