Duodu, B and Rowlinson, S (2021) Opening up the innovation process in construction firms: External knowledge sources and dual innovation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(8), ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Empirical evidence on the relative significance of various sources of knowledge for different construction firms' innovation activities and processes is limited. This study examines the relationships between six external knowledge sources and two types of innovation processes (exploratory and exploitative) in construction firms. The study is based on survey data from 167 managers in construction firms in Hong Kong. The partial least squares structural equation modeling results show that knowledge from clients and suppliers each significantly affects exploratory and exploitative innovation. Knowledge from universities and research institutions significantly affects exploratory innovation but not exploitative innovation. The other three sources (subcontractors, joint venture partners, and competitors) have no significant effects on either innovation type. The study is among the first to empirically explore the links between external knowledge and innovation (exploratory and exploitative) from a process perspective. It also extends open innovation research into the context of construction, showing the knowledge search activity of construction firms and how it influences innovation processes with practical implications for practitioners.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction firms; exploitative innovation; exploratory innovation; external knowledge; open innovation |
| Index terms: | joint venture, research institution, Hong Kong, evidence, practitioner, subcontractor, partial least square, manager, construction firm, survey, structural equation modelling |
| Subjects: | Geography, research management, statistical analysis, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, organization, business, practitioner |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| 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