Attitudes towards innovation in the construction industry: The case in the social housing sector

In light of Government initiatives that encourage change in the construction industry through innovation this thesis examines how people's attitudes impact upon the adoption of innovation. The research employs a technique known as 'Q methodology' which is a qualitative but statistical approach that enables the discovery of the variety of discourses concerning individuals understanding of their social worlds. A critical review of the Government sponsored reports into the construction industry identified that innovation has become a popular focus of attention since the 1990s and that the more recent reports have set targets and initiatives to encourage the rethinking of the construction industry, specifically targeting the social housing sector as needing special attention. Following a critical review of the innovation and attitude literature it was found that the influence of social behaviour is often overlooked; and as such this gave a theoretical framework upon which to develop this research. The results revealed three understandings of innovation in the social housing sector, illustrating how our cultural backgrounds impact upon our understandings of innovation. The first framework of understanding took a sceptically optimistic tone of Government initiatives, not sure whether they would influence innovative behaviour in the industry. As a discourse it valued innovation and yet recognised the impact fragmentation can have on the industry making progress. Transitionally this factor had taken on the message of the Latham report but was not yet convinced by the Egan report. The second framework took a buoyant approach to the recent Government initiatives seeing them to positively influence innovation in the social housing sector. Fragmentation was seen in a positive light where experts exchange knowledge. This factor embraced the ideas of the Egan report and transitionally had made the leap of faith by embracing its ideas. The third and final framework was a lot more pessimistic in tone commenting that the private housing sector in general took a conservative view of house building and that clients played an influential role in this issue. This framework also illustrated some of the problems related with the inability to change working practice and suggested that the work of Latham and Egan needs to be encouraged across the divide of social and private housing sector. Finally, it was identified over all the frameworks of understanding that innovation was valued professionally, should be introduced early, and that there was a readiness for change in the industry.