Rutten, M E J; Dorée, A G and Halman, J I M (2008) How companies without the benefit of authority create innovation through collaboration. In: Dainty, A (ed.) Proceedings of 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK.
Abstract
To create new business firms develop and provide systems that are new to the market. However, if a firm wants to achieve this goal but does not possess all required resources and capabilities, it needs cooperation from other organizations. This study focuses on how firms that lack authority to compel such cooperation, gain and foster commitment from other organizations to cooperate. To develop a model that addresses this question two cases of interorganizational innovation from the Dutch construction industry were studied. In both cases an organization set up and coordinated a network of organizations to jointly develop and market a new system. The cases suggest that, in particular, three types of activities of such leading organizations affect other organizations' commitment to cooperate. These include two types of activities that correspond with two extensively researched constructs, champion behavior and supportive leadership, and one type of activity whose influence is more indirect, value proposition management. Overall, both cases can be regarded as examples of innovation and value chain integration, two issues identified as industry deficiencies in various countries.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | business strategy; cooperation; innovation; leadership |
| Index terms: | business strategy, commitment, interorganizational, value chain, construction industry, cooperation, collaboration, integration |
| Subjects: | management, value chain strategy, organizational analysis, industry analysis, business, psychology |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Business Strategy, Supply Chain Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CT |
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