Sumanarathna, N; Duodu, B; Memon, S A and Rowlinson, S (2025) Exploring innovation deployment of construction contracting firms through the lens of exploratory–exploitative learning: A Hong Kong case study. Construction Innovation, 25(2), pp. 641-664. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to explore the innovation deployment of construction contracting firms through exploratory–exploitative learning and organisational ambidexterity. Design/methodology/approach: Firstly, a literature-based conceptual framework was developed to explain innovation implementation through exploratory–exploitative learning and organisational ambidexterity. A prominent Hong Kong construction contracting firm was then selected as the case study to explore its innovation deployment at different organisational levels (i.e. firm and project levels). Qualitative data were attained by conducting 12 semi-structured interviews with industry experts and document analysis. The thematic analysis using NVivo 12 software was adopted to analyse data. Findings: Findings reveal that the case study firm successfully fosters innovation when ambidexterity is achieved through the balance between exploratory (i.e. radical innovation) and exploitative learnings (i.e. incremental innovation). Research limitations/implications: Establishing uniform ambidexterity (i.e. 50:50) at the firm or project level is not mandatory to deploy innovation successfully. The ratio can vary based on the characteristics and requirements of construction firms. Practical implications: This paper shall motivate construction practitioners to adopt radical–incremental innovation ambidexterity in firms and ultimately enhance the productivity and efficiency of the construction industry. Originality/value: Previous construction innovation research has frequently explored firm or project-level innovation separately. This study identified a multi-level focus on innovation. Through the lens of exploratory–exploitative theory, different forms of innovation ambidexterity for different levels are suggested rather than one specific ambidexterity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction contracting firms; exploratory–exploitative learning; incremental innovation; learning; organisational ambidexterity; radical innovation |
| Index terms: | ambidexterity, interview, construction practitioner, construction firm, thematic analysis, methodology, construction innovation, conceptual framework, case study, Hong Kong, efficiency, productivity, document analysis, construction contracting firm, construction industry, implementation |
| Subjects: | Geography, theoretical framing, research methods, building construction, strategic management, organization, contractual arrangements, methods and analysis, professional development, management, performance management, industry analysis, data collection methods, data science |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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