Brewer, G; Gajendran, T and Le Goff, R (2012) Contextualizing innovation in construction firms in regional areas. In: Smith, S D (ed.) Proceedings of 28th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2012, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Construction firms based in regional contexts face different challenges to their metropolitan counterparts in terms of access to markets and resources, scale of operations, and the nature of their competition. This potentially provides both business opportunities and challenges particularly in relation to innovation activities. A large scale research project investigating innovation processes in an Australian regional construction industry is being contemplated and a research mechanism has been piloted. Accordingly the case of a successful regional New South Wales small-medium-sized enterprise’s (SME) quest for sustainable competitive advantage is presented through the lens of a dynamic capabilities framework. It reveals four capabilities that deliver innovation, one of which is regional in flavour, indicating that a regional location need be no impediment to innovation and indeed may hold some advantages
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction firm; dynamic capabilities; innovation; SME |
| Index terms: | competitive advantage, construction firm, face, competition, New South Wales, dynamic capability, markets, construction industry |
| Subjects: | market analysis, industry analysis, management, Geography, psychology, economic analysis, organization |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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