Wilkinson, S; Noktehdan, M; Shahbazpour, M and Cameron, R (2017) Creating an opportunity to innovate during disaster recovery. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
Innovating in construction can be a complex task. Innovating in construction whilst recovering from a disaster adds an extra level of complexity. This paper examines a unique innovation process adopted by an alliancing organisation (SCIRT) during the Canterbury earthquake recovery. The innovation process developed for capturing and measuring innovations was novel as it came from a desire to recover well from the earthquake and to seek opportunities to construct better and more efficiently. Over 600 innovations were reported and analysed for this research, giving a rich picture of where innovations originate, what types of innovations occur more frequently, and where in a construction life cycle different innovation types can best be developed. The paper shows that, despite innovations being created in a time of change and uncertainty, the innovations created can have lasting long term benefits for the wider construction indystry.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | innovation; disaster; construction |
| Index terms: | life cycle, disaster recovery, alliancing, recovery, complexity, earthquake |
| Subjects: | operations management, contractual arrangements, value management, emergency and crisis management, systems engineering, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Project Management, Engineering Principles, Procurement, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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