Sundquist, J (2004) Low innovation among building material suppliers: The natural level of the trade. Construction Economics and Building, 4(1), pp. 35-44. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Many studies concerning innovation have been carried out on building contractors, but very few have studied innovation among the suppliers of building materials. In Sweden the cost of building materials is approximately 40% of the total building costs. Some products also need more handeling than others, therefore not only cost but also productivity is affectedby the suppliers of building materials. This article focuses on innovation among building material suppliers which is found to be low. The suppliers are compared to other lines of business to show the level of their innovation processes. The article is based upon slightly over 800 companies of various sizes. Important findings are:A smaller proportion of the Building Material suppliers than of the Other Manufacturers offer new products, invest in R&D, machinery and marketing the introduction of products.The Building Material Suppliers have a greater proportion of their sales from older products and have older equipment than Other Manufacturers.The Building Material Suppliers have poorer production processes and they are not as good at finding new ides as the Other ManufacturersThe study reveals barriers within the trade, where motivation seems to be of great importance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building material suppliers; development; innovation; new prodicts; processes |
| Index terms: | productivity, motivation, marketing, building material, Sweden, production process, building contractor, manufacturer |
| Subjects: | manufacturing engineering, business, practitioner, Geography, psychology, management, building materials |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Geographical Context |
| 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