Davidson, C (2013) Innovation in construction: before the curtain goes up. Construction Innovation, 13(4), pp. 344-351. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
This paper aims to present an overview of innovation in the construction sector, its forms, its inherent pitfalls and difficulties, and some underlying reasons for them. The familiar distinction between technical and organisational innovation is inapplicable in the fragmented construction industry. – This paper is based on systematic observation, accompanying many years' hands-on experience. – The processes of innovation in construction require that the innovator (possibly starting from a narrow idea or opportunity) broaden his/her view to take into account the impacts of the intended innovation on the priorities of other stakeholders, in an iterative process. In other words, orchestrated organisational changes must accompany – if not precede – technical innovation. – This paper specifically describes the processes and constraints of innovation in the context of the construction sector. – Failure to take into account the dual obligation to innovate simultaneously on the organisational and technical fronts will lead to yet one more failed attempt. Such a failure represents a waste of time and effort, and a missed opportunity to contribute to improved construction. – This paper is based on a uniquely broad experience-based view of innovation, covering a period of more than five decades; this feedback from experience can help innovators directly and provide evidence for subsequent research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | change; construction; innovation; learning; performance |
| Index terms: | organizational change, organizational innovation, construction sector, evidence, construction industry |
| Subjects: | business, evaluation and assessment methods, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PTA |
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