Nam, C H and Tatum, C B (1997) Leaders and champions for construction innovation. Construction Management and Economics, 15(3), pp. 259-270. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Based on empirical studies of the role of key individuals in the processes of ten successful innovations in the US construction industry, this paper makes three principal arguments. First, effective leadership is essen-tial for technological innovation - in particular in construction. Second, technological competence is an utmost prerequisite for effective leadership for construction innovation - regardless of the size of the firm. In other words, an entrepreneurial role as a technical champion in a small firm does not change even as the firm grows. Lastly, the role of technical champion can be delegated only with slack resources and adequate power. This paper also highlights conclusions and practical applications to increase technological innovation in design and construction firms.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | entrepreneurship; innovation; leadership; technology |
| Index terms: | competence, construction innovation, slack, design and construction, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, empirical study, construction industry |
| Subjects: | research methods, personnel development, building construction, industry analysis, business, operations research, innovation and technology management, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Time Control, Human Resources, Procurement, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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