Na, L J; Ofori, G; Ling, F Y Y and Hua, G B (2007) Role of national institutions in promoting innovation by contractors in Singapore. Construction Management and Economics, 25(10), pp. 1021-1039. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
The complexity of the relationships among the government, national institutions and enterprises often hinders efforts to understand the effectiveness of national institutions in encouraging contractors to innovate. The role of national institutions in stimulating innovation is investigated, with a focus on construction firms in Singapore. A qualitative systems model portraying the role of national institutions in the construction industry is developed and validated through statistical analysis and interviews. Technological advance from national institutions that cultivates a competitive environment is able to stimulate a direct increase in construction innovation, and develop industry clusters that enhance the contractors' research capabilities. The primary policy recommendation is that a national body that unifies various institutions and parties within the construction sector should be established to spearhead an integrated and focused research agenda for the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | innovation; national institutions; policy; systems thinking |
| Index terms: | construction industry, effectiveness, complexity, construction innovation, research agenda, interview, construction firm, construction sector, Singapore, systems thinking, statistical analysis |
| Subjects: | data science, systems engineering, research management, analytical methods, Geography, industry analysis, building construction, organization, data collection methods, performance management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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