Innovation as re-institutionalization: A case study of technological change in housebuilding in Norway

Orstavik, F (2014) Innovation as re-institutionalization: A case study of technological change in housebuilding in Norway. Construction Management and Economics, 32(9), pp. 857-873. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Case study can give important new insights into the systemic nature of construction innovation and the interrelationship between local innovation successes and structural forces shaping the sector. Even well-defined, modular innovations can have significant repercussions on the industry level. Recent innovation in building materials for wet rooms in Norway represents an attempt to modify only limited aspects of the established approach to housebuilding, but is made difficult by institutions and actors relying on established methods and existing building products. Institutions acting as innovation brokers can be very important for innovators. However, brokering is no panacea for promoting disruptive innovation. A broker can thwart rather than promote potentially useful but disruptive innovations. Because innovation is a re-institutionalization process, the third-party position needed for brokering effectively can be undermined, whenever a successful broker attains vested interests in the innovation outcomes it has helped bring forth. Methodologically, employing theories on technological innovation systems and on multilevel socio-technical systems shows that these are effective, complementary tools for analysis of innovation in construction. Only the latter incorporates the notion of innovation as creative destruction, and it is by drawing on this theory that the precariousness of the brokering role can be highlighted.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building; innovation; innovation broker; innovation system; Norway
Index terms: drawing, Norway, construction innovation, technological change, housebuilding, case study, broker, building material, institutionalization, innovation system, socio-technical system, technological innovation
Subjects: innovation and technology management, business, construction integration, theoretical framing, data collection methods, profession, building materials, innovation studies, Geography, sociology, building construction, technical documentation
Topics: Research Practice, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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