hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Diffusing systemic innovations: Influencing factors, approaches and further research
Halmstad University, School of Business, Engineering and Science, Centre for Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Learning Research (CIEL).ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8766-1957
2016 (English)In: Architectural Engineering and Design Management, ISSN 1745-2007, E-ISSN 1752-7589, Vol. 12, no 1, p. 19-28Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Research about innovation diffusion in construction has considered systemic innovations to a minor extent. Systemic innovations are inter-organizational, relational and require a coordinated change in processes. Systemic innovations like Building Information Modeling and industrialized housing are on the move forward and systemic innovations can be considered important to diffuse within the construction sector. Most likely, they provide great impact on productivity in construction. The aim of this paper is to discuss factors influencing the diffusion of systemic innovations, approaches and areas for future studies. Previous research on systemic innovations is complemented with inter-organizational research in construction and research using the Industrial Network Approach. Of the many factors influencing the diffusion a key seems to relate to long-term relationships since they enable development and learning necessary for diffusion. The main complexities are also related to the project-based work method in combination with different degrees of interdependencies: in projects, between projects and within the construction chain. In turn this has effects on interaction between individuals. Further research should preferably be conducted with broad approaches that validate and nuance current constructs, capture the dynamics in the diffusion process and thereby add understanding for the diffusion of systemic innovations. © 2015 Taylor & Francis.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Abingdon: Earthscan Publications Ltd., 2016. Vol. 12, no 1, p. 19-28
Keywords [en]
Systemic innovations, diffusion, influential factors, approaches, construction
National Category
Construction Management
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-29986DOI: 10.1080/17452007.2015.1092942ISI: 000374343400003Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84947129313OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-29986DiVA, id: diva2:878458
Available from: 2015-12-09 Created: 2015-12-09 Last updated: 2018-03-22Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Diffusion of systemic innovations in the construction sector
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Diffusion of systemic innovations in the construction sector
2018 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The amount of research dealing with innovation has increased dramatically, construction management research included. This thesis focuses on innovations with inter-organizational effects, systemic innovations, which may radically change and improve the construction process. The overall aim of the thesis is to contribute understanding of diffusion of systemic innovations in the construction sector through the study of two different types of systemic innovations, Building Information Management and Multi-Story Housing in Timber (MSHT). It explores what facilitates and hinders innovation diffusion, with a special focus on knowledge integration and mechanisms used in the diffusion process and their effects on knowledge development. The studies conducted were made in a Swedish context related to two separate companies work with diffusing the innovations, using a broad approach with different data collection methods.

The research departures in the interplay between the innovation content, context and process through which diffusion take place, displaying differences in how diffusion precedes and is affected. Where organizations are situated in the construction process and their ability to control the diffusion process is influential and diffusion is affected by established traditions and work procedures. For MSHT other structural materials form obstacles, while for BIM it is established work procedures and methods. Environmental pressure drives diffusion of MSHT and both innovations are supported by active clients. Diffusion also requires financial resources depending on the size of investment and associated risks. The cases show advantages with moving activities from projects into a continuous business that delivers to projects, where simplifying implementation is central. Mainly due to complexity, developing in steps enables simplifications and adjustments towards users in a controlled manner. MSHT to a higher degree depends on performing real projects for development and diffusion than BIM, which can be tested to a larger extent before diffusing into the real environment. MSHT in particular show a difference in relation to many traditional models of innovation and innovation diffusion where tests are assumed possible.

The research relates to and has emphasized interaction and dynamics in the diffusion process and has provided additional understanding for managing complexity in the diffusion process. Projects are the most crucial knowledge integration mechanism with many underlying mechanisms, since they are a result of the development and show consequences of work performed. The applicability of codified knowledge in combination with more interactionintensive mechanisms has been shown and the introduction of the knowledge type’s domain-specific, procedural and general knowledge, complementing the current use of tacit and explicit knowledge, has provided additional understanding for diffusion and related knowledge flows. There are however differences in how knowledge types develop for the innovations. General knowledge is more influencing for BIM, while MSHT is about developing domain-specific knowledge. MSHT is about learning something new, while for BIM it is about re-learning. Findings show relevance in both using and developing the framework of innovation in organizations by Rogers (2003) for future diffusion studies in construction management research as well as the necessity of developing knowledge concerning implementation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Halmstad: Halmstad University Press, 2018. p. 114
Keywords
Construction Sector, Innovation Diffusion, Systemic Innovation, Knowledge Integration, Knowledge Development
National Category
Construction Management
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-36248 (URN)978-91-87045-82-0 (ISBN)978-91-87045-83-7 (ISBN)
Public defence
2018-02-01, O104, Kristian IV:s väg, Halmstad, 13:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2018-02-08 Created: 2018-02-08 Last updated: 2018-02-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Lindgren, John

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindgren, John
By organisation
Centre for Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Learning Research (CIEL)
In the same journal
Architectural Engineering and Design Management
Construction Management

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 191 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf