Horses for courses: Relating innovation diffusion concepts to the stage of the diffusion process

The research uses a sociological perspective to build an improved, context specific understanding of innovation diffusion within the UK construction industry. It is argued there is an iterative interplay between actors and the social system they occupy that directly influences the diffusion process as well as the methodology adopted. The research builds upon previous findings that argued a level of best fit for the three innovation diffusion concepts of cohesion, structural equivalence and thresholds. That level of best fit is analysed here using empirical data from the UK construction industry. This analysis allows an understanding of how the relative importance of these concepts' actually varies within the stages of the innovation diffusion process. The conclusion that the level of relevance fluctuates in relation to the stages of the diffusion process is a new development in the field.

The diffusion of innovations within a UKCI context: An explanatory framework

The UK Construction Industry has been criticized for being slow to change and adopt innovations. The idiosyncrasies of participants, their roles in a social system and the contextual differences between sections of the UK Construction Industry are viewed as being paramount to explaining innovation diffusion within this context. Three innovation diffusion theories from outside construction management literature are introduced, Cohesion, Structural Equivalence and Thresholds. The relevance of each theory, in relation to the UK Construction Industry, is critically reviewed using literature and empirical data. Analysis of the data results in an explanatory framework being proposed. The framework introduces a Personal Awareness Threshold concept, highlights the dominant role of Cohesion through the main stages of diffusion, together with the use of Structural Equivalence during the later stages of diffusion and the importance of Adoption Threshold levels.

Subcontract and supply enquiries in the tender process of contractors

In the tender process, contractors often rely on subcontract and supply enquiries to calculate their bid prices. However, this integral part of the bidding process is not empirically articulated in the literature. Over 30 published materials on the tendering process of contractors that talk about enquiries were reviewed and found to be based mainly on experiential knowledge rather than systematic evidence. The empirical research here helps to describe the process of enquiries precisely, improve it in practice, and have some basis to support it in theory. Using a live participant observation case study approach, the whole tender process was shadowed in the offices of two of the top 20 UK civil engineering construction firms. This helped to investigate 15 research questions on how contractors enquire and obtain prices from subcontractors and suppliers. Forty-three subcontract enquiries and 18 supply enquiries were made across two different projects with average value of 7m. An average of 15 subcontract packages and seven supply packages was involved. Thus, two or three subcontractors or suppliers were invited to bid in each package. All enquiries were formulated by the estimator, with occasional involvement of three other personnel. Most subcontract prices were received in an average of 14 working days; and supply prices took five days. The findings show 10 main activities involved in processing enquiries and their durations, as well as wasteful practices associated with enquiries. Contractors should limit their enquiry invitations to a maximum of three per package, and optimize the waiting time for quotations in order to improve cost efficiency.

How contractors price risk in bids: theory and practice

Formal and analytical models that contractors can use to assess and price project risk at the tender stage have proliferated in recent years. However, they are rarely used in practice. Introducing more models would, therefore, not necessarily help. A better understanding is needed of how contractors arrive at a bid price in practice, and how, and in what circumstances, risk apportionment actually influences pricing levels. More than 60 proposed risk models for contractors that are published in journals were examined and classified. Then exploratory interviews with five UK contractors and documentary analyses on how contractors price work generally and risk specifically were carried out to help in comparing the propositions from the literature to what contractors actually do. No comprehensive literature on the real bidding processes used in practice was found, and there is no evidence that pricing is systematic. Hence, systematic risk and pricing models for contractors may have no justifiable basis. Contractors process their bids through certain tendering gateways. They acknowledge the risk that they should price. However, the final settlement depends on a set of complex, micro-economic factors. Hence, risk accountability may be smaller than its true cost to the contractor. Risk apportionment occurs at three stages of the whole bid-pricing process. However, analytical approaches tend not to incorporate this, although they could.

Technological innovation in the context of PPPs: incentives, opportunities and actions

From a construction perspective, Public-Private Partnership projects (PPPs) are often credited as providing real incentives for the actors involved as well as a business environment that is conducive to innovation and improved practices. The validity of four common rhetorical arguments used to promote the PPP procurement route is explored: collaborative working, design freedom, long-term commitment and risk transfer. Particular interest is given to the extent to which espoused intentions correlate with experienced realities in allowing actors involved in the design and construction phases to be presented with, and able to exploit, opportunities for technological innovation. It is argued that there is reason to be cautious in fully accepting the purported benefits of the PPP framework and that the arguments often presented need to be revised. Alternative interpretations are provided.

Tales of the expected: investigating the rhetorical strategies of innovation champions

Innovation continues to be high on the agenda in construction. It is widely considered to be an essential prerequisite of improved performance both for the sector at large and for individual firms. Success stories dominate the parts of the academic literature that rely heavily on the recollections of key individuals. A complementary interpretation focuses on the way innovation champions in hindsight interpret, justify and legitimize the diffusion of innovations. Emphasis is put on the temporal dimension of interpretation and how this links to rhetorical strategies and impression management tactics. Rhetorical theories are drawn upon to analyse the accounts given by innovation champions in seven facilities management organizations. In particular, the three persuasive appeals in classic rhetoric are used to highlight the rhetorical justifications mobilized in the descriptions of what took place. The findings demonstrate the usefulness of rhetorical theories in complementing studies of innovation.

Critical success factors for competitiveness of contractors: A China study

Gaining or maintaining a “contractor's” competitive advantage is not easy as it is determined by a large number of factors. Identification of critical success factors (CSFs) allows one to reduce the vast number of factors to some manageable few but vital ones. Based on the CSFs, contractors' limited resources such as money and manpower can be allocated and aligned appropriately for yielding a maximum outcome of overall competitiveness. This paper describes the CSFs identified from a survey study carried out in Mainland China. The ranking analysis of the survey results shows that 35 factors are rated as critical for determining the competitiveness of a contractor. Factor analysis reveals that the 35 CSFs identified can be grouped into eight clusters, namely, project management skills, organization structure, resources, competitive strategy, relationships, bidding, marketing, and technology. The CSFs in this study provide a vehicle for guiding a contractor in managing its resources in order to improve competitive advantage. The study also provides insights into the management of competitiveness for contractors that are operating in the particular context of the Chinese construction industry.

The challenges of creating actionable knowledge: an action research perspective

Academia has a critical role in developing new knowledge which construction industry practitioners need to envision, undertake and sustain successful innovation. The new knowledge produced by academia, however, often does not satisfy the needs of practitioners. This unsatisfactory state of affairs is frequently taken to be the consequence of the cultural, motivational and operational differences between the two communities. Actionable knowledge is presented as a useful concept which can fuse the expectations, contributions and outputs of academia and practitioners. Within this context, action research is argued to be an appropriate methodology to develop successful actionable knowledge. Results from an action research project are given which provide researchers and practitioners greater understanding of the key factors that shape the degree to which action research produces actionable knowledge: change focus, collaboration capabilities and systematic process. The criteria intrinsic to Mode 2 research (Gibbons et al., 1994) are demonstrated to have utility in evidencing actionable knowledge. The implication for policy is that there is a need to develop and use appropriate actionable knowledge frameworks and measures to design funding calls, and to evaluate research proposals and outputs.

Using bargaining-game theory for negotiating concession period for BOT-type contract

This paper extends the build-operate-transfer (BOT) concession model (BOTCcM) to a new method for identifying a concession period by using bargaining-game theory. Concession period is one of the most important decision variables in arranging a BOT-type contract, and there are few methodologies available for helping to determine the value of this variable. The BOTCcM presents an alternative method by which a group of concession period solutions are produced. Nevertheless, a typical weakness in using BOTCcM is that the model cannot recommend a specific time span for concessionary. This paper introduces a new method called BOT bargaining concession model (BOTBaC) to enable the identification of a specific concession period, which takes into account the bargaining behavior of the two parties concerned in engaging a BOT contract, namely, the investor and the government concerned. The application of BOTBaC is demonstrated through using an example case.