Adoption of innovative products on Australian road infrastructure projects

Product innovation is an important contributor to the performance of infrastructure projects in the construction industry. Maximizing the potential for innovative product adoption is a challenging task due to the complexities of the construction innovation system. A qualitative methodology involving interviews with major construction project stakeholders is employed to address the research question: ‘What are the main obstacles to the adoption of innovative products in the road industry?’ The characteristics of six key product innovation obstacles in Australian road projects are described. The six key obstacles are: project goal misalignment, client pressures, weak contractual relations, lack of product trialling, inflexible product specifications and product liability concerns. A snapshot of the dynamics underlying these obstacles is provided. There are few such assessments in the literature, despite the imperative to improve construction innovation rates globally in order to deliver road infrastructure projects of increasing size and complexity. Key obstacles are interpreted through an open innovation construct, providing direction for policy to enhance the uptake of innovation across the construction product supply network. Early evidence suggests the usefulness of an open innovation construct that integrates three conceptual lenses: network governance, absorptive capacity and knowledge intermediation, in order to interpret product adoption obstacles in the context of Australian road infrastructure projects. The paper also provides practical advice and direction for government and industry organizations that wish to promote the flow of innovative product knowledge across the construction supply network.

Client recommendations for financial incentives on construction projects

Purpose: To provide recommendations for construction clients who design and implement financial incentive mechanisms (FIMs) on projects. ---------- Methodology: Four large Australian building projects commissioned by government clients under managing contractor contracts and completed between 2001 and 2005 were examined to explore the ‘drivers’ that promoted motivation toward financial incentive goals. The results were triangulated across data sources, projects and stakeholder types. ---------- Findings: FIM design should incorporate: 1. flexibility to modify goals and measurement procedures over time, 2. multiple goals covering different project areas, 3. distribution of rewards across all the key organizations contributing to team performance (e.g. potentially not just the contractor, but the subcontractors and consultants) and a reward amount sufficient to be valued by potential recipients. FIM benefits are maximized through the following complementary procurement initiatives: 4. equitable contract risk allocation, 5. early contractor involvement in design, 6. value-driven tender selection, 7. relationship workshops, and 8. future work opportunities.---------- Research Limitations: This paper provides practical recommendations to industry and hence does not emphasize theoretical aspects.---------- Practical Implications: The uptake of these recommendations is likely to increase the impact of FIMs on motivation and improve project and industry outcomes. Although the study focuses on government clients of building projects, all the recommendations would seem to apply equally to private-sector clients and to non-building projects.---------- Originality: In order to improve motivation and reward high performance, clients are increasingly using FIM in their construction contracts. Despite the rising use of financial incentives, there is a lack of comprehensive construction-specific knowledge available to help clients maximize outcomes. The study addresses this gap in the literature.

Extension of constructability to include operation and maintenance for infrastructure projects

This project was a step forward in developing an extension of the concept of constructability to include the post-occupancy stages of operation and maintenance. This was through an in-depth study of Australian health projects and interviews with professionals in the field. The thesis investigated how the operation and maintenance stakeholders can enter the initial planning, design and construction phases resulting in more efficient and effective delivery of infrastructure projects.

National guidelines for digital modelling

These National Guidelines and Case Studies for Digital Modelling are the outcomes from one of a number of Building Information Modelling (BIM)-related projects undertaken by the CRC for Construction Innovation. Since the CRC opened its doors in 2001, the industry has seen a rapid increase in interest in BIM, and widening adoption. These guidelines and case studies are thus very timely, as the industry moves to model-based working and starts to share models in a new context called integrated practice. Governments, both federal and state, and in New Zealand are starting to outline the role they might take, so that in contrast to the adoption of 2D CAD in the early 90s, we ensure that a national, industry-wide benefit results from this new paradigm of working. Section 1 of the guidelines give us an overview of BIM: how it affects our current mode of working, what we need to do to move to fully collaborative model-based facility development. The role of open standards such as IFC is described as a mechanism to support new processes, and make the extensive design and construction information available to asset operators and managers. Digital collaboration modes, types of models, levels of detail, object properties and model management complete this section. It will be relevant for owners, managers and project leaders as well as direct users of BIM. Section 2 provides recommendations and guides for key areas of model creation and development, and the move to simulation and performance measurement. These are the more practical parts of the guidelines developed for design professionals, BIM managers, technical staff and ‘in the field’ workers. The guidelines are supported by six case studies including a summary of lessons learnt about implementing BIM in Australian building projects. A key aspect of these publications is the identification of a number of important industry actions: the need for BIM-compatible product information and a national context for classifying product data; the need for an industry agreement and setting process-for-process definition; and finally, the need to ensure a national standard for sharing data between all of the participants in the facility-development process.

National guidelines for digital modelling : case studies

These National Guidelines and Case Studies for Digital Modelling are the outcomes from one of a number of Building Information Modelling (BIM)-related projects undertaken by the CRC for Construction Innovation. Since the CRC opened its doors in 2001, the industry has seen a rapid increase in interest in BIM, and widening adoption. These guidelines and case studies are thus very timely, as the industry moves to model-based working and starts to share models in a new context called integrated practice. Governments, both federal and state, and in New Zealand are starting to outline the role they might take, so that in contrast to the adoption of 2D CAD in the early 90s, we ensure that a national, industry-wide benefit results from this new paradigm of working. Section 1 of the guidelines give us an overview of BIM: how it affects our current mode of working, what we need to do to move to fully collaborative model-based facility development. The role of open standards such as IFC is described as a mechanism to support new processes, and make the extensive design and construction information available to asset operators and managers. Digital collaboration modes, types of models, levels of detail, object properties and model management complete this section. It will be relevant for owners, managers and project leaders as well as direct users of BIM. Section 2 provides recommendations and guides for key areas of model creation and development, and the move to simulation and performance measurement. These are the more practical parts of the guidelines developed for design professionals, BIM managers, technical staff and ‘in the field’ workers. The guidelines are supported by six case studies including a summary of lessons learnt about implementing BIM in Australian building projects. A key aspect of these publications is the identification of a number of important industry actions: the need for BIMcompatible product information and a national context for classifying product data; the need for an industry agreement and setting process-for-process definition; and finally, the need to ensure a national standard for sharing data between all of the participants in the facility-development process.

Community engagement : exploring a relational approach to consultation and collaborative practice in Australia

Community engagement is increasingly being employed by Australian organizations as a key strategy to incorporate representative community opinions into decision-making. This trend is reflected by Australian local and state governments legislating for community consultation in major infrastructure projects and the increasing role of public relations practitioners to manage these programs. This study explores community engagement founded on relational theory and proposed a typology of engagement employing a relational framework. An exploratory study of 20 Australian infrastructure projects with a mandatory consultation component is analyzed applying this framework. Results indicate little discrimination between the terms engagement, consultation, and participation; however, a range of tactics supported both collaborative and advocacy approaches. The implications for adopting a relational framework for community engagement programs are discussed.

Measuring costs of sustainability issues in highway infrastructure : perception of stakeholders in Australia

With increasing pressure to deliver environmentally friendly and socially responsible highway infrastructure projects, stakeholders are also putting significant focus on the early identification of financial viability and outcomes for these projects. Infrastructure development typically requires major capital input, which may cause serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability has added new dimensions to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the cost front. Comprehensive analysis of the cost implications of implementing place sustainable measures in highway infrastructure throughout its lifespan is highly desirable and will become an essential part of the highway development process and a primary concern for decision makers. This paper discusses an ongoing research which seeks to identify cost elements and issues related to sustainable measures for highway infrastructure projects. Through life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA), financial implications of pursuing sustainability, which are highly concerned by the construction stakeholders, have been assessed to aid the decision making when contemplating the design, development and operation of highway infrastructure. An extensive literature review and evaluation of project reports from previous Australian highway projects was first conducted to reveal all potential cost elements. This provided the foundation for a questionnaire survey, which helped identify those specific issues and related costs that project stakeholders consider to be most critical in the Australian industry context. Through the survey, three key stakeholders in highway infrastructure development, namely consultants, contractors and government agencies, provided their views on the specific selection and priority ranking of the various categories. Findings of the survey are being integrated into proven LCCA models for further enhancement. A new LCCA model will be developed to assist the stakeholders to evaluate costs and investment decisions and reach optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.