Innovation care pathways and the healthcare built environment: An explanatory framework and research agenda

The built environment in which health and social care is delivered can have an impact on the efficiency and outcomes of care processes. The health-care estate is large and growing and is expensive to build, adapt and maintain. The design of these buildings is a complex, difficult and political process. Better use of care pathways as an input to the design and use of the built environment has the potential to deliver significant benefits. A number of variations on the idea of care pathways are already used in designing health-care buildings but this is under-researched. This paper provides a framework for thinking about care pathways and the health-care built environment. The framework distinguishes between five different pathway ‘types’ defined for the purpose of understanding the relationship between pathways and infrastructure. The five types are: ‘care pathways’, ‘integrated care pathways’, ‘patient pathways’, ‘patient journeys’ and ‘patient flows’. The built environment implications of each type are discussed and recommendations made for those involved in either building development or care pathway projects.

Perspectives on experiences of innovation: the development of an assessment methodology appropriate to construction project organizations

The UK construction industry is in the process of trying to adopt a new culture based on the large-scale take up of innovative practices. Through the Demonstration Project process many organizations are implementing changed practices and learning from the experiences of others. This is probably the largest experiment in innovation in any industry in recent times. The long-term success will be measured by the effectiveness of embedding the new practices in the organization. As yet there is no recognized approach to measuring the receptivity of the organization to the innovation process as an indication of the likelihood of long-term development. The development of an appropriate approach is described here. Existing approaches to the measurement of the take up of innovation were reviewed and where appropriate used as the base for the development of a questionnaire. The questionnaire could be applicable to multi-organizational construction project situations such that the output could determine an individual organization's innovative practices via an innovation scorecard, a project team's approach or it could be used to survey a wide cross-section of the industry.

Learning across business sectors: Knowledge sharing between aerospace and construction

This report addresses the extent that managerial practices can be shared between the aerospace and construction sectors. Current recipes for learning from other industries tend to be oversimplistic and often fail to recognise the embedded and contextual nature of managerial knowledge. Knowledge sharing between business sectors is best understood as an essential source of innovation. The process of comparison challenges assumptions and better equips managers to cope with future change. Comparisons between the aerospace and construction sectors are especially useful because they are so different. The two sectors differ hugely in terms of their institutional context, structure and technological intensity. The aerospace sector has experienced extensive consolidation and is dominated by a small number of global companies. Aerospace companies operate within complex networks of global interdependency such that collaborative working is a commercial imperative. In contrast, the construction sector remains highly fragmented and is characterised by a continued reliance on small firms. The vast majority of construction firms compete within localised markets that are too often characterised by opportunistic behaviour. Comparing construction to aerospace highlights the unique characteristics of both sectors and helps explain how managerial practices are mediated by context. Detailed comparisons between the two sectors are made in a range of areas and guidance is provided for the implementation of knowledge sharing strategies within and across organisations. The commonly accepted notion of ‘best practice’ is exposed as a myth. Indeed, universal models of best practice can be detrimental to performance by deflecting from the need to adapt continuously to changing circumstances. Competitiveness in the construction sector too often rests on efficiency in managing contracts, with a particular emphasis on the allocation of risk. Innovation in construction tends to be problem-driven and is rarely shared from project to project. In aerospace, the dominant model of competitiveness means that firms have little choice other than to invest in continuous innovation, despite difficult trading conditions. Research and development (R&D) expenditure in aerospace continues to rise as a percentage of turnovers. A sustained capacity for innovation within the aerospace sector depends crucially upon stability and continuity of work. In the construction sector, the emergence of the ‘hollowed-out’ firm has undermined the industry’s capacity for innovation. Integrated procurement contexts such as prime contracting in construction potentially provide a more supportive climate for an innovation-based model of competitiveness. However, investment in new ways of working depends upon a shift in thinking not only amongst construction contractors, but also amongst the industry’s major clients.

Implementing innovation in construction: Contexts, relative boundedness and actor-network theory

Theoretical understanding of the implementation and use of innovations within construction contexts is discussed and developed. It is argued that both the rhetoric of the 'improvement agenda' within construction and theories of innovation fail to account for the complex contexts and disparate perspectives which characterize construction work. To address this, the concept of relative boundedness is offered. Relatively unbounded innovation is characterized by a lack of a coherent central driving force or mediator with the ability to reconcile potential conflicts and overcome resistance to implementation. This is a situation not exclusive to, but certainly indicative of, much construction project work. Drawing on empirical material from the implementation of new design and coordination technologies on a large construction project, the concept is developed, concentrating on the negotiations and translations implementation mobilized. An actor-network theory (ANT) approach is adopted, which emphasizes the roles that both human actors and non-human agents play in the performance and outcomes of these interactions. Three aspects of how relative boundedness is constituted and affected are described; through the robustness of existing practices and expectations, through the delegation of interests on to technological artefacts and through the mobilization of actors and artefacts to constrain and limit the scope of negotiations over new technology implementation.