Search results

This paper aims to report on data from case studies of development process, and a survey of use patterns over ten years, for 13 highly innovative products. While the paper does not claim concurrent commercialization (CC) as a universal solution, it aims to highlight significant correlates between management best practice, concurrent commercialization and builder use rates for these 13 highly innovative products in the USA residential construction industry.

To study the effect of CC on new‐product adoption rates by installers, the authors assembled data from the National Association of Home Builders' (NAHB) Builders' Practices Survey (BPS) for the years 1996 through 2005. The data collection was executed in three phases. Best practices were collected from literature. Explanatory variables regarding best practice and presence of CC were collected and measured through case studies. The measure of market penetration, based on the concept of innovativeness, was obtained from the BPS survey data.

Data analysis of 13 highly innovative products indicates that CC is consistent with accepted best practice in product development. These products suggest that some organizations might contain 100 percent CC with varying degrees of best practice management ideals, and also include equilibrium.

The extent to which products, with varying CC percentage, are affected by individual steps within CC is a direction for future research. The authors also did not have the ability to look at the entry year for other products strongly rooted in CC; there could be other explanations for a product entering the market strongly.

CC is essentially directed at designing a commercialization process, as opposed to designing a product, which benefits the product development from exposure to all members along the construction supply chain. CC, drawing on concurrent engineering, expands the definition of the market to include all supply‐chain participants, not just the installers and advocates the establishment of a complete supply chain, possible only if every member of the chain foresees net benefits to joining. In strengthening the commercialization process, the product might experience better probability of success.

The paper places reason upon product failure, in the residential construction industry, through further investigation of sound commercialization process.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a commercialization framework that outlines phases and functional areas for technical and business practices in getting innovative products to market. The development of this framework was motivated by a history of failures of entrepreneurial business ventures in the commercialization of construction products.

This paper presents Phase 1 of commercialization research efforts, which includes a definition of innovation and commercialization for the residential construction industry; a review of literature related to generic commercialization models; and construction of a new commercialization framework for innovative construction products. This paper also introduces Phase 2 of this research, which includes qualitative and quantitative knowledge capture from construction industry experts; and the development of a domain‐specific commercialization model for the residential industry based on these inputs to reflect the unique challenges of construction products.

This paper presents a generic commercialization framework as a basis for interpreting various data from product interviews and case study literature. These data were used to further specify the framework. This paper presents an example of the many construction products reviewed in this research and its possible impact on the framework.

The generic commercialization model presented here could benefit innovators of construction products. The research indicates the importance of key steps in the commercialization of these kinds of products.

Since, no model captured the specific issues of commercializing residential construction products, this paper introduces a basis for one. In creating a generic commercialization framework, this paper facilitates entrepreneurial product commercialization for the construction industry.

The aim of this paper is to present part of continuing research on the challenges of entrepreneurial business ventures to commercialize innovative construction products in the residential construction industry.

The authors use workshop and survey data on the role of the developer/builder to further develop the domain‐specific commercialization model for residential construction products. The authors propose a cross‐functional system to better facilitate innovation.

Successful concurrent commercialization requires risk sharing among all members of a product's supply chain. The authors advocate concurrent management in commercialization, which requires information sharing and knowledge transfer among supply‐chain members early in a commercialization project and a special form of concurrent engineering for construction products, which is called concurrent commercialization (CC).

The research indicates that addressing the developer/builder risk along the entire supply chain is one key determinant to a successful commercialization project. It also indicates that commercialization involves more than just technical product design; commercialization cuts across all functional areas.

The research data, along with the review of the literature on product innovation and commercialization, lead one to advocate concurrent engineering for construction products termed concurrent commercialization (CC). Since the research clearly indicates that the developer/builder is the most reluctant customer in the supply chain, CC applied to construction products emphasizes the influence of mitigating developer/builder risks in the design of a commercialization project.

The purpose of this paper is to advance knowledge on the advantages of integrating safety earlier in the construction project lifecycle.

A case study approach is used to collect data from construction sites in the USA, which performs poorly in construction safety and health, and Australia (AU), which performs well in construction safety and health. Qualitative data are collected to determine how and when safety is considered in the project lifecycle in both countries, and then the results are benchmarked to determine the benefits of addressing safety earlier in the process.

Data show that addressing a potential hazard earlier in the project lifecycle has performance benefits in terms of the level of hazard control.

The processes that are identified as possibly explaining the performance difference are just based on qualitative data from interviews. Targeted research addressing the relationship between these processes and safety outcomes is an opportunity for further research.

The case study data are used to identify specific processes that are used in AU that might be adopted in the USA to improve performance by integrating safety earlier into the decision-making process.

This paper highlights the advantages of integrating safety as a decision factor early in the process. Worker safety is not just an issue in the construction industry, and thus the findings are applicable to all industries in which worker safety is an issue.

This paper advances the safety in design literature by quantitatively supporting the link between when a hazard is addressed and performance. It also links the results to specific processes across countries, which advances the literature because most research in this area to data is within a single country.

In this chapter, I suggest that Connecticut’s and other states’ recent discontinuation of civil unions in the name of marriage “equality” marginalizes and demeans marriage – rejecting people who may nonetheless wish to codify their intimate partnerships – for purposes of legal “incidents,” including rights and privileges, like hospital visitation rights, testimonial privilege, inheritance rights, etc. In doing so, I also call for a rejuvenation of the practice of granting civil union licenses in these states.

This work provides validation of a model for successful commercialisation of innovative products for residential construction. The development of the model is motivated by the persistence of failed commercialisations due to inadequate business plans. This paper aims to discuss these issues.

The current paper validates the model with data from case studies of 15 manufacturers of recently commercialised innovative residential‐construction products. The research team interpreted the interview data and correlated this data with the model. The correlations illuminate critical steps within the commercialisation process; perceptions of the less important steps; decisions and resulting actions that support commercialisation, accelerators and barriers of commercialisation; and prototypical commercialisation processes.

A total of 15 case studies of successfully commercialised products provide empirical support for the commercialisation model that was developed from literature review and previous surveys.

The research is based on content analysis of in‐depth interviews from 15 case studies, a methodology that yields a small number of general conclusions from a large data set. More case studies are needed to expand the implications presented in this work. Conclusions drawn from the data have important implications for establishing a normative description of the process of transforming an invention into a commercialised innovation in residential construction.

The commercialisation findings presented here could benefit innovators and adopters of construction products. The research indicates best practices, key accelerators and key barriers to the commercialisation of products in the residential‐construction industry.

This work presents the second phase of development of a domain‐specific commercialisation model for innovative residential‐construction products. This commercialisation model serves as a roadmap to entrepreneurs, which avoids the most common pitfalls along the path of commercialisation.

Compares race relations in two suburban communities in order to show that middle‐class blacks meet with some success when they temporarily exchange their racial identity for a class‐based identity. Collects data through ethnography and individual interview to examine the conditions under which middle‐class blacks construct and assert a sub‐urban identity. States that success varies with the racial composition of the suburban community and the white neighbours’ level of the satisfaction with the community.