Search results

Innovation is constantly present in the construction industry, however, mainly on a single project level. Initiating and implementing inter-organizational innovation in a multi-project context such as in urban development entails large complexity, for example, because of the many interdependent projects and users of innovation. The users’ influence on inter-organizational innovation in a multi-project context has not been fully explored. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to discuss how users influence inter-organizational innovation in multi-project contexts by mapping the receptiveness for change.

A single case study approach was used, where empirical material including semi-structured interviews in combination with meeting observations, document studies and participative workshops were gathered. The rich empirical material, studying inter-organizational innovation in an urban development context, was mapped based on the receptive context for change framework.

A receptive context for change was not present in the studied multi-project context. Communication to develop and implement inter-organizational innovation was not sufficient and the clients’ procurement strategies were to a large extent not developed to facilitate inter-organizational innovation. Findings show differences in users’ possibility and aim to implement inter-organizational innovation.

The mapping of the receptive context to influence inter-organizational innovation widens the knowledge base and provides valuable insights on how inter-organizational innovation may be implemented in the loosely coupled construction industry. Furthermore, the findings broaden the discussion on clients as innovation supporters, and contribute to the debate on clients as innovation supporters, by highlighting the importance of distinguishing between different types of clients.

In recent decades, higher education institutes (HEIs) have come under pressure to cooperate with society as a whole. This shift towards an increased focus on third mission and social innovation activities implies a substantial organizational change process for many HEIs, as they need to initiate both structural and cultural changes. This paper provides guidance for such change processes by examining the views and attitudes of academic and administrative staff, as well as students within the HEIs over a period in which the HEIs increase their focus on social innovation.

The study uses a longitudinal quantitative approach consisting of a survey of administrative and academic staff, as well as students at two German HEIs. The authors studied members’ attitudes towards third mission and social innovation activities (N = 3470).

Results suggest that the university members’ attitudes towards third mission and social innovation are positive but change to some extent over time. Different aspects shape the attitudes within the three groups (administrative staff, academic staff and students). Furthermore, attitudes vary among academic employees who are involved in the process and those who are not.

The findings provide useful information for university managers and anyone aiming to promote social innovation at HEIs.

The study examines how attitudes of university members change whenever social innovation takes place at HEIs. This study includes data on the participation and empowerment of all HEI members in view of the important role that HEIs can play as supporters of social innovation.

The authors explore how social approval assets, namely status and reputation, are used to legitimate and categorise a new national university. They argue that in the course of the legitimation process, status and reputation work as stakeholder-oriented value-creating benefits. The authors specifically analyse the discursive constructions and labels used in the process and how the process enables nationwide university reform.

The authors’ longitudinal case study utilises critical discourse analysis and analyses media and policy discourses regarding the birth of Aalto University.

The findings suggest that the legitimation of the new university was accomplished through the use of two distinct discourses: one on higher education and another on the market economy. These discourses not only sought to legitimise the new university as categorically different from existing Finnish universities, but also rationalised the merger using the expected reputation and status benefits that were claimed would accrue for supporters.

This study elaborates on the role of various social approval assets and labels in legitimation processes and explores how policy enforcement can take place in arenas that are not necessarily perceived as policymaking. For managers, it is crucial to understand how a chosen label (name) can result in both stakeholder support and resistance, and how important it is to anticipate the changes a label can invoke.

The authors propose that the use of several labels regarding a new organisation is strategically beneficial to attracting multiple audiences who may hold conflicting interests in terms of what the organisation and its offerings should embody. They propose that even though status and reputation have traditionally been defined as possessions of an organisation, they should be further understood as concepts used to disseminate and justify the interests, norms, structures and values in a stakeholder network.

This article considers the nature and role of leadership in three ideal types of public management innovation: politically‐led responses to crises, organizational turnarounds engineered by newly‐appointed agency heads, and bottom‐up innovations initiated by front‐line public servants and middle managers. Quantitative results from public sector innovation awards indicate that bottom‐up innovation occurs much more frequently than conventional wisdom would indicate. Effective political leadership in a crisis requires decision making that employs a wide search for information, broad consultation, and skeptical examination of a wide range of options. Successful leadership of a turnaround requires an agency head to regain political confidence, reach out to stakeholders and clients, and to convince dispirited staff that change is possible and that their efforts to do better will be supported. Political leaders and agency heads can create a supportive climate for bottom‐up innovation by consulting staff, instituting formal awards and informal recognition for innovators, promoting innovators, protecting innovators from control‐oriented central agencies, and publicly championing bottom‐up innovations that have proven successful and have popular appeal.

The experiences are the basis of the tourist sector and the creation of unique and unforgettable ones allows the differentiation from the competition. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of the experience when visiting a zoo on our emotions and how they influence our (positive and/or negative) behaviors and to investigate whether an innovation (gamification programs) could be used to intensify the relations proposed.

The authors collected the experiences lived by 242 visitors in BIOPARC Valencia (a zoological park). Two subsamples were identified: 166 insatiable tourists who expressed that the gamification would complete their experience, and 76 conventional tourists who indicated that the current experience did not need any kind of improvement.

The results show that some of the proposed relationships are more tenuous among the insatiable visitors, defenders of gamification, which allows the authors to verify the possibilities offered by gamification.

First, although the impact of experiential modules on emotions and behaviors has already been investigated, as far as behavioral effects are concerned, the difference between positive behaviors (loyalty) and negative behaviors (complaints and claims) has not been addressed. Second, the relationship between both types of behaviors (positive and negative) in this sector has not been studied to date. Finally, although the literature recognizes the impact of technology and its importance as an instrument of experiential marketing, its empirical exploration remains uninvestigated. Indeed, to date, the willingness of consumers to adopt gamified strategies to improve their tourism experiences has not been investigated.

This article aims to present and discuss research findings on 360 degree assessments of team role behaviours in different contexts. In so doing, it brings together and develops two themes previously explored by the author, namely: the need to introduce a significant social dimension into thinking about team roles; the need to recognise that appropriate leadership behaviour is not universal but contingent upon context.

A mixed sample of public sector managers in the UK completed a team role self-assessment questionnaire and had a 360 degree assessment completed on them. The research looked at the degree of correlation between the self-assessments and the 360 assessments and its statistical significance, exploring the ways in which the nine team roles are more or less valued in different contexts.

Statistically significant relationships were found between measures of leadership contexts and team role behaviours. More importantly for this research, 360 degree assessments of team role behaviours were also found to vary in different contexts. Similarities and differences were found in the team roles behaviours that were typical in particular contexts and those that were valued in such contexts.

The range of contexts explored in this article was limited. Two contextual variables derived from the model of “dynamic” leadership were examined, namely the level of influence over change and the level of influence over others. In both cases, high and low levels of influence were considered. It would be useful to explore other contextual variables. It would also be useful to see if the observed relationships were found in situations other than the UK public sector.

First, the findings reinforce the view that there is a significant social dimension to team roles, they cannot be viewed merely as clusters of personality traits, they are related to social roles and the influence people have in such roles. Second, teams are likely to be more effective if the behaviour of individual team members is appropriate to the social roles and contexts that they find themselves in. Third, what people tend to do in particular situations is not necessarily the same as that which is valued in such situations.

The findings reinforce the conclusions of earlier research by the author and associates. In so doing, they lend support to original team role and leadership models developed by these individuals, as well as highlighting links between the two models. They also highlight differences between what people tend to do in particular situations and what is likely to be valued in such situations.

This paper aims to identify how a public client’s use of control systems (process, output and social control) affect innovation possibilities in construction projects.

Semi-structured interviews about six infrastructure projects were conducted to identify respondents’ views on innovation possibilities. These possibilities were then analyzed from an organizational control perspective within principal–agent relationships between the Swedish Transport Administration (STA) and their contractors.

How the client uses control systems affects innovation possibilities. Relying on process control could negatively affect innovation opportunities, whereas output control could have a positive influence. In addition, social control seems to have a weak effect, as the STA appears not to use social control to facilitate joint innovation. Public clients must comply with the Public Procurement Act and, therefore, retain the requirements specified in the tendering documents. Much of the steering of the execution is connected to the ex ante phase (before signing the contract), which affects innovation possibilities in the design and execution phases for the contractor.

This study was conducted with only one client, thus limiting its generalizability. However, the findings provide an important stepping stone to further investigation into balancing control systems and creating innovation possibilities in a principal–agent relationship.

Although public procurement has increasingly been emphasized as a major potential source of innovation, studying how a public client’s use of organizational control systems affects innovation possibilities in the construction sector has received scant attention.

The paper aims to examine the effect of knowledge management processes (knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization) and knowledge management approaches (social network, codification and personalization) on innovation in Jordanian consultancy firms.

A questionnaire that targets 266 respondents resulted in 216 usable ones with a response rate of 81.2 per cent. To test the research hypotheses, a multiple regression analysis was conducted, in addition to descriptive statistics that provide a background about the respondents.

The analysis showed that there is a significant and positive impact of knowledge management processes on innovation in Jordanian consulting firms, as well as a significant and positive effect of codification and personalization approaches on innovation, while the social network approach has a significant negative impact with innovation.

This is the first study that examines the effect of knowledge management processes (knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization) and knowledge management approaches (social network, codification and personalization) on innovation in Jordanian consultancy firms.

Knowledge management (KM) has emerged in recent times as a phenomenon with wide‐ranging implications for organizational innovation and competitiveness. Supporters argue that as organizations understand the value of KM, they have the opportunity to establish long‐term internal strengths, which will lead to external competitive advantage. Further, we find the current literature advocates that KM can be implemented in every organizational discipline. KM is approached from several different perspectives, and a number of these are used to structure our paper and identify emerging factors in: strategy, human resources management (HRM), information technology (IT), total quality management (TQM), and marketing. This paper presents a summary of key responses to a recent survey of FTSE 100 companies conducted by the authors, which shows that KM is an extremely popular management topic, yet relatively few organizations have serious implementation programs in place. Also presented are findings from longitudinal studies of six case organizations, which have been approaching and deploying KM over the last three years. The academic arguments for organizations to be proactive in KM are strong and compelling. Our research identifies the critical factors that respondents feel are vital for successful KM implementation, and these provide a basis for a further stage of the study which considers how best to develop appropriate performance measurements.

The aim of this paper is to study and empirically test the relationship between employees' perceptions of the two motivation-enhancing human resource management (HRM) practices of reward and performance appraisal and both incremental and radical innovation. The paper examines whether innovative work behaviour (IWB) mediates the hypothesised relationship.

Data were collected from 313 unit managers in manufacturing, pharmaceutical and technology companies in Jordan. Structural equation modelling (SEM) using AMOS v27 was employed to analyse the data and test the hypotheses.

The study finds that employees perceive rewards to be significant and to directly influence incremental and radical innovation. Additionally, employees perceive that performance appraisal to be significant for incremental innovation. The study also finds that IWB mediates the relationship between rewards, performance appraisal and incremental and radical innovation. No support was found for the impact of performance appraisal on radical innovation.

Distinctively, this paper considers both incremental and radical innovation in studying the link between HRM practices and innovation. It also takes an intra-organisational perspective by considering employees' perceptions of rewards and performance in fostering innovation. Additionally, it assesses the impact of IWB in mediating the relationship between rewards, performance appraisal and innovation. IWB is rarely empirically studied in the HRM–innovation link specifically when linked with radical and incremental innovation.