Search results

In a world of progressively more difficult business conditions, the capacity to innovate remains one of the most important attributes of all organizations. It's not, however, particularly easy to do. The quest for innovation is supported through a focus on learning, and particularly when learning is applied to increasing the productivity of knowledge tasks. To support this process, there are elements of infrastructure that are particularly important to develop, which include adoption of effective innovation methodology, as well as robust collaboration, attention to eliminating obstacles and enhancing the enablers of innovation, and providing effective work environments.

While a commonly-held mental image suggests that big corporations live very long lives, the reverse is actually true quite often, and the lifespan of companies is decreasing as the rate of change increases. The situation of accelerating change places ever greater challenges before each and every company, and while innovation is obviously a response to this dilemma, it turns out that not all types of innovation are equally valuable. Business model innovation, the subject of this paper, has proven to a tremendous source of competitive advantage. This paper examines many dimensions of business model innovation, focusing particularly on the relationship between a company and its customers, and the methods that companies use to grasp the bigger picture, or whole system perspective, that enables them to understand how their enterprise relates to the larger industry and broader economy in which it operates.

The traditional innovation process - consisting of a funnel coupled with project screening - suffers from several practical shortcomings and flaws. Overemphasis on the role of early stages, such as idea generation, overshadows subsequent phases of equal importance. The drive to feed as many ideas as possible into the funnel may cause congestion that slows down overall progress. Furthermore, the yield may be of low quality if ineffective gates allow too many infertile ideas to pass through the funnel. Processes may be inflexible and slow to react, especially if tied to the corporate planning calendar as often proposed. This is not to imply that these problems are inherent; they are instead the consequences of poor practices.

The authors discuss the disadvantages and suggest an alternative to overcome them. The proposed approach is driven by strategic business options and also introduces additional benefits. It produces savings in sunk costs and prematurely tied-up capital. It contributes to effective and economical use of resources, because a company commits irrevocably to only one step at a time. Lastly, options enable, and by their very nature even demand, active and adaptive management.

The dearth of green standards (GS) in sub-Saharan Africa is alarming and the green cost premiums (GCP) in seeking certification in emerging markets are scanty. This paper studied the Building Energy-Efficiency Code of Nigeria (BEEC) and estimated the potential GCPs associated with the various energy-efficiency ratings.

The study retrofitted 150 conventional residential bungalow and maisonette buildings using BEEC's energy-efficiency interventions and performed analytical estimating of the retrofitted designs. The mean cost premium associated with each energy-efficiency intervention is presented as well as their financial benefits and payback periods. The benefits are achievable financial-savings due to a reduction in energy consumption and savings in electricity payment estimated from the average energy demands of each building. An independent t-test was further conducted to determine the cost differential between energy-efficient design (ED) and conventional design over a five-year period.

The potential GCPs and their payback periods are actually less than feared. The study showed that less than 5% and 21% extra funding would be required to achieve 1 to 4-Star and 5-Star energy-efficiency ratings involving passive design interventions and photovoltaic systems. Passive and active design interventions produced a financial savings of $8.08/m² in electricity payment and $2.84/m² per annum in energy consumption reduction. The financial-savings ($10.92/m²) was objective to pay-off the GCPs in less than four years. The independent t-test analysis showed the cost of ED is more economical after four years into the project lifecycle.

The research provides cost benchmarks for navigating cost planning and budgetary decisions during ED implementation and births a departure point for advancing energy-efficient construction in developing markets from the rational economic decision perspective.

At a recent inquest upon the body of a woman who was alleged to have died as the result of taking certain drugs for an improper purpose, one of the witnesses described himself as “an analyst and manufacturing chemist,” but when asked by the coroner what qualifications he had, he replied : “I have no qualifications whatever. What I know I learned from my father, who was a well‐known ‘F.C.S.’” Comment on the “F.C.S.” is needless.

In Sri Lanka, a limited number of buildings have been certified for incorporation of green features and the reasons are attributed to green building investors who continue to perceive that green buildings are expensive. Further, the green building investors fail to appreciate the subsequent benefits received by those buildings during the operational phase. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to compare the life cycle cost (LCC) of green certified industrial manufacturing buildings with a similar form of the conventional buildings to establish the economic sustainability of green buildings.

The study involved a comparative case study analysis of two green buildings and a similar natured conventional building. The data required to perform the LCC analysis were extracted through documentary analysis.

The comparative analysis shows that the construction cost of a green industrial manufacturing building is 37 per cent higher than that of a similar natured conventional building while operation, maintenance and the end life cost of green buildings result in 28, 22 and 11 per cent savings, respectively. This results in an overall cost saving of 21 per cent in green buildings.

The current study provides an assessment of the total LCC of green industrial manufacturing buildings. In Sri Lanka, green industrial manufacturing buildings offer LCC saving of 21 per cent over its lifetime compared to similar natured conventional buildings. Thus, comparative analyses would enable green investors to make informed decisions before commissioning their investment in green facilities and thereby promote sustainable construction in Sri Lanka.