Managing short-term efficiency and long-term development through industrialized construction

There is a strong need for a productive and innovative infrastructure sector because of its monetary value and importance for the development of a sustainable society. An increased level of industrialization is often proposed as a way to improve efficiency and productivity in construction projects. In prior literature on industrialized construction, there are however neither many studies addressing more long-term aspects of innovation and sustainability nor studies within the infrastructure context. Organizational theory suggests that firms need to be ambidextrous and focus on both long-term exploration of new knowledge and technologies and short-term exploitation of current knowledge and technologies, in order to achieve sustainable development. Therefore, an investigation of how both short-term exploitative performance objectives and long-term explorative development can be addressed when implementing industrialized construction in infrastructure projects was conducted. A case study consisting of four infrastructure projects shows that the main drivers for increased industrialization are of an exploitative nature, focusing on cost savings and increased productivity through more efficient processes. The main barriers to increased industrialization are however related to both explorative and exploitative activities. Hence, by managing the identified barriers and explicitly addressing both exploitation and exploration, industrialized construction can improve both short-term efficiency and long-term innovation and sustainability.

[1]  M. J. Riley,et al.  COMPARISON OF CULTURES IN CONSTRUCTION AND MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES , 2001 .

[2]  Lars Stehn,et al.  Applicability of lean principles and practices in industrialized housing production , 2008 .

[3]  Graham Winch,et al.  Zephyrs of creative destruction: understanding the management of innovation in construction , 1998 .

[4]  Per Erik Eriksson,et al.  Client perceptions of barriers to partnering , 2008 .

[5]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  The interplay between exploration and exploitation. , 2006 .

[6]  Adler,et al.  Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system , 1999 .

[7]  Per Erik Eriksson,et al.  Exploration and exploitation in project-based organizations: Development and diffusion of knowledge at different organizational levels in construction companies , 2013 .

[8]  Michael Song,et al.  Technology development projects in road infrastructure: The relevance of government championing behavior , 2011 .

[9]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[10]  M. Gibbert,et al.  What passes as a rigorous case study , 2008 .

[11]  David Gann,et al.  Construction as a manufacturing process? Similarities and differences between industrialized housing and car production in Japan , 1996 .

[12]  Karen Manley,et al.  Adoption of innovative products on Australian road infrastructure projects , 2012 .

[13]  N. Gil,et al.  The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project , 2012 .

[14]  Mike Bresnen,et al.  Understanding the diffusion and application of new management ideas in construction , 2001 .

[15]  Graham Winch,et al.  Models of manufacturing and the construction process: the genesis of re-engineering construction , 2003 .

[16]  J. Turner,et al.  Quantity versus Quality in Project-Based Learning Practices , 2000 .

[17]  Alan D. Russell,et al.  Assessing Infrastructure Project Innovation Potential as a Function of Procurement Mode , 2008 .

[18]  B. Flyvbjerg,et al.  Different Cost Performance: Different Determinants? The Case of Cost Overruns in Dutch Transport Infrastructure Projects , 2012, 1307.2179.

[19]  A. Kadefors.  Institutions in building projects: Implications for flexibility and change , 1995 .

[20]  A. Tiwana.  Do bridging ties complement strong ties? An empirical examination of alliance ambidexterity , 2008 .

[21]  R. Stewart,et al.  Management Organization , 1957, Nature.

[22]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma , 2007 .

[23]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change , 1996 .

[24]  C. Gibson,et al.  THE ANTECEDENTS , CONSEQUENCES , AND MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY , 2004 .

[25]  Søren L. Buhl,et al.  What Causes Cost Overrun in Transport Infrastructure Projects? , 2004, 1304.4476.

[26]  Karen Manley,et al.  Key influences on construction innovation , 2004 .

[27]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[28]  Mendel Giezen,et al.  Keeping it simple? A case study into the advantages and disadvantages of reducing complexity in mega project planning , 2012 .

[29]  Per Erik Eriksson,et al.  Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construction project performance: A conceptual framework , 2011 .

[30]  Abang Abdullah Abang Ali,et al.  Construction performance comparison between conventional and industrialised building systems in Malaysia , 2006 .

[31]  R. Katila,et al.  Something Old, Something New: A Longitudinal Study of Search Behavior and New Product Introduction , 2002 .

[32]  Marianne W. Lewis,et al.  Managing Innovation Paradoxes: Ambidexterity Lessons from Leading Product Design Companies , 2010 .

[33]  Bengt Hansson,et al.  ASSESSING THE DEGREE OF INDUSTRIALISATION IN CONSTRUCTION - A CASE OF UGANDA , 2006 .

[34]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[35]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[36]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[37]  Seung Heon Han,et al.  Analyzing Schedule Delay of Mega Project: Lessons Learned From Korea Train Express , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[38]  Marek Korczynski.  THE LOW-TRUST ROUTE TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: INTER-FIRM RELATIONS IN THE UK ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY IN THE 1980S AND 1990S , 1996 .

[39]  Ting-ya Hsieh,et al.  Statistical analysis of causes for design change in highway construction on Taiwan , 2005 .

[40]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[41]  Per Erik Eriksson,et al.  Client perceived barriers to change of the construction process , 2010 .

[42]  Luke McLeod,et al.  Improving Productivity on a Troubled Bridge Project , 2011 .

[43]  Gerhard Girmscheid,et al.  Business Design Modeling for Industrialization in Construction: Cooperative Approach , 2012 .

[44]  FOR THE LACK OF A BOILERPLATE : TIPS ON WRITING UP ( AND REVIEWING ) , 2009 .

[45]  Markku V. J. Maula,et al.  Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations , 2009 .

[46]  Iris D. Tommelein,et al.  Consequences of competitive bidding in project-based production , 2005 .

[47]  Søren L. Buhl,et al.  How common and how large are cost overruns in transport infrastructure projects? , 2003 .

[48]  M. Pratt.  From the Editors: For the Lack of a Boilerplate: Tips on Writing Up (and Reviewing) Qualitative Research , 2009 .