Innovation Performance and Its Impact on Profitability Among Different Sectors in the Australian Construction Industry

Abstract

The BRITE (Building Research Information Technology and Environment) project was established by the Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation to encourage innovation in the construction industry. While innovation is generally perceived to be broadly beneficial, there has been little formal study of its occurrence or impact in Australian construction or of the factors which foster an innovative atmosphere within an enterprise. In order to benchmark innovation performance, the BRITE project conducted a survey in 2004 into the nature, incidence and variety of technological and organisational innovations in various sectors of the industry. With some exceptions, the survey found that clients and consultants engaged in significantly higher levels of innovation than did suppliers, main contractors or trade contractors. Within the industry sectors those organisations classified as high innovators favoured the adoption of advanced management practices and had formal evaluation systems in place to judge their progress. They reported significant positive impacts on their profitability from innovation and can therefore provide instructive examples for the rest of the industry to follow.

Stakeholder perception of reverse logistics practices on supply chain performance

“…The study was conducted in the South East Queensland region of Australia as the Australian construction industry is known for the adoption of novel and innovative solutions (Hardie, Miller, Manley, & McFallan, 2006). Higher level construction industry employees including senior construction managers, civil engineers, and construction engineers were targeted for the data collection, as the opinions of experts in different industries provide valuable data (Caspari, Eriksson, & Nåden, 2011).…”

Assessment of the Innovation Performance of Nigerian Quantity Surveying Firms

“…On the other hand, in the construction industry, innovation performance indicators vary. This is because behavioural attitudes towards embracing organizational change in terms of business strategies are not the same (Hardie et al, 2012). According to Choi et al (2009), innovation performance indicators are product innovation and process innovation.…”

“…In the study of 183 Chinese construction companies, it was concluded that there exists a direct relationship between organizational culture and the innovation speed and quality of the firms (Chen et al, 2018). In the study of Hardie et al (2012), improve efficiency/productivity, improve technical performance, improve quality, improve accuracy, reduce cost, reduce in time, respond to clients/customers need, meet regulations/standards, and others are the identified drivers to innovation performance. Being a function of multiple indicators, Lo & Kam (2021) emphasized innovation success should be measured in different organization strategies, processes and outputs.…”

“…The research challenge to promote the measurement of firms' innovation performance is continuously receiving attention from scholars and professionals in the construction industry (Ajayi et al, 2021a;Hardie et al, 2012;Lo & Kam, 2021;Wang et al, 2021;Yankah & Dadzie, 2015). Innovative performance is described as the quality of the innovation process (Mazur & Invo, 2017).…”

Critical success factors, opportunities and threats of the cost management profession: the case of Australasian quantity surveying firms

“…Many of the key opportunities discussed in literature were echoed in the feedback from respondents. The opportunities revealed in the literature include: demand for new services brought about by legislation such as the mandatory disclosure of office building energy efficiency rating in Australia (NFEE, 2009); globalisation and the resultant opportunities for internationalising of businesses [Dixon, 1998;Frei, (2010), p.1;; increased involvement in alternative procurement techniques (Frei and Mbachu, 2009;Hardie et al, 2005;Kennedy and Akintoye, 1995;Potts, 2004); efficiency increases afforded by advances in information technology (Best et al, 1996(Best et al, , 1991Cavill, 1999;Smith, 2004;Tse and Wong, 2004;Watkins and Adetola, 2006), and; growth in environmentally sustainable design (ESD) presenting options for diversification (Smith, 2004). The opportunity afforded by government stimulus spending on building construction as discussed by Kennedy (2009) was not specifically raised as an opportunity.…”