The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project

Gil, Nuno; Miozzo, Marcela; Massini, Silvia

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.011

Cited by 86 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is because in most large projects, delivering a technological response is a cooperative effort involving firms that have collective responsibilities for systems and their interfaces (Barlow, 2000;Gil, Miozzo, & Massini, 2012;Stinchcombe & Heimer, 1985). Changes require engaging network partners in order to negotiate the technological response (Miller & Lessard, 2000).…”

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Changes require engaging network partners in order to negotiate the technological response (Miller & Lessard, 2000). Integration of the novel product requires involving stakeholders, so that impacts to the rest of the project can be fully understood-including any impacts to the eventual operation of the asset (Gil et al, 2012).…”

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, the ability to deliver a novel product technology also relies heavily on the ability to leverage and communicate the value of the novel product to the network of relationships that are affected by it (Gil et al, 2012). A major reason that change requires significant involvement of the network is the complicated and nested nature of the technologies in CoPS, requiring the integration of knowledge residing in disparate firms (Brusoni, Prencipe, & Pavitt, 2001).…”

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The market with the components and subsystems are defined by this CoPS development. Thus, CoPs-related novel products do not diffuse per se, but are introduced by negotiating iteratively with existing customers and network partners, who integrate novel products into their products and systems at appropriate times within the context of the industry projects (Gil et al, 2012;Taylor, Levitt, & Fellow, 2006). This does not serve to make the diffusion of novel product innovation easy; it is just negotiated inter-organisationally (Miller & Lessard, 2000).…”

Section: Cops Have Well-defined Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inequitable risk sharing would be making the contractor pay for changes, even though that contractor would have made initial estimates based on insufficient information. The structure of risks and rewards relate directly to the levels of innovation the project achieves (Barlow, 2000;Davies et al, 2009;Gil et al, 2012;Miller & Lessard, 2000). When there is equal sharing of risks, and the rewards structure incentivises firms toward collaborative behaviours, then an innovative problem-solving culture ensues at the project level.…”

Section: Cops Literature Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Novel product innovation in project-based firms: explaining innovation where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes

Ford¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Project-based firms (PBFs) are an increasingly important firm type in today's projectdriven world. Over the next two decades, PBFs will transform nearly $60 trillion into complex product systems (CoPS) that comprise the communication, energy, and transportation infrastructure of our modern global economy. In the process, they will participate in a collective technological development process that is iterative, intensely interorganisational, and dominated by their participation in large industry projects. In this environment, PBFs will deliver components, subsystems, and CoPS, some being novel products that are new to the world. These are called CoPS-related novel products.However, the current understanding of how PBFs introduce CoPS-related novel products is lacking. In general, the existing innovation literature does not provide an adequate inter-organisational perspective, which is necessary to explain the development of new The CoPS innovation literature itself remains too focused on the role of large system integrators, and not on the broader network of firms that support innovation. This leaves unscrutinised rest of the 'project-based productive network' of firms delivering products (components, technologies, and subsystems) into the higher-level CoPS. Taken together, the current literature inadequately addresses many factors that are important to novel product innovation in PBFs. Therefore, the central research question this thesis aims to answer is: What factors facilitate PBFs' ability to introduce novel product innovations in environments where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes?Three specific challenges are imperative to understanding novel product introduction in PBFs. The first relates to the project-based nature of organising, which means that PBFs have contingent opportunities for novel product innovation, depending upon the circumstances of the projects they conduct. This is called the contingent opportunities problem. The second challenge is that PBFs have to ensure that their innovations are compatible with our technologies in their environment. This is called the technological interdependencies problem. The third challenge is that PBFs have enduring interorganisational commitments that extend across the projects they conduct. This is called the enduring relationships problem.ii Novel product innovation in project-based firms Three research studies were designed and conducted to address the three specific challenges. The research is based on survey data collected from PBFs in the Australian upstream oil and gas industry. Study 1 investigates capabilities that PBFs use to overcome the contingent opportunities problems. This study finds that firms use an adaptive problemsolving capability to recognise opportunities within projects, and are reliant on networking capabilities to bring about novel product innovations. Study 2 investigates how PBFs use both inbound and outbound non-pecuniary open innovation practices to resolve technological interdependencies. This stud...

show abstract

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contingent Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cops Have Well-defined Marketsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cops Literature Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Novel product innovation in project-based firms: explaining innovation where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes

Ford¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Making Innovation Happen in a Megaproject: London's Crossrail Suburban Railway System

Davies

MacAulay

DeBarro³

et al. 2014

Project Management Journal

132

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

■Isolated pockets of innovation can be found in projects-such as the novel solution used to redesign the Velodrome roof during the London 2012 Olympics-but there have been few, if any, systematic efforts to manage innovation in a megaproject. This paper presents the initial findings of an ongoing threeyear (2012)(2013)(2014) action research project between Crossrail and researchers at Imperial College London and University College London. Action research is well suited to a setting where an intervention is required to diagnose and solve an organizational problem and produce scientific findings (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Van de Ven, 2007). Undertaken in collaboration with practitioners, the aim of action research is to transform the research setting through a process of critical inquiry and action. Our engagement with Crossrail aimed to formulate and implement an innovation strategy to improve the performance and outcomes of the project. We identified four stages-or windows of opportunity-to intervene to generate, discover, and implement innovation in a megaproject: (1) the bridging window during the front-end when ideas, learning, and practices from other projects and industries can be used to create an innovative project process, organization, and governance structure; (2) the engaging window, when tendering and contractual processes can be used by the client to encourage contractors and suppliers to develop novel ideas and innovative solutions; (3) the leveraging window, when all the parties involved-clients, delivery partners, and suppliers-are mobilized to develop novel ideas, new technologies, and organizational practices to improve performance; and (4) the exchanging window at the back-end, when ideas and resources for innovation can be (re) combined with those of other projects in the wider innovation ecosystem to improve performance. The first two stages had largely occurred when we became involved in the Crossrail project in 2012. Our intervention addressed the final two stages, when we assisted in the development and implementation of an innovation strategy. Core to this strategy was a coordinated mobilization of the innovative capabilities across the project supply chain. Though, to be successful, this approach had to be open enough to span organizational boundaries beyond the supply chain, reaching into the broader ecosystem. The four windows provide a valuable new heuristic for organizing innovation in megaprojects, pointing to areas where project managers can craft targeted innovation interventions and compare their efforts with those of others.

show abstract

Dynamic Capabilities in Complex Projects: The Case of London Heathrow Terminal 5

Davies

Dodgson

Gann

2016

Project Management Journal

147

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas existing approaches and empirical studies of dynamic capabilities focus on the strategic innovation activities of firms (i.e., permanent organizations executing multiple projects and programs), this article identifies how certain types of dynamic capabilities are required to deliver large, complex, and risky projects involving multiple parties. Our longitudinal study of the design and construction of Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 by the British Airports Authority (BAA) makes three main contributions to the literature: (1) It contributes to the project management literature by identifying how specific dynamic capabilities (BAA’s “T5 Agreement,” strategic behaviors, and collaborative processes) are developed through a three‐phase process (learning, codifying, and mobilizing) to support the strategic management of complex projects. (2) While emphasizing their importance for the successful management of complex projects, our findings also underline the continuing fragility of dynamic capabilities. (3) The case study reveals their fluidity and balancing role with respect to demands for stability and change in complex, uncertain, and volatile project environments.

show abstract

The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project

Cited by 86 publications

References 68 publications

Novel product innovation in project-based firms: explaining innovation where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes

Novel product innovation in project-based firms: explaining innovation where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes

Making Innovation Happen in a Megaproject: London's Crossrail Suburban Railway System

Dynamic Capabilities in Complex Projects: The Case of London Heathrow Terminal 5

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About