Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction

Abstract

Changes in the technologies of representation in a heterogeneous, distributed sociotechnical system, such as a large construction project, can instigate a complex pattern of innovations in technologies, practices, structures, and strategies. We studied the adoption of digital three-dimensional (3-D) representations in the building projects of the architect Frank O. Gehry, and observed that multiple, heterogeneous firms in those projects produced diverse innovations, each of which created a wake of innovation. Together, these multiple wakes of innovation produce a complex landscape of innovations with unpredictable peaks and valleys. Gehry’s adoption of digital 3-D representations disturbed the ecology of interactions and stimulated innovations in his project networks by: providing path-creating innovation trajectories in separate communities of practice, creating trading zones where communities could create knowledge about diverse innovations, and offering a means for intercalating innovations across heterogeneous communities. Our study suggests that changes in digital representations that are central to the functioning of a distributed system can engender multiple innovations in technologies, work practices, and knowledge across multiple communities, each of which is following its own distinctive tempo and trajectory.

An integrated model of innovation drivers for smaller software firms

“…Managing development teams to create innovation (Boland Jr., Lyytinen, & Yoo, 2007;R. G. Cooper, 2011;Gassmann et al, 2006;Martin, 2011;Nambisan, Agarwal, & Tanniru, 1999;Napier et al, 2011;Romijn & Albaladejo, 2002;van den Ende & Wijnberg, 2003) Work Environment Promoting a creative work environment, minimising creativity barriers (R. G. Cooper, 2011;Hocova, E Cunha, & Staníček, 2009;Maccrimmon & Wagner, 1994;Napier et al, 2011;Romijn & Albaladejo, 2002) …”

“…Creating an overall sense of direction in response to market and technology developments (Boland Jr. et al, 2007;Napier et al, 2011;van den Ende & Wijnberg, 2003;Weterings & Boschma, 2009;Weterings & Kotooster, 2007;Yang & Hsiao, 2009) …”

“…The use of understandings of the probable direction of future evolution of software and hardware infrastructures, platforms and technologies to guide innovation (Aerts, Goossenaerts, Hammer, & Wortmann, 2004;Boland Jr. et al, 2007;Brem & Voigt, 2009b;R. G. Cooper, 2011;Hanninen, 2007;Hung & Whittington, 2011;Napier et al, 2011;Romijn & Albaladejo, 2002;Yang & Hsiao, 2009) User Domain Understanding Using understandings of customers' business domain or specialised internal knowledge to drive innovation (Gray et al, 2011;Hanninen, 2007;Igira, 2008;Koc, 2007;Martin, 2011;Mich, Berry, Anesi, & M., 2005;Raasch, 2011;Weterings & Boschma, 2009;Yang & Hsiao, 2009) …”

“…Exploiting external connections, collaborations and partnerships to promote (Boland Jr. et al, 2007;Heirman & Clarysse, 2007;Henkel, 2006;Hung & Whittington, 2011;Lee & Cole, 2003;Leimeister et al, 2009;Morrison et al, innovation 2000;Pisano & Verganti, 2008;Romijn & Albaladejo, 2002;Sosa, 2011;van den Ende & Wijnberg, 2003;West & Gallagher, 2006) …”

“…Exploiting the technical development environment of a software firm to generate innovation (Aerts et al, 2004;Boland Jr. et al, 2007) The principle outputs are software process innovation and software product/service innovation, where process innovation is understood also to influence product and service development. Other concepts are understood to facilitate innovation, with a central group of influences closely associated with the team process (development framework, innovation tools and techniques, creative cognition, teamwork and software design capability).…”