Low Innovation among Building Material Suppliers: The Natural Level of the Trade

Jan Sundquist

Abstract


 

Many studies concerning innovation have been carried out on building contractors, but very few have studied innovation among the suppliers of building materials. In Sweden the cost of building materials is approximately 40% of the total building costs. Some products also need more handeling than others, therefore not only cost but also productivity is affectedby the suppliers of building materials. This article focuses on innovation among building material suppliers which is found to be low. The suppliers are compared to other lines of business to show the level of their innovation processes. The article is based upon slightly over 800 companies of various sizes. Important findings are:A smaller proportion of the Building Material suppliers than of the Other Manufacturers offer new products, invest in R&D, machinery and marketing the introduction of products.The Building Material Suppliers have a greater proportion of their sales from older products and have older equipment than Other Manufacturers.The Building Material Suppliers have poorer production processes and they are not as good at finding new ides as the Other ManufacturersThe study reveals barriers within the trade, where motivation seems to be of great importance.

Keywords


innovation, processes, building material suppliers, new prodicts, development

Full Text:

PDF

References


Andersson et al. (1983). Krâvande fâretagsledning. Liber Fârlag, Lund.

Barrett, P., Sexton, M. G. (2003). A literature synthesis of innovation in small construction firms: insights, ambiguities and questions. Construction Management and Economics, 21, pp. 613-622, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000134147

3 DIST. (1998). Building for growth: A draft strategy for the building and construction industry. Department of Industry Science and Tourism. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia."

Firm Foundations. (2002). A Study of New Zealand Business Practices & Performance. Ministry of Economic Development, New Zealand.

Gann, D. M., Salter, A. J. (2000). Innovation in project-based, serviced-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems. Research Policy, 29 (7, 8), pp. 955-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00114-1

Gearing up. (1999). A Study of Best Manufacturing Practice in New Zealand, Ministry of Commerce, New Zealand.

Larsson, B., Sundqvist, J. (2003). How to Collect Ideas for the Development of Product and Process Innovations in the Building Process. Two Case Studies. Knowledge Construction, Proceedings of the Joint International Symposium of CIB Working Commissions W55, pp. 408-414.

Leading the way (1994). Ministry of Commerce, New Zealand.

Lenard, D. J. (1996). Innovation and industrial culture in the Australian construction industry: A comparative benchmarking analysis of critical cultural indices underpinning innovation. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of New Castle, New Castle.

Loosemore, M., Choo, H., Koh, H. (2002). Encouraging R & D in construction. ASCE Journal of professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 128 (1), pp. 25-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2002)128:1(25)

Loosemore, M. (2004). Impediments to reform in the Australian Building and Construction Industry. The Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 3, no2.

Persson, Wirmark, M., Wijkman, P., M. (2002). Tillverkningsindustrins konkurrenskraft i Gâteborgsregionen, Gothenburg Business School, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg.

Sundqvist, J. (2002). Insikter fâr framgâng. ESI, ârebro University, ârebro.

Sexton, M., Barret, P. (2003). A literature synthesis of innovation in small construction firms: insights, ambiguities and questions. Construction Management and Economics, 21, pp. 613 - 622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000134147,

SOU 2000:44. (2000). Frân byggsekt till byggsektor . byggkostnadsdelegationens betânkande. Statens offentliga utredningar, Stockholm.

Winch, G., M. (2003). How innovative is construction ? Comparing aggregated data on construction innovation and other sectors . case of apples and pears. Construction Management and Economics, 21, pp. 651 - 654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0144619032000113708




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v4i1.2952