IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v41y2012i2p452-466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Gil, Nuno
  • Miozzo, Marcela
  • Massini, Silvia

Abstract

We propose a conceptual framework to analyze technology adoption in mega infrastructure projects, and assess their potential to innovating large socio-technical systems. Drawing on an in-depth empirical analysis of Heathrow airport's Terminal 5 project, we find that innovation hinges on technology adoption decisions that are governed systematically by two intertwined determinants – assessment of expected profitability and development of absorptive capacity, both of which are distributed across various interdependent actors. On an ad hoc basis, technological decisions are also affected by other factors, namely attitudes toward risk, politics, and (lack of) established standards. We reveal how a schedule-driven project framing creates an underlying boundary condition that constrains the longitudinal process of building a ‘whole collective’ with capacity to absorb new technologies. The innovation potential of mega projects is thus subjected to a fundamental, unifying tension: on the one hand, they offer a one-off opportunity to invest in cutting-edge technologies and innovate socio-technical systems; on the other hand, project stakeholders have limited time to develop capacity to absorb novel technologies and negotiate differences on assessments of profitability and risk. Stakeholders may therefore be compelled to agree to adopt proven technologies upfront to reduce uncertainty and mitigate risks, thus limiting the innovation potential of new infrastructure development.

Suggested Citation

  • Gil, Nuno & Miozzo, Marcela & Massini, Silvia, 2012. "The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 452-466.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:2:p:452-466
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004873331100206X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. John Hansman & Christopher Magee & Richard De Neufville & Renee Robins & Daniel Roos, 2006. "Research agenda for an integrated approach to infrastructure planning, design and management," International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(2/3), pages 146-159.
    2. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    3. Stoneman, Paul & Kwon, Myung-Joong, 1994. "The Diffusion of Multiple Process Technologies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(423), pages 420-431, March.
    4. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    5. Dvir, Dov & Lechler, Thomas, 2004. "Plans are nothing, changing plans is everything: the impact of changes on project success," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Prencipe, Andrea & Tell, Fredrik, 2001. "Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1373-1394, December.
    7. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2006. "Innovation processes in large technical systems: Market liberalization as a driver for radical change?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 609-625, June.
    8. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    9. Geyer, Anton & Davies, Andrew, 2000. "Managing project-system interfaces: case studies of railway projects in restructured UK and German markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 991-1013, August.
    10. Glynn, Steven, 2002. "Constructing a selection environment: competing expectations for CFC alternatives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 935-946, August.
    11. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    12. Prencipe, Andrea, 1997. "Technological competencies and product's evolutionary dynamics a case study from the aero-engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1261-1276, January.
    13. Hobday, Mike, 2000. "The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 871-893, August.
    14. Antonelli, Cristiano, 1989. "The role of technological expectations in a mixed model of international diffusion of process innovations: The case of open-end spinning rotors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 273-288, October.
    15. Geroski, P. A., 2000. "Models of technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 603-625, April.
    16. Islas, Jorge, 1997. "Getting round the lock-in in electricity generating systems: the example of the gas turbine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 49-66, March.
    17. Stephen Flowers, 2007. "Organizational capabilities and technology acquisition: why firms know less than they buy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(3), pages 317-346, June.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    19. Robertson, Paul & Smith, Keith & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2009. "Innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 441-446, April.
    20. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equalization in the Adoption of New Technology," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401.
    21. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    22. Hobday, Mike & Rush, Howard & Tidd, Joe, 2000. "Innovation in complex products and system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 793-804, August.
    23. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461.
    24. ,, 2000. "Problems And Solutions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 287-299, April.
    25. Massoud Karshenas & Paul L. Stoneman, 1993. "Rank, Stock, Order, and Epidemic Effects in the Diffusion of New Process Technologies: An Empirical Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 503-528, Winter.
    26. A. Canepa & P. Stoneman, 2004. "Comparative international diffusion: Patterns, determinants and policies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 279-298.
    27. Gann, David M. & Salter, Ammon J., 2000. "Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 955-972, August.
    28. Watson, Jim, 2004. "Selection environments, flexibility and the success of the gas turbine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1065-1080, October.
    29. Hollenstein, Heinz, 2004. "Determinants of the adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT): An empirical analysis based on firm-level data for the Swiss business sector," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 315-342, September.
    30. Robert G. Fichman & Chris F. Kemerer, 1997. "The Assimilation of Software Process Innovations: An Organizational Learning Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(10), pages 1345-1363, October.
    31. Massini, Silvia & Lewin, Arie Y. & Greve, Henrich R., 2005. "Innovators and imitators: Organizational reference groups and adoption of organizational routines," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1550-1569, December.
    32. V. Krishnan & Shantanu Bhattacharya, 2002. "Technology Selection and Commitment in New Product Development: The Role of Uncertainty and Design Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 313-327, March.
    33. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1976. "On Technological Expectations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 86(343), pages 523-535, September.
    34. Barlow, James & Köberle-Gaiser, Martina, 2008. "The private finance initiative, project form and design innovation: The UK's hospitals programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1392-1402, September.
    35. Gil, Nuno & Tether, Bruce S., 2011. "Project risk management and design flexibility: Analysing a case and conditions of complementarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 415-428, April.
    36. Francesco Lissoni, 2000. "Technological Expectations And The Diffusion Of 'Intermediate' Technologies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 487-516.
    37. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    38. Henk W. Volberda & Nicolai J. Foss & Marjorie A. Lyles, 2010. "PERSPECTIVE---Absorbing the Concept of Absorptive Capacity: How to Realize Its Potential in the Organization Field," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 931-951, August.
    39. Gil, Nuno, 2007. "On the value of project safeguards: Embedding real options in complex products and systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 980-999, September.
    40. Davies, Andrew, 1996. "Innovation in Large Technical Systems: The Case of Telecommunications," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(4), pages 1143-1180.
    41. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    42. Gomez, Jaime & Vargas, Pilar, 2009. "The effect of financial constraints, absorptive capacity and complementarities on the adoption of multiple process technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 106-119, February.
    43. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    44. Hodson, Mike & Marvin, Simon, 2010. "Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would we know if they were?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 477-485, May.
    45. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    46. Colombo, Massimo G & Mosconi, Rocco, 1995. "Complementarity and Cumulative Learning Effects in the Early Diffusion of Multiple Technologies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 13-48, March.
    47. Miozzo, Marcela & Dewick, Paul, 2002. "Building competitive advantage: innovation and corporate governance in European construction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 989-1008, August.
    48. Mowery, David C. & Langlois, Richard N., 1996. "Spinning off and spinning on(?): the federal government role in the development of the US computer software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 947-966, September.
    49. Cacciatori, Eugenia, 2008. "Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1591-1601, October.
    50. Miller, Roger, et al, 1995. "Innovation in Complex Systems Industries: The Case of Flight Simulation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 363-400.
    51. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, 1988. "Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 251-267, October.
    52. Arie Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2008. "The configuration of internal and external practiced routines of absorptive capacity: a new perspective," Working Papers CEB 08-010.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    53. Spyros Arvanitis & Heinz Hollenstein, 2001. "The Determinants Of The Adoption Of Advanced Manufacturing Technology," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 377-414.
    54. Michael Hobday & Andrew Davies & Andrea Prencipe, 2005. "Systems integration: a core capability of the modern corporation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(6), pages 1109-1143, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martínez-Román, Juan A. & Gamero, Javier & Delgado-González, María de Loreto & Tamayo, Juan A., 2019. "Innovativeness and internationalization in SMEs: An empirical analysis in European countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Brozynski, Max T. & Leibowicz, Benjamin D., 2022. "A multi-level optimization model of infrastructure-dependent technology adoption: Overcoming the chicken-and-egg problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(2), pages 755-770.
    3. Brea, Edgar, 2023. "A framework for mapping actor roles and their innovation potential in digital ecosystems," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. Michael Himmel & Matti Siemiatycki, 2017. "Infrastructure public–private partnerships as drivers of innovation? Lessons from Ontario, Canada," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(5), pages 746-764, August.
    5. Juan A. Martínez-Román & Isidoro Romero, 2017. "Determinants of innovativeness in SMEs: disentangling core innovation and technology adoption capabilities," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 543-569, July.
    6. Derek Walker & Beverley Lloyd-Walker, 2016. "Understanding Collaboration in Integrated Forms of Project Delivery by Taking a Risk-Uncertainty Based Perspective," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Nuno Oliveira & Davide Secchi, 2023. "Theory Building, Case Dependence, and Researchers’ Bounded Rationality: An Illustration From Studies of Innovation Diffusion," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 52(2), pages 993-1042, May.
    8. Per Erik Eriksson & Stefan Olander & Henrik Szentes & Kristian Widén, 2014. "Managing short-term efficiency and long-term development through industrialized construction," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 97-108, February.
    9. Gil, Nuno & Pinto, Jeffrey K., 2018. "Polycentric organizing and performance: A contingency model and evidence from megaproject planning in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 717-734.
    10. Sarpong, David & Boakye, Derrick & Ofosu, George & Botchie, David, 2023. "The three pointers of research and development (R&D) for growth-boosting sustainable innovation system," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    11. Kwak, Kiho & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2020. "Unpacking transnational industry legitimacy dynamics, windows of opportunity, and latecomers’ catch-up in complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    12. Mirimoghadam, Mojdeh & Ghazinoory, Sepehr, 2017. "An institutional analysis of technological learning in Iran's oil and gas industry: Case study of south Pars gas field development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 262-274.
    13. Chen, Xiaoyan & Locatelli, Giorgio & Zhang, Xinyue & Gong, Yunhao & He, Qinghua, 2022. "Firm and project innovation outcome measures in infrastructure megaprojects: An interpretive structural modelling approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Diego F. Uribe & Isabel Ortiz-Marcos & Ángel Uruburu, 2018. "What Is Going on with Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature? A Symbiotic Relationship for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    15. Pan, Xiongfeng & Guo, Shucen & Li, Mengna & Song, Jinbo, 2021. "The effect of technology infrastructure investment on technological innovation ——A study based on spatial durbin model," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Martínez-Román, Juan A. & Gamero, Javier & Tamayo, Juan A. & Delgado-González, Loreto, 2020. "Empirical analysis of organizational archetypes based on generation and adoption of knowledge and technologies," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 96.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mirimoghadam, Mojdeh & Ghazinoory, Sepehr, 2017. "An institutional analysis of technological learning in Iran's oil and gas industry: Case study of south Pars gas field development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 262-274.
    2. Rachel BOCQUET (IREGE, IUT-University of Savoie) & Olivier BROSSARD (LEREPS-GRES), 2006. "Information Technologies (IT) Adoption and Localized Knowledge Diffusion: an Empirical Study," Cahiers du GRES (2002-2009) 2006-17, Groupement de Recherches Economiques et Sociales.
    3. Strong, Derek Ryan, 2017. "The Early Diffusion of Smart Meters in the US Electric Power Industry," Thesis Commons 7zprk, Center for Open Science.
    4. Gil, Nuno, 2007. "On the value of project safeguards: Embedding real options in complex products and systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 980-999, September.
    5. Stoneman, Paul & Battisti, Giuliana, 2010. "The Diffusion of New Technology," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 733-760, Elsevier.
    6. Rui Baptista, 1999. "The Diffusion of Process Innovations: A Selective Review," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 107-129.
    7. Fuentelsaz, Lucio & Gómez, Jaime & Palomas, Sergio, 2016. "Interdependences in the intrafirm diffusion of technological innovations: Confronting the rational and social accounts of diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 951-963.
    8. Bocquet, Rachel & Brossard, Olivier & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "Complementarities in organizational design and the diffusion of information technologies: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 367-386, April.
    9. Bocquet, Rachel & Brossard, Olivier, 2007. "The variety of ICT adopters in the intra-firm diffusion process: Theoretical arguments and empirical evidence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 409-437, December.
    10. Spyros Arvanitis & Marius Ley, 2013. "Factors Determining the Adoption of Energy-Saving Technologies in Swiss Firms: An Analysis Based on Micro Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 389-417, March.
    11. Giuliana Battisti & Heinz Hollenstein & Paul Stoneman & Martin Woerter, 2007. "Inter And Intra Firm Diffusion Of Ict In The United Kingdom (Uk) And Switzerland (Ch) An Internationally Comparative Study Based On Firm-Level Data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 669-687.
    12. Juan M. Gallego & Luis H. Gutiérrez & Sang H. Lee, 2015. "A firm-level analysis of ICT adoption in an emerging economy: evidence from the Colombian manufacturing industries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 191-221.
    13. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    14. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    15. Sandén, Björn A. & Hillman, Karl M., 2011. "A framework for analysis of multi-mode interaction among technologies with examples from the history of alternative transport fuels in Sweden," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 403-414, April.
    16. Sarkar, Jayati, 1998. "Technological Diffusion: Alternative Theories and Historical Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 131-176, April.
    17. Silvia Massini, 2004. "The diffusion of mobile telephony in Italy and the UK: an empirical investigation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 251-277.
    18. Heinz Hollenstein & Martin Woerter, 2004. "The Decision to Adopt Internet-based E-Commerce. An Empirical Analysis Based on Swiss Firm-level Data," KOF Working papers 04-89, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    19. Gil, Nuno & Tether, Bruce S., 2011. "Project risk management and design flexibility: Analysing a case and conditions of complementarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 415-428, April.
    20. Hollenstein, Heinz, 2004. "Determinants of the adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT): An empirical analysis based on firm-level data for the Swiss business sector," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 315-342, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:2:p:452-466. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.