IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aal/abbswp/07-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation in Private Infrastructure Development Effects of the Selection Environment and Modularity

Author

Listed:
  • Nuno Gil
  • Marcela Miozzo

Abstract

This study investigates how the selection environment and modularity affect innovation in private infrastructure development. Our findings stem from an in-depth empirical study of the extent ten process innovations were implemented in an airport expansion programme. Our findings suggest that developer and customers can each occasionally champion or resist innovations. An innovation succeeds contingent upon the capability of the stakeholder groups to develop collectively a plan to finance and implement the innovation, which reconciles subjective individual assessments. Innovations can be particularly hard to adopt when they require financing from different budgets, or when the developer’s investment pays off only if customers behave in a specified way in the future. We also find that the degrees of novelty and modularity neither represent sufficient or necessary conditions enabling or hindering innovation. Novelty, however, makes the innovation champion’s job harder because it leads to perceptions of downside risk and regulatory changes, whereas modularity helps the champion operationalise ways that moderate resistance to innovate.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuno Gil & Marcela Miozzo, 2007. "Innovation in Private Infrastructure Development Effects of the Selection Environment and Modularity," DRUID Working Papers 07-23, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:aal:abbswp:07-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://wp.druid.dk/wp/20070023.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mie Augier & David J. Teece, 2006. "Understanding complex organization: the role of know-how, internal structure, and human behavior in the evolution of capabilities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(2), pages 395-416, April.
    2. Andrew Davies, 2004. "Moving base into high-value integrated solutions: a value stream approach," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(5), pages 727-756, October.
    3. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    4. Nelson, Richard R., 2003. "On the uneven evolution of human know-how," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 909-922, June.
    5. Rod Coombs & Mark Harvey & Bruce S. Tether, 2003. "Analysing distributed processes of provision and innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(6), pages 1125-1155, December.
    6. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    7. Watson, Jim, 2004. "Selection environments, flexibility and the success of the gas turbine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1065-1080, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    2. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    3. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Tian Heong Chan & Shi-Ying Lim, 2023. "The Emergence of Novel Product Uses: An Investigation of Exaptations in IKEA Hacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2870-2892, May.
    5. Stefano Brusoni & Paola Criscuolo & Aldo Geuna, 2005. "The knowledge bases of the world's largest pharmaceutical groups: what do patent citations to non-patent literature reveal?," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 395-415.
    6. Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier & Jong Seok Lee & Mark Keil & Daniel Lunn & Dirk W. Bester, 2022. "The Empirical Reality of IT Project Cost Overruns: Discovering A Power-Law Distribution," Papers 2210.01573, arXiv.org.
    7. Glenn Hoetker & Anand Swaminathan & Will Mitchell, 2007. "Modularity and the Impact of Buyer-Supplier Relationships on the Survival of Suppliers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 178-191, February.
    8. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    9. Daniela D. Viana & Iris D. Tommelein & Carlos T. Formoso, 2017. "Using Modularity to Reduce Complexity of Industrialized Building Systems for Mass Customization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Henning Skirde & Wolfgang Kersten & Meike Schröder, 2016. "Measuring the Cost Effects of Modular Product Architectures — A Conceptual Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 1-23, August.
    11. Florent Catel & Jean-Charles Monateri, 2007. "Modularité et dynamique des relations durables entre entreprises : le cas des produits et systèmes complexes," Post-Print halshs-00217607, HAL.
    12. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    13. Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien & Healey, Mark, 2021. "The influence of motivational factors on ongoing product design decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 562-569.
    14. Fabrizio Salvador & Juan Pablo Madiedo, 2021. "Enabling Globally Distributed Projects: Effects of Project Interface Match and Related Technical Experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(4), pages 1052-1081, April.
    15. Babak Heydari & Mohsen Mosleh & Kia Dalili, 2016. "From Modular to Distributed Open Architectures: A Unified Decision Framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 252-266, May.
    16. Mario Benassi, 2009. "Investigating modular organizations," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 13(3), pages 163-192, August.
    17. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Chi-Hyon Lee & Manuela N. Hoehn-Weiss & Samina Karim, 2016. "Grouping interdependent tasks: Using spectral graph partitioning to study complex systems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 177-191, January.
    18. Puay Khoon Toh & Eugene Pyun, 2024. "Risky business: How standardization as coordination tool in ecosystems impacts firm‐level uncertainty," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 649-679, April.
    19. Andreas Reinstaller, 2011. "The Modularity of Technology and Organisations. Implications for the Theory of the Firm," WIFO Working Papers 398, WIFO.
    20. Amrit Tiwana, 2018. "Platform Synergy: Architectural Origins and Competitive Consequences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 829-848, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; financing; implementation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • R42 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government and Private Investment Analysis; Road Maintenance; Transportation Planning

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aal:abbswp:07-23. 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: Keld Laursen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.druid.dk/ .

    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.