Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
From ideas to construction innovations: Firms and universities collaborating
Organization of Construction, Department of Technology Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology.
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Structural and Construction Engineering.
2016 (English)In: Construction Economics and Building, ISSN 2204-9029, Vol. 16, no 1, p. 76-89Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The purpose here is to study patterns of project collaboration found in one government supported programme for construction innovation. Preferred types of interaction were identified using data from two questionnaire surveys, one with experienced construction sector respondents and one aimed at construction researchers. All sixteen development projects within the Swedish Bygginnovationen programme were investigated, relying on documents and a survey of project managers. Important types of interaction, according to construction respondents, are informal contacts, joint research projects and staff mobility. For university respondents, informal contacts is also seen as the most important type of interaction, followed by MSc thesis work in firms and industrial PhD candidates. Grant applicants from manufacturing depended more on university laboratories and were less sensitive to firm/university distance. Laboratory use was also more frequent for projects relying on the field of materials engineering. In conclusion, there is a consensus about which types of collaboration are valuable. The broadness of participation in the programme, ranging over many industries, both as to origin of ideas and ultimate applications, reaches beyond narrow interpretations of the construction industry. Policy makers should recognize the innovation importance of university laboratory facilities and field testing, rather than seeing researchers as sources of ideas.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 16, no 1, p. 76-89
National Category
Construction Management Building Technologies
Research subject
Construction Engineering and Management; Steel Structures
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-6919DOI: 10.5130/AJCEB.v16i1.4668ISI: 000372073600006Local ID: 540842d5-fb7d-4e41-835e-365ca4909e88OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-6919DiVA: diva2:979805
Note

Validerad; 2016; Nivå 2; Bibliografisk uppgift: Construction Economics and Building (formerly known as the Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building [AJCEB]) ; 20160321 (andbra)

Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2018-01-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lagerqvist, Ove
By organisation
Structural and Construction Engineering
Construction ManagementBuilding Technologies

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 257 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf