A conceptual decision-making framework for the delivery of innovative change in organisations
Weippert, Achim (2010) A conceptual decision-making framework for the delivery of innovative change in organisations. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology.
Research found that today’s organisations are increasingly aware of the potential barriers and perceived challenges associated with the successful delivery of change — including cultural and sub-cultural indifferences; financial constraints; restricted timelines; insufficient senior management support; fragmented key stakeholder commitment; and inadequate training. The delivery and application of Innovative Change (see glossary) within a construction industry organisation tends to require a certain level of ‘readiness’. This readiness is the combination of an organisation’s ability to part from undertakings that may be old, traditional, or inefficient; and then being able to readily adopt a procedure or initiative which is new, improved, or more efficient.
Despite the construction industry’s awareness of the various threats and opportunities associated with the delivery of change, research found little attention is currently given to develop a ‘decision-making framework’ that comprises measurable elements (dynamics) that may assist in more accurately determining an organisation’s level of readiness or ability to deliver innovative change. To resolve this, an initial Background Literature Review in 2004 identified six such dynamics, those of Change, Innovation, Implementation, Culture, Leadership, and Training and Education, which were then hypothesised to be key components of a ‘Conceptual Decision-making Framework’ (CDF) for delivering innovative change within an organisation.
To support this hypothesis, a second (more extensive) Literature Review was undertaken from late 2007 to mid 2009. A Delphi study was embarked on in June 2008, inviting fifteen building and construction industry members to form a panel and take part in a Delphi study. The selection criterion required panel members to have senior positions (manager and above) within a recognised field or occupation, and to have experience, understanding and / or knowledge in the process of delivering change within organisations. The final panel comprised nine representatives from private and public industry organisations and tertiary / research and development (R&D) universities. The Delphi study developed, distributed and collated two rounds of survey questionnaires over a four-month period, comprising open-ended and closed questions (referred to as factors).
The first round of Delphi survey questionnaires were distributed to the panel in August 2008, asking them to rate the relevancy of the six hypothesised dynamics. In early September 2008, round-one responses were returned, analysed and documented. From this, an additional three dynamics were identified and confirmed by the panel as being highly relevant during the decision-making process when delivering innovative change within an organisation. The additional dynamics (‘Knowledge-sharing and Management’; ‘Business Process Requirements’; and ‘Life-cycle Costs’) were then added to the first six dynamics and used to populate the second (final) Delphi survey questionnaire. This was distributed to the same nine panel members in October 2008, this time asking them to rate the relevancy of all nine dynamics. In November 2008, round-two responses were returned, analysed, summarised and documented. Final results confirmed stability in responses and met Delphi study guidelines.
The final contribution is twofold. Firstly, findings confirm all nine dynamics as key components of the proposed CDF for delivering innovative change within an organisation. Secondly, the future development and testing of an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Process’ (ICDP) is proposed, one that is underpinned by an ‘Innovative Change Decision-making Framework’ (ICDF), an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Analysis’ (ICDA) program, and an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Guide’ (ICDG).
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||QUT Thesis (PhD)|
|Supervisor:||Kajewski, Stephen & Skitmore, Ronald|
|Keywords:||hange, innovation, dynamics, decision making, framework, Delphi, construction, organisation|
|Divisions:||Past > QUT Faculties & Divisions > Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering
Past > Schools > School of Urban Development
|Institution:||Queensland University of Technology|
|Deposited On:||27 Jul 2011 04:39|
|Last Modified:||27 Jul 2011 04:39|
Repository Staff Only: item control page