IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v77y2015icp261-275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation strategy in new transportation systems: The case of Crossrail

Author

Listed:
  • Dodgson, Mark
  • Gann, David
  • MacAulay, Sam
  • Davies, Andrew

Abstract

This article examines how innovation can be strategically incorporated into transportation systems. Large transportation systems generally have a poor record in systematically integrating innovation in their development, construction and operation. Our research setting is Crossrail, a major new railway traversing London, where the creation and implementation of an innovation strategy formalized and systemized its approach to innovation. Based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with project leaders and participant observation, the paper critically analyses the formulation, implementation and performance of Crossrail’s innovation strategy. Crossrail’s management explicitly uses an ‘open innovation’ strategy that incentivizes partners, contractors, and clients to innovate in the project. Its strategy guides decisions and priorities on innovation and the types and levels of innovation that best match project aims. The paper holds lessons for those developing, operating and studying large transportation systems both now and into the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Dodgson, Mark & Gann, David & MacAulay, Sam & Davies, Andrew, 2015. "Innovation strategy in new transportation systems: The case of Crossrail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 261-275.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:77:y:2015:i:c:p:261-275
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415001056
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.019?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. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Dennis A. Gioia & Kumar Chittipeddi, 1991. "Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(6), pages 433-448, September.
    3. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461, October.
    7. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, April.
    8. Ann Langley & Henry Mintzberg & Patricia Pitcher & Elizabeth Posada & Jan Saint-Macary, 1995. "Opening up Decision Making: The View from the Black Stool," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 260-279, June.
    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. Arbolino, Roberta & Carlucci, Fabio & Cirà, Andrea & De Simone, Luisa & Ioppolo, Giuseppe & Yigitcanlar, Tan, 2018. "Factors affecting transport privatization: An empirical analysis of the EU," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 149-160.
    2. 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).
    3. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    4. Greco, Marco & Grimaldi, Michele & Locatelli, Giorgio & Serafini, Mattia, 2021. "How does open innovation enhance productivity? An exploration in the construction ecosystem," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    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. Daniela Rupo & Mirko Perano & Giovanna Centorrino & Alfonso Vargas-Sanchez, 2018. "A Framework Based on Sustainability, Open Innovation, and Value Cocreation Paradigms—A Case in an Italian Maritime Cluster," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    2. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    3. Thomas J. Hannigan & Alessandra Perri & Vittoria Giada Scalera, 2016. "The Dispersed Multinational: Does Connectedness Across Spatial Dimensions Lead to Broader Technological Search?," Working Papers 11, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    4. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    5. Riviere, Monica & Suder, Gabriele, 2016. "Perspectives on strategic internationalization: Developing capabilities for renewal," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 847-858.
    6. Lewandowska Małgorzata Stefania, 2015. "Capturing Absorptive Capacity: Concepts, Determinants, Measurement Modes and Role in Open Innovation," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 45(1), pages 32-56, March.
    7. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Hallberg, Niklas L. & Brattström, Anna, 2019. "Concealing or revealing? Alternative paths to profiting from innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 165-174.
    9. Garcia Martinez, Marian & Zouaghi, Ferdaous & Sanchez Garcia, Mercedes, 2017. "Capturing value from alliance portfolio diversity: The mediating role of R&D human capital in high and low tech industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 55-67.
    10. Christophe Pennetier & Karan Girotra & Jürgen Mihm, 2019. "R&D Spending: Dynamic or Persistent?," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 636-657, July.
    11. Coccia, Mario, 2023. "New Perspectives in Innovation Failure Analysis: A taxonomy of general errors and strategic management for reducing risks," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    12. Lopes, Ana Paula Vilas Boas Viveiros & de Carvalho, Marly Monteiro, 2018. "Evolution of the open innovation paradigm: Towards a contingent conceptual model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 284-298.
    13. Claudimar Pereira da Veiga & Cassia Rita Pereira da Veiga & Mônica Maier Giacomini & Heitor Takashi Kato & Jansen Maia Del Corso, 2015. "Evolution of Capabilities in the Discovery Cycle of an Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Market," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 5(3), pages 141-153.
    14. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2016. "Openness and innovation in the US: Collaboration form, idea generation and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1660-1671.
    15. Ferreira, Jorge & Coelho, Arnaldo & Moutinho, Luiz, 2020. "Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    16. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Mario Le Glatin & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Can organisational ambidexterity kill innovation? A case for non-expected utility decision making," Post-Print hal-01808566, HAL.
    18. Peng Xiao & Xiaoxia Sun, 2022. "Does internationalization strategy promote enterprise innovation performance?—The moderating effect of environmental complexity," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1721-1733, September.
    19. 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.
    20. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.

    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:transa:v:77:y:2015:i:c:p:261-275. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.