factors affecting innovation and competitiveness in northern iraq construction industry
TRANSCRIPT
Factors Affecting the Competitiveness and Innovation in Northern Iraq Construction Industry
Sevar Neamat (145233)
Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Ibrahim Yitmen
February 2016
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 2
Agenda
• Innovation and Competitiveness• Iraq and Northern region Construction Industry• Factors affecting innovation and competitiveness• Questionnaire• Data Analysis • Display results• Hypothesis • Testing • Conclusion• Future work
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 3
Innovation and Competitiveness
• Innovation is the process of creating and implementing new ideas for the community.
• Competitiveness is the ability of a firm to provide the community standard quality services at competitive costs.
• Creativity and innovation have always been recognized as the foundation of success of any organization.
• Without taking the competitiveness in consideration, the prosperity process of any firm would be difficult.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 4
Iraq and Northern Region
• After the Iraq war in 2003, the construction industry developed dramatically in the country, especially in the Northern region.• So, an advance innovation system in managing,
designing and construction execution is needed for the construction industry.• However, many of the construction firms fail in
performance! Which means unsuccessful in achieving its goals
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 5
How to keep the success path?
• To keep the construction industry on the success path by making them innovative and competitive, examining factors affecting innovation and competitiveness is crucial. • So, this research is conducted so as to identify
the factors influencing innovation and competitiveness of the construction industry in Northern Iraq.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 6
Conducting the research
• Based on the literature review, forty three factors have been selected for both innovation and competitiveness.• These factors are listed down into seven
dimensions.• A questionnaire is made up of these
dimensions and distributed to 150 construction firms in the region.• 85 of the firms replied with the answers
making the response rate 57%.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 7
Questionnaire dimensions
• Innovation: 25 questions about the following dimensions• Inputs (5 questions)• Drivers (4 questions)• Enablers (5 questions)• Impacts (4 questions)• Barriers (6 questions)• Firm’s need of innovation (1 question)
• Competitiveness: 1 dimension which consists of 18 questions
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 9
Who filled the Questionnaire?More than 95% were from Civil Engineers
24%
12%
24%4%1%1%
13%
7%
8%4%2%1%
Please state your position in the company
Supervisor EngineerExecutive EngineerManager of the companyAssist ManagerDesignerHead of Office (civil engineer)Site EngineerHead of EngineersDirect CommissionerOwner of CompanyProject ManagerRapporteur of Company
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 10
Results of Input dimension
Capital (investment in ICT, Software, and Equipment)
Research and Development Expenditure (R&D), and (R&D) projects
Number of Employees who Devote to InnovationConsultancy (To provide valuable advices)
Internal and External idea generation
2
3
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 11
Results of Driver dimension
Customer Requirements
Technology Development
Regulation and Legislation
Project Performance Improvement 3
3.5
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 12
Results of Barrier dimension
Unwillingness to Change
Lack of Technology
Lack of Experienced and Qualified Staff
Time Constraint
Financial Constraint
Government Policy
2
3
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 13
Results of Enabler dimension
Collaborative Partnering
Commitment
Reward SystemEducation and Training Policy
Early Contractor Involvement (ECI)
3
3.5
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 14
Results of Impact dimension
Improvement of Experience
Improve Competitiveness
Increase in Technical, Organizational, Management Capability
Short and Long term Profitability 2
3
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 15
Results of Competitiveness dimension
Research and DevelopmentAdaption to ChangeRate of Marketing Budget
Motivation and Employ Satisfaction
Strategic Management Plans
Change of Target Market
Level of Success
Intellectual Property (Patents, Brand Registration)Information Communication Technology (ICT)InternationalizationPioneering Leaders
Improvement of Experience
Short and Long Term Profitability
Product Competitiveness
Accounting and Financial System
Level of performance
Cooperative Working AtmosphereCompany Culture
0
2
4
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 16
Developing Hypotheses
• Based on the results of data analysis, 4 hypotheses have been developed:• Hypothesis 1: Construction companies in Northern
Iraq activating their inputs, drivers, and impacts of innovation can improve their project performance.• Hypothesis 2: Construction companies in Northern
Iraq activating their inputs, drivers, and impacts of innovation can increase their competitive advantages.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 17
Developing Hypotheses
• Based on the results of data analysis, 4 hypotheses have been developed:• Hypothesis 3: Construction companies stimulating
enablers and dimensions of competitiveness can improve their project performance.• Hypothesis 4: Construction companies unable to
overcome barriers cannot improve their competitiveness and project performance.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 19
Hypotheses Testing
• To ensure the validity of the developed hypotheses, hypotheses testing is performed over them.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 20
Testing Hypothesis 1
T-Test for Input - Project PerformancePaired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower UpperInput - Project Performance -.00152 .8267
6.1017
7-.2047
6 .20173 -.015 65 .988
• Data analysis shows us, 66 firms who have selected high scales for input factors, their project performances are high.
• Therefore, the firms that considering the input dimension is essential for the innovation, they have an improved project performance.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 21
Testing Hypothesis 1• For the driver dimension, the results reveals
that 77 construction firms having high driver’s scales, have high project performance.
• Which means that, the construction sectors paying attention for driver dimension, have high performance in their projects.
T-Test for Driver - Project Performance
Paired Differences
t df Sig. (2-tailed)Mean Std.
DeviationStd. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Driver - Project
Performance.06818 .61724 .07034 -.0719
1 .20828 .969 76 .335
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 22
Testing Hypothesis 1• Similarly, 69 construction firms having high
impact in their scales, have high project performance.
• This also means that, the firms which care for their impacts, have excellent project performance.
T-Test for Impact - Project Performance
Paired Differences
t df Sig. (2-tailed)Mean
Std. Deviatio
n
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence Interval of the
DifferenceLower Upper
Impact - Project Performance
.03623 .74542 .08974 -.14284 .21530 .404 68 .688
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 23
Testing Hypothesis 2
• In the results of the survey, 58 construction firms have given high ranges to input factors.
• These firms have been found with high competitive advantages.
T-Test for Input - Competitiveness
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)MeanStd.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower UpperInput -
Competitiveness
-.02625
.62565
.08215
-.19075
.13826 -.319 57 .751
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 24
Testing Hypothesis 2
• In the same way, 58 of the construction firms having high scales of drivers, have high scale of competitiveness.
T-Test for Driver - Competitiveness
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)Mea
nStd.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper Driver -
Competitiveness
.15996 .71960 .0944
9-.0292
5.3491
7 1.693 57 .096
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 25
Testing Hypothesis 2
• The firms with high values of impact factors, have high values of competitiveness.
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)MeanStd.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Impact - Competitiven
ess-.0038
3.6422
7.0843
3-.1727
1.1650
4 -.045 57 .964
T-Test for Impact - Competitiveness
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 26
Testing Hypothesis 3
• Data analysis discovered that 75 of the firms that gave high metrics to enabler dimension, have high project performances
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)Mean
Std. Deviatio
nStd. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Enabler - Project
Performance.08933 .67415 .0778
4-.0657
7.2444
4 1.148 74 .255
Enabler - T-Test for Project Performance
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 27
Testing Hypothesis 3
• On the other side, 58 of the construction firms having high competitiveness have high project performance.
T-Test for Competitiveness - Project Performance
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)MeanStd.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Competitiveness - Project
Performance-.194
44 .91289 .11987
-.43448
.04559 -1.622 57 .110
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 28
Testing Hypothesis 4• All of the firms in the questionnaires who gave
high scales to barrier factors, means that they consider these factors as obstacles and eventually avoid them.
• The firms with high scales of barriers, have high competitive advantages.
T-Test for Barrier - Competitiveness
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)Mea
nStd.
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper Barrier -
Competitiveness
.08431
1.11924
.12140
-.15710
.32573 .695 84 .489
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 29
Testing Hypothesis 4
• The same way, 61 of the firms who have high barrier scales, which means they avoid them, have high project performance.
T-Test for Barrier - Project Performance
Paired Differences
t dfSig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Std. Deviati
onStd. Error
Mean
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Barrier - Project
Performance
-.03552 .81315 .10411 -.24378 .17274 -.341 60 .734
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 30
Research objectives
• Analyse the factors affecting the competitiveness and innovation in construction industry in Northern Iraq• Share these results to draw a conceptual
framework indicating the relationship between innovation and competitiveness• Provide some developed hypotheses related to
analysing results.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 31
Conceptual Framework of Innovative System and Competitiveness in
Construction Industry
• it can be noticed that activating the factors of input, driver and impact, affect positively on project performance of the construction firms.
• While by stimulating enablers’ factors and competitiveness dimensions, results in improving the competitive advantage of the construction sectors.
Driver
Impact
Enabler
Input
Barrier
Proj
ect P
erfo
rman
ce
Competitiveness dimensions
Com
petit
ive A
dvan
tage
+ H1
+ H1
+ H1
+ H2
+ H2
+ H2
+ H3
- H4 -H
4
+ H3
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 32
Conceptual Framework of Innovative System and Competitiveness in
Construction Industry
• The factors of the variables inputs, drivers and impacts, have positive influences on increasing the firms’ competitive advantages, which means by activating these variables, the competitive advantages improve proportionally.
Driver
Impact
Enabler
Input
Barrier
Proj
ect P
erfo
rman
ce
Competitiveness dimensions
Com
petit
ive A
dvan
tage
+ H1
+ H1
+ H1
+ H2
+ H2
+ H2
+ H3
- H4 -H
4
+ H3
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 33
Conceptual Framework of Innovative System and Competitiveness in
Construction Industry
• Finally, the barriers dimension of the companies, have negative affect on both of project performance and competitiveness.
• So, without overcoming the current barriers, the construction firms are incapable of improving the project performance and competitive advantages.
Driver
Impact
Enabler
Input
Barrier
Proj
ect P
erfo
rman
ce
Competitiveness dimensions
Com
petit
ive A
dvan
tage
+ H1
+ H1
+ H1
+ H2
+ H2
+ H2
+ H3
- H4 -H
4
+ H3
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 34
Conclusion
• A collection of factors effecting innovation and competitiveness have been studied and selected forming a group of variables/dimensions for innovation and competitiveness. Based on these dimensions, a structured questionnaire survey is created and distributed to experienced engineers such as projects managers, site engineers and office engineers in Northern Iraq construction industry.
• Forty three factors have been selected and listed under seven groups of variables based on previous studies. The variables considered in this research are: 1) input, 2) driver, 3) barriers, 4) enabler, 5) impact, 6) competitiveness, and 7) firm’s need of innovation.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 35
Conclusion
• The 150 firms have been surveyed, out of which 85 firms replied with the answers making the response rate 57%. Data from questionnaires has been collected and analyzed followed by developing four hypotheses outlining the improvements of project performance of the construction firms and their competitive advantages.
• Moreover, a conceptual framework clarifying the developed hypotheses are designed, ended up with exposing two main theories: 1) through stimulating the variables of innovation such as inputs, drivers, enablers and impacts, the competitive advantages and project performance of construction sectors increase; 2) the construction sectors unable to overcome barriers are unable to increase their project performance and competitiveness.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 36
Research Limitation
• Due to time limitations, the research was conducted on a relatively small number of construction firms, since only 85 of the firms were replied with answers.• Most of the construction firms in Northern Iraq do not give
an accurate information or even a correct estimation about their annual turnovers, which makes it hard to categorize the firms according to their sizes. • There is no prior research studies on the same topic for
the region, causing it more difficult to lay a foundation for understanding the research problem.
05/03/2023
Sevar Neamat 37
Recommendations for further research
• Failure measurement systems for the construction industry in Northern Iraq are not effective to measure construction projects performance and identify their problems. Therefore, it is highly recommended to develop such systems. Furthermore, it is recommended to develop a specific unit in all construction firms so as to encourage the innovation. Finally, it is also recommended to investigate and evaluate the most essential factors as a case study of construction projects in Northern Iraq.