Bo Terje Kalsaas

Suppliers and Strategies for Upgrading in Global Production Networks: The Case of a Supplier to the Global Automotive Industry in a High-cost Location

The paper analyses the possibilities for a Norwegian supplier incorporated into global production networks in the automotive industry to perform knowledge upgrading and innovation activity. A consistent finding is that different departments of the supplier are parts of different types of global network. The serial production of the supplier is distinguished by quasi-hierarchical governance by customers and by lean forms of work organization in the production that stimulate continuous, incremental upgrading of the production process. The development department has network relations with customers and learning forms of work organization, which triggers production and functional upgrading. The learning and innovation capacity of the supplier builds on its long tradition as a producer for the global automotive industry, on its location in a regional cluster with strong industrial traditions and on its involvement in a strong Norwegian “aluminium innovation system”. The suppliers capability complements the strategic needs of global automotive firms and contributes to embedding the supplier in a high-cost location.

Collaborative innovation: the decade that radically changed drilling performance

This article sheds light on key factors associated with innovations that are mainly based on experiential learning. The history of a company engaged in the offshore oil and gas industry exemplifies the points: Hitec started out as a small company with limited financial resources, but over a 10-year period, its innovations and improvements radically transformed offshore oil and gas drilling operations. An evolutionary methodological approach is balanced by theoretically informed analysis. A main finding is that customer–supplier interaction was crucial. Hitecs success, crowned by its eventual acquisition by American capital, can be attributed in part to the know-how and technology provided by one of its suppliers and partners during the early phase. However, it has also depended on a series of other factors: a flexible, motivated and creative organisation; targeting of the right know-how; being part of a cluster and thus enjoying easy access to important customers and suppliers as well as easy, informal flow of ideas and information; developers and entrepreneurs prepared to take risks; being in the right place at the right time; a good measure of luck; the underdeveloped state of American drilling control technology; Norwegian oil and gas policies supportive of domestic technological companies; and proximity to research labs which were conducting full-scale tests of drilling operations. An invention made by regional researchers can also be linked to Hitecs innovation of a drilling control system. The relevance of the article is its contribution to a better understanding of the complexity involved in the implementation of major practice-based innovations – a process which includes identifying and creating ideas; finding a market/customer and putting the ideas into practice.

Transformation From Design-Bid-Build to Design-Build Contracts in Road Construction

This article was triggered by a public client opting to change contracting strategy on a pre-designed 4-lane motorway project from design-bid-build to design-build contract. The goal for the client is to build roads cheaper and faster with the greatest possible economic benefits for society. In the article, we ask: Which changes associated with the transition from a design-bidbuild to a design-build contract can be identified in the contractual relationship between the public developer, contractor and subcontractors? The article focuses on changes in relation to constructability, construction time and costs, and discusses the issues of quality and customer value. The study is theoretically related to the principal-agent theory and transaction cost theory, where the threat of opportunistic behaviour is central. This is also seen through the lens of the Lean Construction triangle, which focuses on the need for harmonisation between commercial element in the contract, organisation and production. We analyse the case in relation to three propositions:  Design-build offers incentives that result in better constructability than designbid-build contracts.  Design-build results in lower production costs and faster construction than designbid-build contracts.  Quality and customer value come under pressure in design-build contracts. The first proposition seems to be confirmed by the empirical analysis. Production cost is, however, not the same as the price for the client. It is more uncertainty related to the third proposition. An important finding is that the developer’s change in strategy seems to 1 Professor, Dr. Ing, Faculty of Engineering and Science, Department of Engineering Sciences, University of Agder, N-4846 Grimstad, Norway; e-mail: bo.t.kalsaas@uia.no 2 Associate professor, PhD, Faculty of business and law, Department of working life and innovation, University of Agder, N-4846 Grimstad, Norway; e-mail: goril.hannas@uia.no 3 Research Assistant, M.Sc, Faculty of business and law, Department of working life and innovation, University of Agder, N-4846 Grimstad, Norway; e-mail: grethe.frislie@uia.no 4 Assistant professor, M.Sc., Faculty of Engineering and Science, Department of Engineering Sciences, University of Agder, N-4846 Grimstad, Norway; e-mail: john.skaar@uia.no Transformation from Design-Bid-Build to Design-Build Contracts in Road Construction Contract and Cost Management 35 result in a radical change in working conditions for the consulting design and engineering companies, as well as to a great degree for the head contractor. A strong relationship between the contractor and consulting engineers is especially important to ensure success in terms of execution, and we find indications that alliances have been formed between

A Balanced Dashboard for Production Planning and Control

The paper proposes a concept for a dashboard to be used as part of Last Planner based production planning and control. The dashboard is constructed to be used, not primarily by management, but by the last planners. For this reason the dashboard has to be simple (it should focus on some few but important metrics), and it has to be balanced (it should give a holistic view of the status of the process and where it is heading). It is proposed that the dashboard should consist of three sections: planning, production flow and outcome. Each of these three sections should comprise one or a few metrics, put together so as to and provide a consolidated overview of both status and direction. We present a specific dashboard consisting of six metrics in all. This dashboard will be tested in a forthcoming case study.