Relevance of five generic business ideation approaches vis-a-vis contexts embedded within construction markets

In general, ideation encompasses the formation of ideas or mental images of things not present to the senses or simply the creation of new ideas. Business ideation is herein perceived to be the core area within future-oriented business management (BM). The main aim of the paper is to assess and advance the relevance of the five generic approaches to business ideation vis-à-vis firms targeting contexts embedded within construction markets. A typology differentiates between the fitting, value-creating, profit generating, systemizing, and commercializing approaches. It is argued that each approach is, at minimum, highly relevant in the case of business unit (BU) management targeting preferred client investment and procurement behavior within construction markets. Approach 1 involves BUs aiming at fit between clients and their needs as well as units’ offerings and operations, respectively. Professional clients couple needs with preferred procurement methods whereas competing BUs are trying to achieve best fit between solutions and client behaviors. This approach calls for research on how to sustain such fit between a BU and clients when changes occur. Approach 2 enables BUs to create value by specifying high-value propositions, producing value to clients, and capturing their fair shares of produced values. Farsighted clients look for more or novel values for construction investments and, thus, units are collaborating and co-producing values to clients. This approach calls for research on a BU’s value co-production with such clients, value capture, and offerings integration. Approach 3 accommodates BUs that are focusing on generating profits, achieving high-profit levels, and sustaining them. Pioneering clients pursue complex investment aims that can be met only by radical solutions. This approach calls for research on a BU’s profit-generating mechanisms related to clients with complex investment needs and radical solutions. Approach 4 facilitates BUs to systemize businesses around core ideas. Sectoral clients have large or complex needs and, in turn, units are satisfying them by engineering systems as wholes and delivering them as parts. This approach calls for research on BUs with systems and clients, multi-dimensional investments, and system engineering as wholes and parts. Approach 5 facilitates BUs to couple ideas with commercializing dimensions such as entrepreneurship, innovation, business development, venturing, or spin-offing. Risk-taking clients prefer to enter high-innovation contracts and, thus, units are offering novel solutions and emerging business cases. This approach calls for research on a BU’s entrepreneurial competencies and risk-taking clients, wicked investment needs, and high-innovation contracts. In the same vein, the suggestions are put forth to CIB-related scholars for directing research on along the BM and ideation dimensions and adopting most relevant approaches. Likewise, management in firms and BUs competing in construction markets are encouraged to assess the business case-sensitive relevance of each of Approaches 1-5 and try out those with initial high relevance.Peer reviewe