korrents

What Brian Potter thinks about innovation

@brian-potter · 43 positions · 1 change of mind

Structural engineer and writer, author of the Construction Physics newsletter, where he takes apart how large physical things — buildings, ships, semiconductor fabs, aeroplanes — actually get made, and why the cost of making them moves the way it does.

Everything they publish, on ppll ↗

Brian Potter did not write this page.

We collected these quotes from things they published elsewhere, and every quote links to where it was said. They have no account here and have not endorsed this site. Quotes are word for word; the short line under each one is our own restatement, not their wording. Their own site. Is this you? Claim it or ask us to remove it. Or tell us what is wrong here.

3 dated positions, 2021 to 2024, in their own words. Our reading of what Brian Potter has said — not written or endorsed by them.

3 positions so far — this page is not yet offered to search engines.

  1. Our readingInventing a manufacturing technology and building a competitive industry on it are separate achievements, and America has repeatedly done only the first.

    Their wordsBut in turning these innovations into competitive industries, America has come up short.

    ↗Why Can't the U.S. Build Ships?construction-physics.com 4th of 8 in this piece

    America

    Interesting
  2. 3 years earlier

  3. Our readingThe person who specifies a new building system carries all its risk and none of its reward, a reverse moral hazard that keeps construction innovation out.

    Their wordsIn many cases, the person specifying a new system won’t capture the upside from actually using it - they’ll be under a sort of reverse moral hazard, where the benefits accrue to the rest of the project team, but the risks will accrue only to them.

    ↗Why It's Hard to Innovate in Constructionconstruction-physics.com 2nd of 3 in this piece

    Interesting

  5. Our readingBuilders reject new building systems rationally: a change to the process raises the odds of a catastrophic overrun by more than the innovation can save.

    Their wordsA new or innovative system that involves changes to the process thus incurs a significant risk penalty that would likely exceed the expected benefits of the innovation.

    ↗Why It's Hard to Innovate in Constructionconstruction-physics.com 3rd of 3 in this piece

    Interesting