SYSTEM OF INDICATORS FOR ASSESSING THE READINESS OF CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES FOR TRANSFORMATIONAL RECOVERY
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to develop a system of indicators for assessing the readiness of a construction enterprise for transformational recovery, suitable for practical application under post-conflict transformation conditions. The research methodology is based on a systemic approach to forming hierarchical indicator systems, the theory of dynamic capabilities, and the concept of absorptive capacity. The study applies a hybrid data collection design that combines verified public financial statements with structured manager survey data, ensuring both objectivity and the ability to capture non-observable innovation characteristics. The research results are presented as a four-level hierarchical indicator system comprising 30 primary indicators organised into 10 sub-indices, 2 block indices – financial-operational and innovation-strategic– and an integral Transformation Readiness Index. The system introduces the Operational Integrity Index as a methodological mechanism for neutralising wartime distortion of financial indicators, ensuring comparability of diagnostic results across enterprises with different levels of war-related damage. The independence of the two block indices prevents diagnostic blindness that arises when all indicators are collapsed into a single weighted score. The sub-indices of the innovation-strategic block are aligned with European Innovation Scoreboard indicators, enabling benchmarking against European monitoring standards. The developed system provides enterprise managers with a transformation readiness diagnostic tool that requires neither managerial reporting nor specialised software and is specifically adapted to the characteristics of the Ukrainian construction sector under post-conflict recovery conditions. The developed indicator system can be applied by financial institutions for assessing the creditworthiness and investment attractiveness of construction enterprises during recovery. State authorities and international donors may use the Transformation Readiness framework for prioritising support programmes and allocating reconstruction funding across enterprises with different readiness profiles.
References
Teece D.J., Pisano G., Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal. 1997. Vol. 18(7). P. 509–533.
Saunila M. Performance measurement approach for innovation capability in SMEs. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. 2016. Vol. 65(2). P. 162–176.
Teece D.J. Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal. 2007. Vol. 28(13). P. 1319–1350.
Cohen W.M., Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990. Vol. 35(1). P. 128–152.
Adner R., Kapoor R. Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal. 2010. Vol. 31(3). P. 306–333.
European Commission. European Innovation Scoreboard 2024. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2024. URL: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/statistics/performance-indicators/european-innovation-scoreboard_en. (дата звернення: 18.03.2026)
Lubberink R., Blok V., van Ophem J., Omta O. Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 9(5).
Blok V., Martinuzzi A., Brem A., Stahl B., Schonherr N. Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry – Challenges, Insights and Perspectives. Sustainability. 2018. Vol. 10. P. 702.
Dreyer M., Chefneux L., Goldberg A., von Heimburg J., Patrignani N., Schofield M., Shilling C. Responsible Innovation: A Complementary View from Industry. Sustainability. 2017. Vol. 9(10).
Gonzalez-Gemio C., Cruz-Cazares C., Parmentier M. Responsible Innovation in SMEs: A Systematic Literature Review for a Conceptual Model. Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12. 10232.
Teece D.J., Pisano G., Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal. Vol. 18(7). P. 509–533.
Saunila M. (2016). Performance measurement approach for innovation capability in SMEs. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. Vol. 65(2). P. 162–176.
Teece, D.J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, no. 28(13), pp. 1319–1350.
Cohen, W.M., & Levinthal, D.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, no. 35(1), pp. 128–152.
Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, no. 31(3), pp. 306–333.
European Commission. (2024). European Innovation Scoreboard 2024. Available at: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/statistics/performance-indicators/european-innovation-scoreboard_en (accessed March 18, 2026)
Lubberink, R., Blok, V., van Ophem, J., & Omta, O. (2018). Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context. Sustainability, no. 9(5).
Blok, V., Martinuzzi, A., Brem, A., Stahl, B., & Schonherr, N. (2018). Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry. Sustainability, no. 10, 702.
Dreyer, M., Chefneux, L., Goldberg, A., von Heimburg, J., Patrignani, N., Schofield, M., & Shilling, C. (2017). Responsible Innovation: A Complementary View from Industry. Sustainability, no. 9(10).
Gonzalez-Gemio, C., Cruz-Cazares, C., & Parmentier, M. (2020). Responsible Innovation in SMEs: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, no. 12, 10232.
Copyright (c) 2026 Т.В. Іванова
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
