Firms invest differentially in the intellectual human capital required to recognize, evaluate, and utilize technological breakthroughs occurring outside the firm. Such differential investment has been crucial in explaining which incumbent pharmaceutical firms have successfully transformed their technological identities in response to the biotechnological revolution and which are threatened by persistent low performance. While all incumbent firms lagged the dedicated, new biotechnology firms in adopting the new drug-discovery technology, firms with higher research and development expenditures before the biotech revolution were more likely to successfully adopt the new techniques and likely to do so earlier. Failure to adopt the new techniques was associated with lower performance compared to firms adopting more fully and faster.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bilofsky, H. S. , & Burks, C. (1988). The GenBank (R) genetic sequence data bank. Nucleic Acids Research, 16, 1861-1864.
2.
Bioscan, various issues, 1988-1995.
3.
California Department of Commerce . (1986, May). Drugs and pharmaceuticals (Report R-66A, prepared by the Institute for the Future). Sacramento: California Department of Commerce.
4.
Danzon, P. M. , & Percy, A. (1995, July 28). The effects of price regulation on productivity in pharmaceuticals. Paper presented at the NBER Summer Institute on Productivity, Cambridge, MA.
5.
Darby, M. R. (1976, June). Rational expectations under conditions of costly information. The Journal of Finance31(3), 889-895.
6.
Flynn, J. (with J. Carey, J. Weber, & J. O'C. Hamilton). (1996, March 4). Is SmithKline's future in its genes? R&D chief Poste is racing ahead in gene-based drugs. Business Week, pp. 80-81.
7.
Hanson, G. H. (1995, May). Incomplete contracts, risk, and ownership. International Economic Review, 36(2), 341-365.
8.
Hilton, G. W. , & Due, J. F. (1964). The electric interurban railways in America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
9.
Lee, K. B., Jr. , & Burrill, G. S. (1995). Biotech 95: Reform, restructure, renewal (Ernst & Young Ninth Annual Report on the Biotechnology Industry). San Francisco: Ernst & Young.
10.
Machiavelli, N. (1947). The Prince (T. G. Bergin, Trans. and ed.). Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan Davidson.
11.
Meyer, M. W. , & Zucker, L. G. (1989). Permanently failing organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1988a). Moody's Industrial Manual 1988. New York: Author.
13.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1988b). Moody's International Manual 1988. New York: Author.
14.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1988c). Moody's OTC Industrial Manual 1988. New York: Author.
15.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1995a). Moody's Industrial Manual 1995. New York: Author.
16.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1995b). Moody's International Manual 1995. New York: Author.
17.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (1995c). Moody's OTC Industrial Manual 1995. New York: Author.
18.
Nikkei Biotechnology . (1994). 94/95 sekai no baio kigyo 2000-sha [1994/1995 World's 2000 Bioindustry Corporations]. Tokyo, Japan: Nikkei Business Publications.
19.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association . (1993). 1993 Survey: 143 biotechnology medicines in development. In H. S. Price & R. Greenshields (Eds.), The biotechnology report 1993/94. Hong Kong: Campden.
20.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.
21.
Teitelman, R. (1994). Profits of science: The American marriage of business and technology. New York: Basic Books/Harper Collins.
22.
Tushman, M. L. , & Anderson, P. (1986, March). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439-465.
23.
Tversky, A. , & Kahneman, D. (1974, September). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
24.
Zucker, L. G . (1991). Markets for bureaucratic authority and control: Information quality in professions and services. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 8, 157-190.
25.
Zucker, L. G. , & Darby, M. R. (1995a, August). Present at the revolution: Transformation of technical identity for a large incumbent pharmaceutical firm after the biotechnological break-through (Working Paper No. 5243). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
26.
Zucker, L. G. , & Darby, M. R. (1995b). Sociological analysis of multi-institutional collaborations in space science and geophysics. In J. Warnow-Blewett, A. J. Capitos, J. Genuth, & S. R. Weart (Eds., with contributions by F. Nebeker, L. Zucker, & M. Darby), AIP study of multi-institutional collaborations, Phase II: Space science and geophysics. Report No. 2: Documenting collaborations in space science and geophysics (pp. 149-178). College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics.
27.
Zucker, L. G. , & Darby, M. R. (in press a). Star scientists and institutional transformation: Patterns of invention and innovation in the formation of the biotechnology industry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
28.
Zucker, L. G. , & Darby, M. R. (in press b). Star scientist linkages to firms in APEC and European countries: Indicators of regional institutional differences affecting competitive advantage. International Journal of Technology Management.
29.
Zucker, L. G. , Darby, M. R., & Armstrong, J. (1994, December). Intellectual human capital and the firm: The technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers (Working Paper No. 4946). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
30.
Zucker, L. G. , Darby, M. R., & Brewer, M. B. (1994, February). Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises (Working Paper No. 4653). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
31.
Zucker, L. G. , Darby, M. R., Brewer, M. B., & Peng, Y. (1996). Collaboration structure and information dilemmas in biotechnology: Organizational boundaries as trust production. In R. M. Kramer & T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 90-113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
