Problems of action and structure underpin key issues in research on innovation processes. The question of entrepreneurial activity is an enduring one, from the risk-taking actor debate right through to recent discussions of strategic leadership and new venturing for wealth creation. But we can also detect deterministic tendencies in those arguments that find innovation activity defined by the sector’s institutionalized regime or paradigm. To this extent, concern for the reconciliation of action and structure has been particularly neglected. Drawing on insights from structuration theory, institutionalism and resource dependence, this article develops a new model that attempts to reconcile the action-structure dichotomy in the innovation process in industry. The article concludes by considering the implications of this model for issues of life cycle effects, technology strategy and systems of innovation.
Abernathy, W.J. & Utterback, J.M.A dynamic model of product and process innovation . Omega, 1975, 3, 639-656 .
2.
Aldrich, H. & Fiol, C.M.Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation . Academy of Management Review, 1994, 19, 645-670 .
3.
Antonelli, C.Externalities and complementarities in telecommunications dynamics . International Journal of Industrial Organization, 1993, 11, 437-447 .
4.
Arthur, W.B.Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events . The Economic Journal, 1989, 99, 116-131 .
5.
Barley, S.R. & Tolbert, P.S.Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution . Organization Studies, 1997, 18, 93-117 .
6.
Baum, J.A.C. , Calabrese, T. & Silverman, B.S.Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and start-ups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology . Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21, 267-294 .
7.
Bierly, P. & Chakrabarti, A.Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry . Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(Winter Special Issue), 123-135 .
8.
Burt, R.S.Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press , 1992.
9.
Casper, S.Institutional adaptiveness, technology policy, and the diffusion of new business models: The case of German biotechnology . Organization Studies, 2000, 21, 887-914 .
10.
Christensen, C.The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press , 1997.
11.
Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A.Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D . The Economic Journal, 1989, 99, 569-596 .
12.
Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A.Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35, 128-152 .
13.
Coleman, J.Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press , 1990.
14.
Cowan, R.Nuclear power reactors: A study in technological lock-in . Journal of Economic History, 1990, 5, 541-567 .
15.
Cusumano, M. , Mylonadis, Y. & Rosenbloom, R.Strategic maneuvering and mass market dynamics: The triumph of VHS over Betamax . Business History Review, 1992, 66(Spring), 41-58 .
16.
David, P.A.Clio and the economics of QWERTY . American Economic Review, 1985, 75, 332-337 .
17.
David, P.A.Path dependence, its critics and the quest for ‘historical economics’. In P. Garrouste & S. Ionnides (Eds), Evolution and path dependence in economic ideas: Past and present. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar , 2001, pp. 15-40.
18.
Debackere, K. & Rappa, M.A.Technological communities and the diffusion of knowledge: A replication and validation . R&D Management, 1994, 24, 355-371 .
19.
DiMaggio, P. & Powell, W.W.The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields . American Sociological Review, 1983, 48, 147-180 .
20.
Dosi, G.Technological paradigms and technological trajectories . Research Policy, 1982, 11, 147-162 .
21.
Dyer, J.H. & Nobeoka, K.Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The Toyota case . Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21, 345-367 .
22.
Edquist, C.Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. In J. Fagerberg , D. Mowery & R. Nelson (Eds), Handbook of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press , 2004, in press.
23.
Friedman, A.L.The information technology field: Using fields and paradigms for analysing technological change . Human Relations, 1994, 47, 367-392 .
24.
Garud, R. & Rappa, M.A.A socio-cognitive model of technological evolution: The case of cochlear implants . Organization Science, 1994, 5, 344-362 .
25.
Giddens, A.The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press , 1984.
26.
Gulati, R.Network location and learning: The influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation . Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20(5), 397-420 .
27.
Hagedoorn, J. & Boijakkers, N.Small entrepreneurial firms and large companies in inert-firm R&D networks - The international biotechnology industry. In M.A. Hitt , R.D. Ireland , S.M. Camp & D.L. Sexton (Eds), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset. Oxford: Blackwell , 2002, pp. 223-252.
28.
Hannan, M.T. & Carroll, G.R.Dynamics of organizational populations. New York: Oxford University Press , 1992.
29.
Henderson, R. & Clark, K.B.Architectural innovations: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35, 9-30 .
30.
Hung, S.-C.Mobilising networks to achieve strategic difference . Long Range Planning, 2002a, 35, 591-613 .
31.
Hung, S.-C.On the co-evolution of technologies and institutions: A comparison of Taiwanese hard disk drive and liquid crystal display industries . R&D Management, 2002b, 32(3), 179-190 .
32.
Hung, S.-C. & Whittington, R.Strategies and institutions: A pluralistic account of strategies in the Taiwanese computer industry . Organization Studies, 1997, 18, 551-575 .
33.
Jenkins, M. & Floyd, S.Trajectories in the evolution of technology: A multi-level study of competition in Formula 1 racing . Organization Studies, 2001, 22, 945-969 .
34.
Klevorick, A. , Levin, R. , Nelson, R. & Winter, S.On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunity . Research Policy, 1995, 24, 185-206 .
Kogut, B.The network as knowledge generative rules and the emergence of structure . Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21, 405-425 .
37.
Langley, A.Strategies for theorizing from process data . Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24, 691-710 .
38.
Langlois, R.N. & Steinmueller, W.E.Strategy and circumstance: The response of American firms to Japanese competition in semiconductors, 1980-1995 . Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21, 1163-1173 .
39.
Leiner, B.M. , Cerf, V.G. , Clark, D.D. , Kahn, R.E. , Kleinrock, L. , Lynch, D.C. , Postel, J. , Roberts, L.G. & Wolff, S.S.The past and future history of the Internet . Communications of the ACM, 1997, 40, 102-108 .
40.
Liebeskind, J.P. , Oliver, A.L. , Zucker, L. & Brewer, M.Social networks, learning and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms . Organization Science, 1996, 7, 428-443 .
41.
Lynn, L.H. , Reddy, N.M. & Aram, J.D.Linking technology and institutions: The innovation community framework . Research Policy, 1996, 25, 91-106 .
42.
Malerba, F. , Orsenigo, L. & Peretto, P.Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization . International Journal of Industrial Organization, 1997, 15, 801-826 .
43.
Mayer, M. & Whittington, R.Strategy, structure and ‘systemness’: National institutions and corporate change in France, Germany and the UK, 1950-1993 . Organization Studies, 1999, 20, 933-959 .
44.
Meyer, J.W. & Rowan, B.Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony . American Journal of Sociology, 1977, 83, 340-363 .
45.
Nelson, R. & Nelson, K.Technology, institutions and innovation systems . Research Policy, 2002, 31, 265-272 .
46.
Nelson, R. & Winter, S.In search of useful theory of innovation . Research Policy, 1977, 6, 36-76 .
47.
Nightingale, P.A cognitive model of innovation . Research Policy, 1998, 27, 689-709 .
48.
Noble, D.Forces of production. New York: Alfred A. Knopf , 1984.
Ostry, S. & Nelson, R.Techno-nationalism and techno-globalism: Conflict and cooperation. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution , 1995.
51.
Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G.R.The external control of organizations: A resource-dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row , 1978.
52.
Phillips, N. , Lawrence, T.B. & Hardy, C.Inter-organizational collaboration and the dynamics of institutional fields . Journal of Management Studies, 2000, 37, 23-43 .
53.
Pinch, T.F. & Bijker, W.E.The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W.E. Bijker , T.P. Hughes & T. Pinch (Eds), The social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press , 1987, pp. 17-50.
54.
Powell, T.C. & Dent-Micallef, A.Information technology as competitive advantage: The role of human, business and technology resources . Strategic Management Journal, 1997, 18, 375-405 .
55.
Rindova, V. & Fombrun, C.J.Constructing competitive advantage: The role of firm-constituent interactions . Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20, 691-710 .
Rosenkopf, L. & Tushman, M.The coevolution of technology and organization. In J.A.C. Baum & J.V. Singh (Eds), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. New York: Oxford University Press , 1994, pp. 403-424.
58.
Sahal, D.Patterns of technological innovation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley , 1981.
59.
Sahal, D.Technological guide-posts and innovation avenues . Research Policy, 1985, 14(2), 61-82 .
60.
Schumpeter, J.A.Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper , 1942.
61.
Scott, W.R.Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage , 1995.
62.
Shane, S. & Venkataraman, S.The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research . Academy of Management Review, 2000, 25, 217-226 .
63.
Slappendel, C.Perspectives on innovation in organizations . Organization Studies, 1996, 17, 107-129 .
64.
Spender, J.-C.Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm . Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(Winter Special Issue), 45-62 .
65.
Stuart, T.E. & Podolny, J.M.Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities . Strategic Management Journal, 1996, 17(Summer Special Issue), 21-38 .
66.
Swan, J. & Newell, S.The role of professional associations in technological diffusion . Organization Studies, 1995, 16, 847-874 .
67.
Teece, D.J.Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation . Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1996, 31, 193-224 .
68.
Tolbert, P.A. & Zucker, L.G.Institutional sources of change in the femoral structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform 1990-1935 . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1983, 28, 22-39 .
Tushman, M.L. & Rosenkopf, L.Organizational determinants of technological change: Toward a sociology of technological evolution . Research in Organizational Behavior, 1992, 14, 311-347 .
71.
Utterback, J.M.Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School , 1994.
72.
Van den Ende, J. & Kemp, R.Technological transformations in history: How the computer regime grew out of existing computing regimes . Research Policy, 1999, 28, 833-851 .
73.
Van de Ven, A.H.Central problems in the management of innovation . Management Science, 1986, 32, 590-607 .
74.
Van de Ven, A.H. & Rogers, E.M.Innovations and organizations: Critical perspectives . Communication Research, 1988, 15, 632-651 .
75.
Von Hippel, E.The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press , 1988.
76.
Wade, J.A community-level analysis of sources and rates of technological variation in the microprocessor market . Academy of Management Journal, 1996, 39, 1218-1244 .
77.
Westphal, J.D. , Gulati, R. & Shortell, S.M.Customization or conformity: An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42, 366-394 .
78.
Whittington, R.Putting Giddens into action: Managerial agency and social structure . Journal of Management Studies, 1992, 29, 693-712 .
