The author presents an historical account of scientific work conducted at a commercial biotech firm in San Diego called Hybritech. It tells of disruptions in research programs following the acquisition of the company by the pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly in 1986. The story centers on responses to an organizational challenge that research managers and scientists in any setting, academic or industrial, must confront—how to create and sustain an organizational culture that is conducive to creativity and innovation. The case provides an occasion for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of two leading theoretical accounts of innovation in social studies of science and technology—sociological network analysis and actor-network theory.
AkrichM.CallonM.LatourB. (2002a). The key to success in innovation part I: The art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6, 187-206.
2.
AkrichM.CallonM.LatourB. (2002b). The key to success in innovation part II: The art of choosing good spokespersons. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6, 207-225.
BarnesJ. A. (1979). Network analysis: Orienting notion, rigorous technique, or substantive field of study? In HollandP.LeinhardtS. (Eds.), Perspectives on social network research (pp. 402-423). New York, NY: Academic Press.
5.
BergerD. (1985, May30). Hybritech grows on success of its diagnostic work. San Diego Union, p. E1.
6.
BrunerR. F.OpitzC. S. (1988). Eli Lilly and company (Darden School Case UVA-F-0794). Charlottesville: University of Virginia Darden School Foundation.
7.
BurtR.S. (1982). Toward a structural theory of action: Network models of social structure, perception, and action. New York, NY: Academic Press.
8.
CallonM. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay. In LawJ. (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? (pp. 196-223). London, England: Routledge.
9.
ChaseM. (2007, June5). How Genentech wins at blockbuster drugs. The Wall Street Journal, 249, B1-B2.
10.
ChauduriS.TabriziB. (1999). Capturing the real value in high tech acquisitions. Harvard Business Review, 77, 123-130.
11.
CollinsH. M. (1974). The TEA set: Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies, 4, 165-186.
12.
CraneD. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
13.
FjermedalG. (1984). Magic bullets. New York, NY: Macmillan.
14.
FuhseJ. (2009). The meaning structure of social networks. Sociological Theory, 27, 51-73.
15.
GrabherG.IbertO. (2006). Bad company? The ambiguity of personal knowledge networks. Journal of Economic Geography, 6, 251-271.
16.
GranovetterM. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
17.
HybritechInc. (1989, September3). President’s message: Scientific innovation is key to our future. The Magic Bulletin, IV.
18.
JonesM. P. (2009). Entrepreneurial science: The rules of the game. Social Studies of Science, 39, 821-851.
19.
LatourB. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20.
LawJ.MolA. (Eds.). (2002). Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
21.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2008). Main science and technology indicators. Paris, France: Author.
22.
PendersB.VerbakelJ. M. A.NelisA. (2009). The study of corporate science: A research manifesto. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29, 439-446.
23.
PisanoG. P. (2006). Science business: The promise, the reality, and the future of biotech. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
24.
PowellW. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295-336.
25.
PowellW. W.GrodalS. (2005). Networks of innovators. In FagerbergJ.MoweryD. C.NelsonR. R. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 56-85). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
26.
PowellW. W.KoputK.Smith-DoerrL. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116-145.
27.
RoseC. D. (1987b, July19). New president charts course for Hybritech: Indianapolis commuter says Lilly merger beneficial. San Diego Union, p. I1.
28.
RoseC. D. (1993a, October12). Lilly downsizing will tighten biotech belt at Hybritech; 150 employees expected to lose jobs by year’s end. San Diego Union-Tribune, p. C1.
29.
RoseC. D. (1993b. October26). Magic bullet that missed: Hybritech did a lot right, but Lilly pulls plug on new drugs. San Diego Union-Tribune, p. C1.
30.
RoseC. D. (1994, January19). 3 S.D. Firms included in Lilly divestiture plan. San Diego Union-Tribune, p. C1.
31.
ShapinS. (2008). The scientific life: A moral history of a late modern vocation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
ValkirsG. E.BartonR. (1985). ImmunoConcentration: A new format for solid-phase immunoassays. Clinical Chemistry, 31, 1427-1431.
33.
ValkirsG. E.ColemanN. O.LevensonP. (1986). U.S. Patent No. 4,632,901 (Method and apparatus for immunoassays). Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
34.
VeltmanC. (2003). Genesis of a high tech hub. Nature, 426, 700-704.
35.
WattsD. J.StrogatzS. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of small-world networks. Nature, 393, 440-442.
36.
WhiteH. C.BoormanS. A.BreigerR. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks. I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 730-780.
