In this article the author proposes that firm status has a significant effect on the regulatory evaluation process. Regulators rely on external signals of quality such as status to resolve uncertainty, and the tendency to be infused with ‘value beyond the technical requirements of the task at hand’ (Selznick, 1957) causes status positions in institutionalized domains to be particularly salient. Using review times for 839 New Drug Applications approved by the Food and Drug Administration between 1990 and 2004, the author finds that firms with higher status in the scientific knowledge domain receive faster approval for their drugs. The effect of status strengthened when products address underserved disease areas, and when following a major product withdrawal in the industry. Status in areas unrelated to the therapy category had a stronger effect on approval speed than therapy-specific status, implying that status effects are driven by values in addition to technical concerns.
AllisonP. A. (1984) History Analysis: Regression for Longitudinal Event Data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
AvornJ. (2004) Powerful Medicines: The Benefits, Risks and Costs of Prescription Drugs. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
3.
BakerW. E.FaulknerR. R. (2002) ‘Interorganizational Networks’, in BaumJ. (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
4.
BaumJ. A. C.OliverC. (1991) ‘Institutional Linkages and Organizational Mortality’, Administrative Science Quarterly36(2): 187–218.
5.
BazermanM. H.BaronJ.ShonkK. (2001) ‘You Can’t Enlarge the Pie’: The Psychology of Ineffective Government. New York: Basic Books.
6.
BerndtE. R.GottschalkA. H. B.PhilipsonT. J.StrobeckM. W. (2005) ‘Industry Funding of the FDA: Effects of PDUFA on Approval Times and Withdrawal Rates’, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery4(7): 545–54.
7.
BonardiJ. P.HolburnG. L. F.Vanden BerghR. G. (2006) ‘Nonmarket Strategy Performance: Evidence from US Electric Utilities’, Academy of Management Journal49(6): 1209–28.
8.
CarpenterD. P. (2001) The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy: Reputations, Networks, and Policy Innovation in Executive Agencies, 1862–1928. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
CarpenterD. P. (2002) ‘Groups, the Media, Agency Waiting Costs, and FDA Drug Approval’, American Journal of Political Science46(3): 490–505.
10.
CarpenterD. P. (2004) ‘Protection without Capture: Product Approval by a Politically Responsive, Learning Regulator’, The American Political Science Review98(4): 613–31.
11.
CarpenterD. P. (2010) Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
CoxD. R. (1972) ‘Regression Models and Life-Tables’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological)34(2): 187–220.
13.
DanzonP. M.NicholsonS.Sousa PereiraN. (2003) ‘Productivity in Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology R&D: The Role of Experience and Alliances’, NBERWorking Paper No. W9615.
14.
DranoveD.MeltzerD. (1994) ‘Do Important Drugs Reach the Market Sooner?’, The Rand Journal of Economics25(3): 402–23.
15.
ElsbachK. (2003) ‘Organizational Perception Management’, in CummingsL. L.StawB. (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25, pp. 297–332. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
16.
FDA (1998) A Historical Guide to the U.S. Government. New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
FDA (1999) Publication No. BG99-2.
18.
FDA (2000) ‘Science at FDA: The Key to Making the Right Decision’, FDA Consumer MagazineMarch/April.
19.
FDA (2003) ‘FDA Science: Protecting America’s Health’, FDA Consumer MagazineMarch/April.
20.
FDA (2010) ‘FDA 101: Advisory Committees’, FDA Consumer Health Information.
21.
De FigueiredoR. J. P.JrEdwardsG. (2007) ‘Does Private Money Buy Public Policy? Campaign Contributions and Regulatory Outcomes in Telecommunications’, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy16(3): 547–76.
22.
FlemingL. (2001) ‘Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search’, Management Science47(1): 117–32.
23.
FlemingL.SorensonO. (2004) ‘Science as a Map in Technological Search’, Strategic Management Journal 25(8/9): 909–28.
24.
FombrunC.ShanleyM. (1990) ‘What’s in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate Strategy’, The Academy of Management Journal33(2): 233–58.
25.
GouldR. V. (2002) ‘The Origins of Status Hierarchies: A Formal Theory and Empirical Test’, American Journal of Sociology107(5): 1143–78.
26.
GranovetterM. (1985) ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, The American Journal of Sociology91(3): 481–510.
27.
GutierrezR. G. (2002) ‘Parametric Frailty and Shared Frailty Survival Models’, Stata Journal2(1): 22–44.
28.
HallB. H.JaffeA. B.TrajtenbergM. (2001) ‘The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights, and Methodological Tools’, NBER Working Paper 8498.
29.
HamiltonB. H.NickersonJ. A. (2003) ‘Correcting for Endogeneity in Strategic Management Research’, Strategic Organization1(1): 51–78.
30.
HawthorneF. (2005) Inside the FDA: The Business and Politics behind the Drugs We Take and the Food We Eat. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
31.
HendersonR.CockburnI. (1996) ‘Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery’, RAND Journal of Economics27(1): 32–59.
32.
HeniszW. J.ZelnerB. A. (2003) ‘The Strategic Organization of Political Risks and Opportunities’, Strategic Organization1(4): 451–460.
33.
HiltsP. J. (2003) Protecting America’s Health: The FDA, Business, and One Hundred Years of Regulation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
34.
HsuG. (2006) ‘Evaluative Schemas and the Attention of Critics in the US Film Industry’, Industrial and Corporate Change15(3): 467–96.
35.
KaltJ. P.ZupanM. A. (1984) ‘Capture and Ideology in the Economic Theory of Politics’, American Economic Review74: 279–300.
36.
KingB. G. (2008) ‘A Political Mediation Model of Corporate Response to Social Movement Activism’, Administrative Science Quarterly53(3): 395–421.
37.
LevinR. C.KlevorickA. K.NelsonR. R.WinterS. G. (1987) ‘Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development: Comments and Discussion’, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity3: 783–831.
38.
MandelM. (2011) ‘How the FDA Impedes Innovation: A Case Study in Overregulation’, Progressive Policy Institute, June.
39.
MarchJ. G. (1991) ‘Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning’, Organization Science2(1): 71–87.
40.
MertonR. K. (1942) ‘Science and Technology in a Democratic Order’, Journal of Legal and Political Sociology1: 115–26.
NerkarA.RobertsP. W. (2004) ‘Technological and Product-Market Experience and the Success of New Product Introductions in the Pharmaceutical Industry’, Strategic Management Journal25(8/9): 779–99.
45.
NgR. (2004) Drugs: From Discovery to Approval. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Liss.
46.
Oberholzer-GeeF.InamdarS. N. (2004) ‘Merck’s Recall of Rofecoxib – A Strategic Perspective’, New England Journal of Medicine351(21): 2147–9.
47.
OlsonM. K. (1997) ‘Firm Characteristics and the Speed of FDA Approval’, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy6(1): 377–401.
48.
PisanoG. P. (1997) ‘R&D Performance, Collaborative Arrangements, and the Market-for-Know-How: A Test of the Lemons Hypothesis in Biotechnology’, Harvard Business School Working Paper 97-105.
49.
PodolnyJ. (1993) ‘A Status-Based Model of Market Competition’, The American Journal of Sociology98(4): 829–72.
50.
PodolnyJ. M. (1994) ‘Market Uncertainty and the Social Character of Economic Exchange’, Administrative Science Quarterly39(3): 458–83.
51.
PodolnyJ. M.StuartT. E. (1995) ‘A Role-Based Ecology of Technological Change’, American Journal of Sociology100(5): 1224–60.
52.
QuirkP. (1980) ‘The Food and Drug Administration’, in WilsonJ. Q. (ed.) The Politics of Regulation, pp. 191–235. New York: Basic Books.
53.
SauderM. (2006) ‘Third Parties and Status Position: How the Characteristics of Status Systems Matter’, Theory and Society35(3): 299–321.
54.
SchmooklerJ. (1966) Invention and Economic Growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
ScottW. W. R. (2001) Institutions and Organizations (Foundations for Organizational Science), 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56.
SelznickP. (1949) TVA and the Grass Roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
57.
SelznickP. (1957) Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation. New York: Harper and Row.
58.
SkocpolT. (1985) ‘Bringing the State Back In: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research’, in EvansP. B.RueschemeyerD.SkocpolT. (eds) Bringing the State Back In, pp. 3–37. New York: Cambridge University Press.
59.
SpenceA. M. (1974) Market Signaling: Informational Transfer in Hiring and Related Screening Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
60.
StarrP. (1982) The Social Transformation of American Medicine. New York: Basic Books.
61.
SternS. (2004) ‘Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?’, Management Science50(6): 835–53.
62.
StiglerG. J. (1971) ‘The Theory of Economic Regulation’, The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science2(1): 3–21.
63.
StuartT. E.HoangH.HybelsR. C. (1999) ‘Interorganizational Endorsements and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Ventures’, Administrative Science Quarterly44(2): 315–49.
64.
SuchmanM. C. (1995) ‘Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches’, Academy of Management Review20(3): 571–610.
65.
TumaN. B.HannanM. T. (1984) Social Dynamics: Models and Methods. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
66.
ViscusiW. K.VernonJ. M.HarringtonJ. E. (2000) Economics of Regulation and Antitrust. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
67.
VogelD. (1989) ‘AIDS – Policies and Prospects: III. AIDS and the Politics of Drug Lag’, Public Interest96: 73–85.
68.
WashingtonM.ZajacE. J. (2005) ‘Status Evolution and Competition: Theory and Evidence’, Academy of Management Journal48(2): 282–96.
69.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
70.
ZaldM. N.DentonP. (1963) ‘From Evangelism to General Service: The Transformation of the YMCA’, Administrative Science Quarterly8(2): 214–34.
