What Hold us Together? Analyzing Biotech Field Formation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242011000300001Keywords:
biotechnology, organizational field, actor-network theory, interorganizational relations, institutional theory, innovation.Abstract
This article proposes to analyze the formation of biotechnological field bringing actor-network theory’s lens as contribution. Based on conclusions of studies developed by Walter Powell and colleagues it was held a research to analyze the diversity of institutional relations that are active by hemophilia therapies, the principle of generalized symmetry adopted for actor-network theory is highlight to identify how socio-technical associations are assembled. Besides the interorganizational relations, research’s findings indicate the scientific and technological contents have a significant mediating role to create and sustain those connections of knowledge. So, it is emphasized the need of a boarder theoretical discussion to enlarge explanations about the dynamics of organizational fields as well as innovation processes.Downloads
References
CALLON, M. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: the domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieux Bay. In: LAW, J. (ed.) Power, action and belief. Routledge & Kegan. London, pp. 196-229.
CALLON, M. (1989) Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In: Pinch, T.; Hugues, T. Bijker, W. (eds.) The social construction of technological systems. MIT Press , Cambridge, MA.
CALLON, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (1986). A qualitative scientometrics. In: Callon, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (eds.) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Macmillan Press, London. pp. 102-123.
CORIAT, B.; Orsi, F.; Weinstein, O. (2003). Does biotech reflect a new science-based innovation regime? Industry and Innovation. 10 (3). pp. 231-253.
DiMAGGIO, P.; Powell, W.W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational field. In: Powell, W.W.;
DiMAGGIO, P. (eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. pp. 63-82.
DOMÈNECH, M.; Tirado, F. (1998). Claves para la lectura de textos simétrico. In: Domènech, M.; Tirado, F. (comps.) Sociología simétrica. Gedisa Editorial, Barcelona. pp. 13-50.
EDQUIST, C. (1997). Systems of innovation approaches: their emergence and characteristics. In: Edquist, C. (ed.) Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations. Pinter, London.
FERNANDES, C. (2010) Redes de informacSo tecnológica. DissertagSo de Mestrado. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife.
FREEMAN, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: lesson from Japan. London, Pinter.
HOLT, R.T. (2008). Actor-network theory. In: The Sage Dictionary of Qualitative Management Research. Sage Publications, Oxford, UK. pp. 23-24.
JUDICE, V. M.M.; Baeta, A. M.C. (2005). Modelo empresarial, gestSo de inovagSo e investimentos de venture capital em empresas de biotecnologia no Brasil. Revista de AdministragSo Contemporánea. 9 (1), 171-191.
LATOUR, B. (1994). Jamais fomos modernos. Editora 34, SSo Paulo.
LATOUR, B. (2000). Ciencia em agSo. Editora Unesp, SSo Paulo.
LATOUR, B. (2001). A esperanga de Pandora. Editora EDUSC, SSo Paulo.
LATOUR, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network theory.Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
LATOUR, B.; Woolgar, S. (1997). A vida em laboratório. Relume Dumará, Rio de Janeiro.
LAW, J. (1999). After Ant. In: Law, J.; Hassard, J. (eds.) Actor Network Theory and after. Blackwell, Oxford, UK. pp. 1-14.
LAW, J. (2008). Actor-Network Theory and material semiotics. In Turner, B.S. The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory. 3rd ed. Blackwell, Oxford. 141-158.
LAW, J.; Hetherington, K. (2000). Materialities, spatialities, globalities. Lancaster University. <http://www.comp.lancs. ac.uk/sociology/soc029jl.html>. [Accessed may, 22, 2003]
LILLICRAP, D.; Thompson, A. R. (2008). Gene therapy for hemophilia. World Federation of Hemophilia, Montreal.
LUNDVALL, B. (2005). National innovation systems: analytical concept and development tool. Druid tenth Anniversary Summer Conference. Copenhagen.
MARQUES, R.; Gongalves Neto, C. (2007). The brazilian system of innovation in biotechnology: a preliminary study. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation. 2 (1). 55-63.
MEYER, J.W. (2008). Reflections on institutional theories of organizations. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 788-809.
NIOSI, J. (2003). Alliances are not enough explaining rapid growth in biotechnology firms. Research Policy. 32. 737-750.
ORSENIGO, L. (2006). Clusters and clustering in biotechnology: stylized facts, issues and theories. In: Braunerhjelm, P. and Feldman, M.P. (eds.) Cluster Genesis. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. pp. 195-218.
OWEN-SMITH, J.; Riccaboni, M.; Pammolli, F; Powell, W.W. (2002). A comparison of US and European university-industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science. 48. 24-43.
OWEN-SMITH, J.; Powell, P. (2004). Knowledge networks in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science. 15 (1). 5-21.
OWEN-SMITH, J.; Powell, P. (2008). Networks And Institutions. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 594-621.
PORTER, K.; Whittington, K.B.; Powell, W.W. (2005). The institutional embeddedness of high-tech regions: relational foundations of the Boston biotechnology community. In: Breschi, S.; Malerba, F. Clusters, networks, and innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. pp. 261-296.
POWELL, W.W. (1999) The social construction of an organizational field: the case of biotechnology. International Journal of Biotechnology. 1 (1). 42-66.
POWELL. W.W.; Koput, K.W.; Smith-Doerr, L.(1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly. 41 (1). 116-145.
POWELL, W.W.; Koput, K.W.; Bowie, J.I.; Smith-Doerr, L. (2002). The Spatial Clustering Of Science And Capital: Accounting For Biotech Firm-Venture Capital Relationships. Regional Studies. 36 (3). 291-306.
POWELL, W.W.; Koput, K.W.; White, D.R.; Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics in a field evolution: the growth of interorganizational collaboration in life sciences. American Journal of Sociology. 41 (1). 1132-1205.
POWELL, W.W.; Colyvas, J.A (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In: Greenwood, R.; Oliver, C.; Suddaby, R.; Sahlin, K. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Sage Publications,Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 276-298.
POWELL, W.W.; Packalen, K.A.; Whittington, K.B. (2010). Organizational and institutional genesis: the emergence of high-tech clusters in life science. In: PadgettJ.; Powell, W.W.; (eds.) The emergence of organization and markets. Queen's School of Business Research Paper. Kingston, Canada.
RIP, A. (1986). Mobilising resources through texts. In: Callon, M.; Law, J.; Rip, A. (eds.) Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. London: Macmillan Press. pp. 84-99.
SCOTT, W.R. (1994). Institutions and organizations: toward a theoretical synthesis. In: Scott, W.R; Meyer, J. W. Institutional environments and organizations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. pp. 55-80.
SCOTT, W.R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
TRIGUEIRO, M.G.S. (2002). O clone de prometeu: a biotecnologia no Brasil. Editora UnB, Brasilia.
WFH (2008). Contraction fractionation. World Federation of Hemophilia, Montreal.
WHITTINGTON, K.B.; Owen-Smith, J.; Powell, W.W. (2009) Networks, propinquity and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Administrative Science Quarterly. 54 (1). 90-112.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2011 Journal of Technology Management & Innovation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.