+1 Recommend
1 collections

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journalsFurthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Toward a Relational View of Organizational Innovation: Learning from Previous and Subsequent Stages of Innovation in Large Biopharmaceutical Firms, 1990–2006

      Pluto Journals


            The paper draws on insights from relational sociology to develop a relational view of organizational innovation which suggests that feedback between stages of innovation may occur regardless of whether they precede one another, and activities at different stages may have reciprocal effects. Regression models based on a sample of 113 large biopharmaceutical firms demonstrate that firms with products in alternative stages of innovation are associated with having products in the focal stage. The key findings from the regression analysis are that product development generates positive feedback for product implementation and vice versa, and engaging in activities at multiple, alternative stages simultaneously generates benefits at the focal stage. The reciprocity between stages provides compelling evidence for the importance of viewing innovation through the lens of relational theory. Interviews with industry informants illustrate the fluidity that exists between innovation stages and the importance of fostering social interactions and communication between organizational members involved in innovation for fostering success across stages.


            Author and article information

            Pluto Journals
            1 June 2020
            : 36
            : 2 ( doiID: 10.13169/prometheus.36.issue-2 )
            : 173-197
            Sociology Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States
            © 2020 Pluto Journals

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            Custom metadata

            Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics


            1. Abernathy, W. and Clark, K. (1985) ‘Innovation: mapping the winds of creative destruction’, Research Policy, 14, 1, pp.3–22.

            2. Andriopoulos, C. and Lewis, M. (2009) ‘Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: managing paradoxes of innovation’, Organization Science, 20, 4, pp.696–717.

            3. Appiah-Adu, K. and Ranchhod, A. (1998) ‘Market orientation and performance in the biotechnology industry: an exploratory empirical analysis’, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10, 2, pp.197–210.

            4. Argyris, C. and Schon, D. (1978) Organisational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.

            5. Arthur, W. (2007) ‘The structure of invention’, Research Policy, 36, 2, pp.274–87.

            6. Audretsch, D. and Stephan, P. (1996) ‘Company-scientist locational links: the case of biotechnology’, American Economic Review, 86, 3, pp.641–52.

            7. Bento, N. and Wilson, C. (2016) ‘Measuring the duration of formative phases for energy technologies’, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 21, December, pp.95–112.

            8. Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S. et al. (2015) ‘Technological innovation systems in contexts: conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics’, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, September, pp.51–64.

            9. Bioscan (2006) Oryx Press, Phoenix AZ.

            10. Blumenthal, D., Gluck, M., Louis, K. S., and Wise, D. (1986) ‘Industrial support of university research in biotechnology,‘ Science, 231, 4735, pp.242–6.

            11. Bromley, P. and Sharkey, A. (2017) ‘Casting call: the expanding nature of actorhood in US firms, 1960–2010‘, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 59, May, pp.3–20.

            12. Brown, S. and Eisenhardt, K. (1997) ‘The art of continuous change: linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 1, pp.1–34.

            13. Carlsson, B. and Stankiewicz, R. (1991) ‘On the nature, function and composition of technological systems’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1, 2, pp. 93–118.

            14. Casper, S. and Matraves, C. (2003) ‘Institutional frameworks and innovation in the German and UK pharmaceutical industry’, Research Policy, 32, 10, pp.1865–79.

            15. Cefis, E. (2003) ‘Is there persistence in innovative activities?‘, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 4, pp.489–515.

            16. Cefis, E. and Orsenigo, L. (2001) ‘The persistence of innovative activities: a cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis,‘ Research Policy, 30, 7, pp.1139–58.

            17. Clausen, T., Pohjola, M., Sapprasert, K. and Verspagen, B. (2012) ‘Innovation strategies as a source of persistent innovation’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 21, 3, pp.553–85.

            18. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, G. and Aiken, L. (2003) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

            19. Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. (1990) ‘Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 1, pp.128–52.

            20. Coleman, J. (1974) Power and the Structure of Society, W. W. Norton, New York.

            21. Cooper, R. (1990) ‘Stage-gate systems: a new tool for managing new products’, Business Horizons, 33, 3, pp.44–54.

            22. Cooper, R. (2001) Winning at New Products: Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch. Perseus Books, Cambridge, MA.

            23. Cooper, R. (2008) ‘Perspective: the stage-gate idea-to-launch process – update, what's new, and nexgen systems’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 3, pp.213–32.

            24. Cortright, J. and Mayer, H. (2002) Signs of Life: The Growth of Biotechnology Centers in the U.S., Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.

            25. Dewey, J. (1960) Knowing and the Known, Beacon Press, Boston, MA.

            26. Dyer, J. and Singh, H. (1998) ‘The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage’, Academy of Management Review, 23, 4, pp.660–79.

            27. Emirbayer, M. (1997) ‘Manifesto for a relational sociology’, American Journal of Sociology, 103, 2, pp.281–317.

            28. Emirbayer, M. and Mische, A. (1998) ‘What is agency?‘, American Journal of Sociology, 103, 4, pp.962–1023.

            29. Erikson, E. (2013) ‘Formalist and relationalist theory in social network analysis’, Sociological Theory, 31, 3, pp.219–42.

            30. Fagerberg, J. and Verspagen, B. (2009) ‘Innovation studies – the emerging structure of a new scientific field’, Research Policy, 38, 2, pp.218–33.

            31. Fagerberg, J., Fosaas, M. and Sapprasert, K. (2012) ‘Innovation: exploring the knowledge base,‘ Research Policy, 41, 7, pp.1132–53.

            32. Frohlich, M, and Westbrook, R. (2001) ‘Arcs of integration: an international study of supply chain strategies’, Journal of Operations Management 19, 2, pp.185–200.

            33. Fuhse, J. (2009) ‘The meaning structure of networks’, Sociological Theory, 27, 1, pp.51–73.

            34. Ganter, A. and Hecker, A. (2013) ‘Persistence of innovation: discriminating between types of innovation and sources of state dependence’, Research Policy, 42, 8, pp.1431–45.

            35. Garud, R., Dunbar, R. L. and Bartel, C. (2011a) ‘Dealing with unusual experiences: a narrative perspective on organizational learning’, Organization Science, 22, 3, pp.587–601.

            36. Garud, R., Gehman, J. and Kumaraswamy A. (2011b) ‘Complexity arrangements for sustained innovation: lessons from 3M corporation’, Organization Studies, 32, 6, pp.737–67.

            37. Garud, R., Tuertscher, P., and Van de Ven A. (2013) ‘Perspectives on innovation processes’, Academy of Management Annals, 7, 2, pp.775–819.

            38. Geels, F. (2002) ‘Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study’, Research Policy, 31, 8/9, pp.1257–74.

            39. Geels, F. (2005) ‘The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: a multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860–1930)‘, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 17, 4, pp.445–76.

            40. Gertler, M. and Levitte, Y. (2005) ‘Local nodes in global networks: the geography of knowledge flows in biotechnology innovation’, Industry and Innovation, 12, 4, pp.487–507.

            41. Gibson, D. (2005) ‘Taking turns and talking ties: network structure and conversational evangelicalism: how networks matter’, American Journal of Sociology, 111, 3, pp.757–96.

            42. Gupta, A., Smith, K. and Shalley, C. (2006) ‘The interplay between exploration and exploitation’, Academy of Management Journal, 49, 4, pp.693–708.

            43. Hannan, M. and Freeman, J. (1984) ‘Structural inertia and organizational change’, American Sociological Review, 49, 1, pp.149–64.

            44. Hansen, M. and Birkinshaw, J. (2007) ‘The innovation value chain’, Harvard Business Review, 85, 6, pp.121–30.

            45. Hargadon, A. (2003) How Breakthroughs Happen: The Surprising Truth about how Companies Innovate, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

            46. Hawkins, R. and Davis, C. (2012) ‘Innovation and experience goods: a critical appraisal of a missing dimension in innovation theory’, Prometheus, 30, 3, pp.235–59.

            47. Hernandez, E. and Shaver, J. (2019) ‘Network synergy’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 64, 1, pp.171–202.

            48. Hoang, H, and Rothaermel, F. (2010) ‘Leveraging internal and external experience: exploration, exploitation, and R&D project performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 31, 7, pp.734–58.

            49. Kaplan, S. and Orlikowski, W. (2013) ‘Temporal work in strategy making’, Organization Science, 24, 4, pp.965–95.

            50. Katila, R. and Ahuja, G. (2002) ‘Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction’, Academy of Management Journal, 45, 6, pp.1183–94.

            51. King, B., Felin, T. and Whetten, D. (2010) ‘Finding the organization in organizational theory: a meta-theory of the organization as a social actor’, Organization Science, 21, 1, pp.290–305.

            52. Levitt, B. and March, J. (1988) ‘Organizational learning’, Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 1, pp.319–40.

            53. March, J. (1991) ‘Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning’, Organization Science, 2, 1, pp.71–87.

            54. Markard, J. (2020) ‘The life cycle of technological innovation systems’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153.

            55. Markard, J., Raven, R. and Truffer, B. (2012) ‘Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospect’, Research Policy, 41, 6, pp.955–67.

            56. Martin, B. (2012) ‘The evolution of science policy and innovation studies’, Research Policy, 41, 7, pp.1219–39.

            57. Maurer, I. and Ebers, M. (2006) ‘Dynamics of social capital and their performance implications: lessons from biotechnology start–ups’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 2, pp.262–92.

            58. McFarland, D. (2001) ‘Student resistance: how the formal and informal organization of classrooms facilitate everyday forms of student defiance’, American Journal of Sociology, 107, 3, pp.612–78.

            59. McFarland, D., Jurafsky, D. and Rawlings, C. (2013) ‘Making the connection: social bonding in courtship situations’, American Journal of Sociology, 118, 6, pp.1596–1649.

            60. McLean, P. (2007) The Art of the Network: Strategic Interaction and Patronage in Renaissance Florence, Duke University Press, Durham, NC.

            61. McMillan, G., Narin, F. and Deeds, D. (2000) ‘An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology’, Research Policy, 29, 1, pp.1–8.

            62. Meyer, J. (2010) ‘World society, institutional theories, and the actor’, Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 1, pp.1–20.

            63. Mische, A. (2003) ‘Cross-talk in movements: rethinking the culture-network link’ in Diani, M. and McAdam, D. (eds) Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective Action, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.258–80.

            64. Mische, A. (2011) ‘Relational sociology, culture, and agency’ in Carrington, P. and Scott, J. (eds) Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, Sage, London, pp.80–97.

            65. Mische, A. and Pattison, P. (2000) ‘Composing a civic arena: publics, projects, and social settings’, Poetics, 27, 2-3, pp.163-94

            66. Mohr, J. (1994) ‘Soldiers, mothers, tramps, and others: discourse roles in the 1907, New York City Charity Directory‘, Poetics 22, 4, pp.327–57.

            67. Nelson, R. and Winter, S. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.

            68. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W. (2004) ‘Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: the effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community’, Organization Science, 15, 1, pp.5–21.

            69. Owen-Smith, J., Riccaboni, M., Pammolli, F. and Powell, W. (2002) ‘A comparison of U.S. and European university-industry relations in the life sciences’, Management Science, 48, 1, pp.24–43.

            70. Peters, B. (2009) ‘Persistence of innovation: stylised facts and panel data evidence’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 2, pp.226–43.

            71. Pisano, G. (1991) ‘The governance of innovation: vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry’, Research Policy, 20, 3, pp.237–49.

            72. Pisano, G. (2006) Science Business: The Promise, the Reality, and the Future of Biotech, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

            73. Pollman, E. (2011) ‘Reconceiving corporate personhood’, Utah Law Review, 4, pp.1629–75.

            74. Porter, K., Whittington, K. and Powell W. (2005) ‘The institutional embeddedness of high-tech regions: relational foundations of the Boston biotechnology community’ in Breschi, S. and Malerba, F. (eds) Clusters, Networks, and Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.261–96.

            75. Powell, W., Koput, K. and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996) ‘Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 1, pp.116–45.

            76. Roberts, C. and Geels, F. (2019a) ‘Conditions and intervention strategies for the deliberate acceleration of socio-technical transitions: lessons from a comparative multi-level analysis of two historical case studies in Dutch and Danish heating’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 31, 9, pp.1081–1103.

            77. Roberts, C. and Geels, F. (2019b) ‘Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 140, pp.221–40.

            78. Robinson, D. and Stuart, T. (2007) ‘Network effects in the governance of strategic alliances’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 23, 1, pp.242–73.

            79. Rogers, E. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York.

            80. Roper, S. and Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2008) Innovation persistence: survey and case-study evidence', Research Policy, 37, 1, pp.149–62.

            81. Rothaermel, F. and Deeds, D. (2004) ‘Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development’, Strategic Management Journal, 25, 3, pp.201–21.

            82. Rothaermel, F. and Deeds, D. (2006) ‘Alliance type, alliance experience, and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures’, Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 4, pp.429–60.

            83. Rothaermel, F. and Thursby, M. (2007) ‘The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: sources of productivity in incumbent firm research’, Research Policy, 36, 6, pp.832–49.

            84. Saloner, G., Shepard, A. and Podolny, J. (2001) Strategic Management, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

            85. Smilde, D. (2005) ‘A qualitative comparative analysis of conversion to Venezuelan social settings’, Poetics, 27, 2/3, pp.163–94.

            86. Sorensen, J. (2002) ‘The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 1, pp.70–91.

            87. Sorensen, J. and Stuart, T. (2000) ‘Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 1, pp.81–112.

            88. StataCorp (2015) Stata Statistical Software: Release 14, StataCorp LP, College Station, TX.

            89. Stinchcombe, A. (1965) ‘Social structure and organizations’ in March, J. (ed.) Handbook of Organizations, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp.142–93.

            90. Suurs, R., Hekkert, M., Kieboom, S. and Smits, R. (2010) ‘Understanding the formative stage of technological innovation system development: the case of natural gas as an automotive fuel’, Energy Policy, 38, 1, pp.419–31.

            91. Tavassoli, S. and Karlsson, C. (2015) ‘Persistence of various types of innovation analyzed and explained’, Research Policy, 44, 10, pp.1887–1901.

            92. Teece, D. (1982) ‘Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 1, pp.39–62.

            93. Teece, D. (1986) ‘Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy,‘ Research Policy, 15, 6, pp.285–305.

            94. Tolbert, P. and Zucker, L. (1983) ‘Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880–1935‘, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 1, pp.22–39.

            95. Triguero, A. and Córcoles, D. (2013) ‘Understanding innovation: an analysis of persistence for Spanish manufacturing firms’, Research Policy, 42, 2, pp.340–52.

            96. Tushman, M., and Anderson, P. (1986) ‘Technological discontinuities and organizational environments’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 3, pp.439–65.

            97. Van de Ven, A., Polley, D., Garud, R. and Venkataraman, S. (1999) The Innovation Journey, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

            98. Whetten, D. (2006) ‘Albert and Whetten revisited: strengthening the concept of organizational identity,‘ Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 3, pp.219–34.

            99. White, H. (2002) Markets from Networks: Socioeconomic Models of Production, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

            100. White, H. (2008) Identity and Control, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

            101. Yeung, K. (2005) ‘What does love mean? Exploring network culture in two network settings’, Social Forces, 84, 1, pp.391–420.

            102. Zanders, E. (2011) The Science and Business of Drug Discovery: Demystifying the Jargon, Springer, London.


            Comment on this article