Author:
Cardinal Laura B.,Alessandri Todd M.,Turner Scott F.
Abstract
Industry descriptions often depict science‐driven industries as a single industry class, dominated by explicit knowledge in the form of patents, blueprints, diagrams, etc. This one‐dimensional view limits our ability to effectively manage the activities and routines across various stages of a science life cycle. The life cycle concept refers to the extent of development of the underlying scientific knowledge base. The knowledge in developed science fields (e.g. chemicals) is well codified, whereas in developing fields (e.g. biotechnology), it is less so. This variance creates interesting implications for innovation – product development routines will differ across developed and developing sciences. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the knowledge‐ and resource‐based requirements of developed and developing science industries and the link to competitive advantage.
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,Strategy and Management
Reference32 articles.
1. Badaracco, J. (1991), The Knowledge Link, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
2. Barnett, B.D. and Clark, K.B. (1998), “Problem solving in product development: a model for the advanced materials industries”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 15, pp. 805‐20.
3. Barney, J.B. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, pp. 99‐120.
4. Cardinal, L.B. and Lei, D. (2000), “Structuring research and development teams in the technological conversion process”, in Beyerlein, M.M., Johnson, D.A. and Beyerlein, S.T. (Eds), Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 31‐62.
5. Cardinal, L.B. and Opler, T.C. (1995), “Corporate diversification and innovative efficiency: an empirical study”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 19, pp. 365‐81.
Cited by
83 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献