The organization of innovation brokers: An international review

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 747-763

  Winch, Graham M ^a   Courtney, Roger ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDUSTRIAL COMPETITION; INNOVATION; ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK;

EID: 36549076599     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: 14653990     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537320701711223     Document Type: Review

References (92)

1. D.J. Brass, J. Galaskiewicz, H. R. Greve & W. Tsai, Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective, Academy of Management Journal, 47, 2004, pp. 795-817
2. A.B. Hargadon, How Breakthroughs Happen (Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 2003)
3. E.M. Rogers, The Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn (NewYork, Simon and Schuster, 2003).
4. G. Ahuja, Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 2000, pp. 425-455
5. P.-H. Soh & E.B. Roberts, Networks of innovators: A longitudinal perspective research policy, 32, 2003, pp. 1569-1588.
6. R.S. Burt, The social structure of competition, in: N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds) Networks and Organizations (Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 1992).
7. M.S. Granovetter, The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1973, pp. 1360-1380
8. M.S. Granovetter, The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited in: P.V. Marsden & N. Lin (Eds) Social Structure and Network Analysis (Beverly Hills CA, Sage, 1982).
9. J. Howells, Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation, Research Policy, 35, 2006, pp. 715-728.
10. Although the term innovation broker would appear to be generic, it has not previously been used to describe intermediaries in innovation systems and networks; Howells, op. cit., Ref. 5.
11. J. Bessant & H. Rush, Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer, Research Policy, 24, 1995, pp. 97-114
12. E. Muller & A. Zenker, Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: The role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems, Research Policy, 30, 2001, pp. 1501-1516
13. G.M. Winch & E. Schneider, Managing the knowledgebased organisation; the case of architectural practice, Journal of Management Studies, 30(6), 1993, pp. 923-937.
14. Howells, op. cit., Ref. 5.
15. D. Gann, Building Innovation: Complex Constructs in a Changing World (London, Thomas Telford, 2000)
16. M. Miozzo & P. Dewick, Building competitive advantage: Innovation and corporate governance in European construction, Research Policy, 31, 2002, pp. 989-1008
17. M. Miozzo & P. Dewick, Innovation and networks: Benefits from inter-firm co-operation in a fragmented industry, International Journal of Technology Management, 27, 2004, pp. 68-92
18. M. Miozzo & P. Dewick, Innovation in Construction: A European Analysis (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2004)
19. G.M.Winch, Zephyrs of creative destruction: Understanding the management of innovation in construction, Building Research and Information, 26, 1998, pp. 268-279.
20. A. Manseau & G. Seaden, (Eds) Innovation in Construction: An International Review of Public Policies (London, Spon, 2001).
21. C. Freeman, Networks of innovators: A synthesis, Research Policy, 20, 1991, pp. 499-514.
22. Rogers, op. cit., Ref. 1.
23. W.W. Powell, K.W. Koput & L. Smith-Doerr, Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 1996, pp. 116-145.
24. J. Owen-Smith & W.W. Powell, Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spill-overs in the Boston biotechnology community, Organization Science, 15, 2004, pp. 5-21.
25. G.M.Winch, Managing complex connective processes: Innovation broking, in: A. Manseau & R. Shields (Eds) Building Tomorrow: Innovation in Construction and Engineering (London, Ashgate Press, 2005).
26. R.V. Gould & R.M. Fernandez, Structures of mediation: A formal approach to brokerage in transaction networks, Sociological Methodology, 19, 1989, pp. 89-126.
27. It is not clear from the texts why the nomenclature changes. Knowledge broker is retained here because it would appear to be more generic and capture the broader range of cases presented.
28. A.B. Hargadon, Firms as knowledge brokers: Lessons in continuous innovation, California Management Review, 40, 1998, pp. 209-227
29. A.B. Hargadon, Brokering knowledge; linking learning and innovation, Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 2002, pp. 41-85.
30. A.B. Hargadon & R.I. Sutton, Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 1997, pp. 716-749
31. Hargadon, op. cit., Ref. 1.
32. A.B. Hargadon & Y. Douglas, When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of electric light, Administrative Science Quarterly 46, 2001, pp. 476-501
33. T.P. Hughes, Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society 880-1930 (Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1983).
34. Burt, op. cit., Ref. 3.
35. Hargadon, op. cit., Ref. 18.
36. F. Kodama, Technology fusion and the new R & D, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1992, pp. 70-78.
37. L. Rosenkopf & M.L. Tushman, Community Organization and Technological Evolution: Interorganizational Cooperation over the Technology Cycle (Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 1994)
38. L. Rosenkopf & M.L. Tushman, The coevolution of community networks and technology: Lessons from the flight simulation industry, Industrial and Corporate Change, 7, 1998, pp. 311-346
39. L. Rosenkopf, A. Metiu & G. P. Varghese, From the bottom up? Technical committee activity and alliance formation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 2001, pp. 748-772.
40. H. Aldrich, Organizations and Environments (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1978).
41. Rosenkopf & Tushman, 1998, op. cit., Ref. 24, figure 1.
42. R. Miller, M. Hobday, T. Leroux-Demers & X. Olleros, Innovation in complex systems industries; the case of flight simulators, Industrial and Corporate Change, 4, 1995, pp. 363-400.
43. Miller et al., op. cit., Ref. 27, p. 383.
44. Soh & Roberts op. cit., Ref. 2.
45. Soh & Roberts, op. cit., Ref. 29, p. 1578.
46. M. Hobday, Product complexity, innovation and industrial organization, Research Policy, 26, 1998, pp. 689-710.
47. Winch, op. cit., Ref. 9.
48. Rosenkopf & Tushman, 1998, op. cit., Ref. 24
49. Rosenkopf et al., op. cit., Ref. 24
50. Soh & Roberts, op. cit., Ref. 29.
51. Hargadon & Douglas, op. cit., Ref. 20
52. see also Hughes, op. cit., Ref. 20
53. and Hargadon, op. cit., Ref. 1.
54. Hargadon & Sutton, op. cit., Ref. 1
55. Hargadon, 2002, op. cit., Ref. 18.
56. Owen-Smith & Powell, op. cit., Ref. 14.
57. Howells, op. cit., Ref. 5.
58. Granovetter, 1982 op. cit., Ref. 4.
59. Howells, op. cit., Ref. 5.
60. The co-ordination of this international task group was funded by the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (award no. GR/ R18734/01) and undertaken by the authors. The Organization of Innovation Brokers 763
61. Rosenkopf & Tushman, 1998, op. cit., Ref. 24.
62. Hargadon & Sutton, op. cit., Ref. 19.
63. D. Gann, Putting academic ideas into practice: Technological progress and the absorptive capacity of construction organizations, Construction Management and Economics, 19, 2001, pp. 321-330.
64. B.-Å., Lundvall, B. Johnson, E. S. Andersen & B. Dalum, National systems of production, innovation and competence-building, Research Policy, 31, 2002, pp. 213-231.
65. J. Bröchner & B. Grandinson, R&D Cooperation by Swedish contractors, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118, 1992, pp. 3-16.
66. R. Courtney, Building research establishment - past, present and future, Building Research and Information, 25, 1997, pp. 285-291.
67. Freeman, op. cit., Ref. 11.
68. M. Porter, The Competitive Advantage of Nations (NewYork, Macmillan1990).
69. Hargadon & Sutton, op. cit., Ref. 19.
70. G.M. Winch, Institutional reform in British construction: Partnering and private finance, Building Research and Information, 28, 2000, pp. 141-155.
71. Winch, op. cit., Refs 9 and 15.
72. Hargadon & Sutton, op. cit., Ref. 19.
73. G. Seaden, The future of national construction research organizations, Building Research and Information, 25, 1997, pp. 250-256.
74. Gould & Fernandez, op. cit., Ref. 16.
75. Winch, op. cit., Ref. 50.
76. R.E. Rice & E.M. Rogers, Reinvention in the innovation process, Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1, 1980, pp. 499-514.
77. Rosenkopf & Tushman, 1998, op. cit., Ref. 24.
78. Soh & Roberts, op. cit., Ref. 29.
79. Rosenkopf et al., op. cit., Ref. 24.
80. Powell et al., op. cit., Ref. 13
81. Owen-Smith & Powell, op. cit., Ref. 14.
82. Rosenkopf et al., op. cit., Ref. 24.
83. Ahuja, op. cit., Ref. 2.
84. Burk, op. cit., Ref. 3
85. Granovetter, op. cit., Ref. 4.
86. S.R., Barley, J. Freeman & R.C. Hybels, Strategic alliances in commercial biotechnology, in: N. Nohria &R.G. Eccles (Eds) Networks and Organizations (Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 1992)
87. Powell et al., op. cit., Ref. 13.
88. L.C. Freeman, Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification, Social Networks, 1, 1978, pp. 205-239.
89. D. Krackhardt, The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations, in: N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds) Networks and Organizations (Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 1992).
90. Manseau & Seaden, op. cit., Ref. 10.
91. Seaden, op. cit., Ref. 53.
92. Miozzo & Dewick, op. cit., Ref. 9.