When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: Insights from the drugs industry

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 79, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 949-962

  Sabatier, Valerie ^a   Craig Kennard, Adrienne ^b   Mangematin, Vincent ^a  

^a GRENOBLE ECOLE DE MANAGEMENT   (France)

^b NyX Bio Technologies   (France)

Author keywords

Business model; Dominant logic; Drug industry; Industry life cycle; Technological discontinuities

Indexed keywords

BUSINESS MODELS; DOMINANT LOGIC; DRUG INDUSTRIES; HIGH TECHNOLOGY; STRONG DISCONTINUITY; TECHNOLOGICAL DISCONTINUITIES; TECHNOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY; VALUE CHAINS; VALUE CREATION;

BIOINFORMATICS;

INDUSTRY;

BIOINFORMATICS; BIOTECHNOLOGY; BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT; INNOVATION; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY; TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE;

EID: 84860262645     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.12.007     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Afuah A.N., Utterback J.M. Responding to structural industry changes: a technological evolution perspective. Ind. Corp. Change 1997, 6(1):183-202.
2. Agarwal R., Bayus B.L. The market evolution and sales takeoff of product innovations. Manage. Sci. 2002, 48(8):1024-1041.
3. Agarwal R., Tripsas M. Technology and industry evolution. Handbook of Technology and Innovation Management 2008, John Wilez & Sons. S. Shane (Ed.).
4. Allarakhia M., Walsh S. Managing knowledge assets under conditions of radical change: the case of the pharmaceutical industry. Technovation 2011, 31:105-117.
5. Amir-Aslani A., Mangematin V. The future of drug discovery and development: shifting emphasis towards personalized medicine. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 2010, 77:203-217.
6. Anand J., Oriani R., Vassolo R.S. Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change. Organ. Sci. 2010, 21(6):1213-1232.
7. Anderson P., Tushman M.L. Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: a cyclical model of technological change. Adm. Sci. Q. 1990, 35(4):604-633.
8. Arora A., Gambardella A. The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Res. Policy 1994, 23:523-532.
9. Baden-Fuller C., Demil B., Lecocq X. Editorial. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3):143-145.
10. Benner M.J. Process management and technological innovation: a longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Adm. Sci. Q. 2002, 47(4):676.
11. Benner M.J. Securities analysts and incumbent response to radical technological change: evidence from digital photography and internet telephony. Organ. Sci. 2010, 21(1):42-62.
12. Bettis R.A., Prahalad C.K. The dominant logic: retrospective and extension. Strateg. Manag. J. 1995, 16(1):5-14.
13. Bianchi M., Cavaliere A., Chiaroni D., Frattini F., Chiesa V. Organisational modes for open innovation in the bio-pharmaceutical industry: an exploratory analysis. Technovation 2011, 31:22-33.
14. Bosse D.A., Alvarez S.A. Bargaining power in alliance governance negotiations: evidence from the biotechnology industry. Technovation 2010, 30:367-375.
15. Bradfield R., El-Sayed H. Four scenarios for the future of the pharmaceutical industry. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 2009, 21(2):195-212.
16. Briquet-Laugier V., Ott M.-O. Des nanobiotechnologies à la nanomédecine du futur. Biofutur 2006, 265:57-62.
17. Casadesus-Masanell R., Ricart J.E. From strategy to business models onto tactics. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3).
18. Curran C.-S., Bröring S., Leker J. Anticipating converging industries using publicly available data. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2010, 77:385-395.
19. Datamonitor Global Pharmaceuticals, Biotechnology & Life Sciences, Industry Profile: Reference Code: 0199-2357 2010.
20. De George R.T. Intellectual property and pharmaceutical drugs: an ethical analysis. Bus. Ethics Q. 2005, 15(4):549-575.
21. Demil B., Lecocq X. Business model evolution: in search of dynamic consistency. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3).
22. Dhanaraj C., Parkhe A. Orchestrating innovation networks. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2006, 31(3):659-669.
23. DiMasi J., Grabowski H.G. The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: is biotech different?. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2007, 28:469-479.
24. DiMasi J.A., Hansen R.W., Grabowski H.G. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development cost. J. Health Econ. 2003, 22:151-185.
25. Doz Y.L., Kosonen M. Embedding strategic agility: a leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3).
26. Durand R., Bruyaka O., Mangematin V. Do science and money go together? The case of the French biotech industry. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29(12):1281-1299.
27. Ebers M., Powell W.W. Biotechnology: its origins, organization, and outputs. Res. Policy 2007, 36:433-437.
28. Eisenhardt K. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manage. Rev. 1989, 14(4):532-550.
29. Eisenhardt K.M., Graebner M.E. Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad. Manage. J. 2007, 50(1):25-32.
30. Feldman M.S. Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organ. Sci. 2000, 11(6):611-629.
31. Fisken J., Rutherford J. Business models and investment trends in the biotechnology industry in Europe. J. Commer. Biotechnol. 2002, 8(3):191-199.
32. Galambos L., Sturchio J.L. Pharmaceutical firms and the transition to biotechnology: a study in strategic innovation. Bus. Hist. Rev. 1998, 72(2).
33. Gambardella A., McGahan A.M. Business-model innovation: general purpose technologies and their implications for industry structure. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3).
34. Gassmann O., Reepmeyer G. Organizing pharmaceutical innovation: from science-based knowledge creators to drug-oriented knowledge brokers. Creat. Innov. Manage. 2005, 14(3):233-245.
35. Glaser B., Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies of Qualitative Research 1967, Wiedenfeld and Nicholson, London.
36. Gilbert C. Unbundling the structure of inertia: resource versus routine rigidity. Acad. Manage. J. 1995, 48:741-763.
37. Ginsburg G.S., McCarthy J.J. Personalized medicine: revolutionizing drug discovery and patient care. Trends Biotechnol. 2001, 19(12):491-496.
38. Govindarajan V., Gupta A.K. Strategic innovation: a conceptual road map. Bus. Horiz. 2001, 44(4):3-12.
39. Gripsrud G., Gronhaug K. Structure and strategy in grocery retailing: a sociometric approach. J. Ind. Econ. 1985, XXXIII(3):339-347.
40. Hansen E.G., Grosse-Dunker F., Reichwald R. Sustainability innovation cube - a framework to evaluate sustainability-oriented innovations. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2009, 13(4):683-713.
41. Herrigel G. Large firms, small firms and the governance of flexible specialization: Baden-Württemberg and the socialization of risk. Country Competitiveness: Technology and the Organizing of Work 1993, Oxford University Press, New York. B. Kogut (Ed.).
42. Hill C.W.L., Rothaermel F.T. The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Acad. Manage. Rev. 2003, 28(2):257.
43. Hill S., Johnson K. Emerging Challenges and Opportunities in Drug Registration and Regulation in Developing Countries 2004, DFID Health Systems Resource Center.
44. Hodgkinson G.P. Cognitive inertia in a turbulent market: the case of UK residential estate agents. J. Manag. Stud. 1997, 34(6):921-945.
45. Hodgkinson G.P., Wright G. Confronting strategic inertia in a top management team: learning from failure. Organ. Stud. 2002, 23(6):947-977.
46. Hopkins M.M., Martin P.A., Nightingale P., Kraft A., Mahdi S. The myth of biotech revolution: an assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change. Res. Policy 2007, 36(4):566-589.
47. Kennard A. 2009. Business models in the bioinformatics industry. MBA Thesis, Grenoble Graduate School of Business.
48. Klepper S. Industry life cycles. Ind. Corp. Chang. 1997, 6(1):145-181.
49. Kuhn T. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 1962, University Of Chicago Press.
50. Lane C., Probert J. The external sourcing of technological knowledge by US Pharmaceutical companies: strategic goals and inter-organizational relationships. Ind. Innov. 2007, 14(1):5-25.
51. Laroia G., Krishnan S. Managing drug discovery alliances for success. Res. Technol. Manage. 2005, 42-50.
52. Light D.W., Warbuton R. Demythologizing the high costs of pharmaceutical research. BioSocieties 2011, 6:34-50.
53. Lilico A. Six issues in pharmaceuticals. Institute of Economic Affairs 2006, 33-38.
54. Linstone H.A. Three years of technology foresight. Technovation 2011, 31:69-76.
55. Linton J.D., Walsh S.T. Integrating innovation and learning curve theory: an enabler for moving nanotechnologies and other emerging process technologies into production. R&D Management 2004, 34(5):517-526.
56. Marino K.E. Developing consensus on firm competencies and capabilities. Acad. Manag. Exec. 1996, 10(3):40-51.
57. Martin P., Hopkins M., Nightingale P. Living with 'Dinosaurs': What the Case of Genomics Tells Us about the Role of New Technology Based Firms in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Working paper, SPRU, University of Sussex 2010.
58. McGoey L., Reiss J., Wahlberg A. The global health complex. BioSocieties 2011, 6:1-9.
59. Miles M.B., Huberman M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook 1994, SAGE Publications. 2nd Revised edition.
60. Milne C.P. US and European regulatory initiatives to improve R&D performance. Expert Opin. Drug Discovery 2006, 1(1):11-14.
61. Mittra J. Life science innovation and the restructuring of the pharmaceutical industry: merger, acquisition and strategic alliance behaviour of large firms. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 2007, 19(3):279-301.
62. Morris M., Schindehutte M., Allen J. The entrepreneur's business model: toward a unified perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58:726-735.
63. Munir K.A., Phillips N. The birth of the 'Kodak moment': Institutional entrepreneurship and the adoption of new technologies. Organ. Stud. 2005, 26(11):1665-1687.
64. Nosella A., Petroni G., Verbano C. Characteristics of the Italian biotechnology industry and new business models: the initial results of an empirical study. Technovation 2005, 25:841-855.
65. Pavitt K. Sectoral patterns of innovation: toward a taxonomy and a theory. Res. Policy 1984, 13:343-375.
66. Pettigrew A.M. Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice. Organ. Sci. 1990, 1(3).
67. Phaal R., O'Sullivan E., Routley M., Ford S., Probert D. A framework for mapping industrial emergence. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78:217-230.
68. Piachaud B.S. Outsourcing in the pharmaceutical manufacturing process: an examination of the CRO experience. Technovation 2002, 22:81-90.
69. Pisano G. Can science be a business? Lessons from Biotech. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2006, 84(10):114-125.
70. Pollock A. Transforming the critique of big pharma. BioSocieties 2011, 6:106-118.
71. Powell W.W., Koput K.W., Smith-Doerr L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation. Networks of learning in biotechnology. Adm. Sci. Q. 1996, 41:116-145.
72. Prahalad C.K. The blinders of dominant logic. Long Range Plann. 2004, 37:171-179.
73. Prahalad C.K., Bettis R.A. The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 1986, 7(6):485-501.
74. Relman A.S., Angell M. America's other drug problem. New Repub. December 16 2002, 27-41.
75. Rothaermel F.T. Technological discontinuities and the nature of competition. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 2000, 12(2).
76. Rothaermel F.T. Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: an empirical study of industry and firm effect in the biopharmaceutical industry. Res. Policy 2001, 30:1235-1251.
77. Rothaermel F.T. Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2001, 22:687-699.
78. Rothaermel F.T. Technological discontinuities and interfirm cooperation: what determines a startup's attractiveness as alliance partner?. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2002, 49(4):388.
79. Rothaermel F.T., Hill C.W.L. Technological discontinuities and complementary assets: a longitudinal study of industry and firm performance. Organ. Sci. 2005, 16(1):52-70.
80. Rothman H., Kraft A. Downstream and into deep biology: evolving business models in 'top tier' genomics companies. J. Commer. Biotechnol. 2006, 12(2):86-98.
81. Roux M., Xavier F. Biologie Systémique: standards et modèles 2007, Omnisciences, Ecrin, Paris.
82. Sabatier V., Mangematin V., Rousselle T. From recipe to dinner: business model portfolios in the European biopharmaceutical industry. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3).
83. Sabatier V., Mangematin V., Rousselle T. Orchestrating networks in the biopharmaceutical industry: small hub firms can do it. Prod. Plann. Control 2010, 21(2):218-228.
84. Santos F., Eisenhardt K.M. Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Acad. Manage. J. 2009, 52(4):643-671.
85. Sosna M., Trevinyo-Rodriguez R.N., Velamuri S.R. Business model innovation through trial-and-error learning. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3):383-407.
86. Staropoli C. Cooperation in R&D in the pharmaceutical industry - the network as an organizational innovation governing technological innovation. Technovation 1998, 18(1):13-23.
87. Storper M. The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy 1997, Guilford Press, New York.
88. Su Y.-S., Hung L.-C. Spontaneous vs. policy-driven: the origin and evolution of the biotechnology cluster. Technovation 2009, 76:608-619.
89. Taylor A., Helfat C.E. Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organ. Sci. 2009, 20(4):718-739.
90. Teece D.J. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 1986, 15:285-305.
91. Teece D.J. Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Plann. 2010, 43(2-3):172-174.
92. Thumm N. Strategic patenting in biotechnology. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manage. 2004, 16(4):529-538.
93. Tushman M.L., Rosenkopf L. Organizational determinants of technological change: toward a sociology of technological evolution. Res. Organ. Behav. 1992, 14:311-347.
94. Utterback J.M., Abernathy W.J. A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega 1975, 3(6):639-656.
95. van Geenhuizen M., Reyes-Gonzalez L. Does a clustered location matter for high-technology companies' performance? The case of biotechnology in the Netherlands. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2007, 74:1681-1696.
96. von Krogh G., Erat P., Macus M. Exploring the link between dominant logic and company performance. Creat. Innov. Manage. 2000, 9(2):82-93.
97. Walsh S., Kirchhoff B. Entrepreneurs' opportunities and technology based markets. Technological Entrepreneurship 2002, 17-30. IAP Press, New York. P. Phan (Ed.).
98. Weisenfeld U., Reeves J.C., Hunck-Meiswinkel A. Technology management and collaboration profile: virtual companies and industrial platforms in the high-tech biotechnology industries. R&D Manage. 2001, 31(1):91-100.
99. Winter S.G. Schumpeterian competition under alternative technological regimes. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 1984, 5:287-320.
100. Wunsch-Vincent S., Vickery G. Working Party on the information economy, digital broadband content: music. OECD Report 2004.
101. Yanez M., Khalil T.M., Walsh S.T. IAMOT and Education: Defining a Technology and Innovation Management (TIM) Body-of-Knowledge (BoK) for graduate education (TIM BoK). Technovation 2010, 30:389-400.
102. Yin R.K. Applications of Case Study Research 2003, SAGE Publications Ltd. 2nd Revised ed.