The formation and growth of Google: A firm-level triple helix perspective

Social Science Information

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 575-604

  Steiber, Annika ^a   Alänge, Sverker ^a  

^a CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

entrepreneur; Google; government; industry; innovation system; space; Triple Helix model; university

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889048768     PISSN: 05390184     EISSN: 14617412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0539018413497833     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Adner R.Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem.Harvard Business Review. 2006;:98-107.
2. Adner R,Kapoor R.Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations.Strategic Management Journal. 2010;31:306-333.
3. AghionPHowittP (1990) A model of growth through creative destruction. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. (NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper, No. 3223). Available at: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/17807/1/17807.pdf.
4. Ahuja G.Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2000;45 (3): 425-455.
5. AlängeS (1987) Acquisition of capabilities through international technology transfer. PhD Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
6. Alänge SInnovation processes in a systems perspective. Gothenburg, Sweden: Department of Industrial Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology; 2008:.
7. Alänge S,Fogelberg HA critical review of open innovation theory. Gothenburg, Sweden: Department of Technology Management, Chalmers University of Technology and Department of Sociology, University of Gothenburg; 2013:.
8. Alänge S,Steiber S.Diffusion of organizational innovations: An empirical test of an analytical framework.Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. 2011;23 (8): 881-897.
9. Argyris CKnowledge for Action: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1993:.
10. Asheim BT,Lawton Smith H,Oughton C.Regional innovation systems: Theory, empirics and policy.Regional Studies. 2011;45 (7): 875-891.
11. Auletta KGoogled: The end of the world as we know it. New York: The Penguin Press; 2009:.
12. Auerswald PE,Branscomb LM.Valleys of death and Darwinian seas: Financing the invention to innovation transition in the United States.Journal of Technology Transfer. 2003;28:227-239.
13. Brännback M,Carsrud A,Krueger N,Elfving J.Challenging the Triple Helix model of regional innovation systems: A venture-centric model.International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship. 2008;1 (3): 257-277.
14. Burt RSThe New Economic Sociology: Developments in an emerging field. Guillén MFCollins REngland PMeyer M, ed. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation; 2001:.
15. Callon M,Laredo P,Rabeharisoa V.The management and evaluation of technological programs and the dynamics of techno-economic networks: The case of the AFME.Research Policy. 1992;21:215-236.
16. Callon M,Law J.On the construction of sociotechnical networks: Content and context revisited.Knowledge and Society. 1989;8:57-83.
17. Technological Systems and Industrial Dynamics. Carlsson B, ed. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic; 1997:.
18. Carlsson B,Stankiewicz R.On the nature, function and composition of technological systems.Journal of Evolutionary Economics. 1991;1 (2): 93-118.
19. Casas R,de Gortari R,Santos M-J.The building of knowledge spaces in Mexico: A regional approach to networking.Research Policy. 2000;29 (2): 229-241.
20. Gobierno, Academia y Empresas en México: Hacia una nueva configuración de relaciones. 1999) Gobierno, Academia y Empresas en México: Hacia una nueva configuración de relaciones. México City: Editoral Plaza y Valdés. (2nd edn)Casas RLuna M, ed. México City: Editoral Plaza y Valdés; 1999:.
21. Chassagnon V,Audran M.The impact of interpersonal networks on the innovativeness of inventors: From theory to empirical evidence.International Journal of Innovation Management. 2011;15 (5): 931-958.
22. Chesbrough HOpen Innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2003a:.
23. Chesbrough H.The governance and performance of Xerox's technology spin-off companies.Research Policy. 2003b;32:403-421.
24. Coleman JS.Social capital in the creation of human capital.The American Journal of Sociology. 1988;94:95-120.
25. Cooke P.Sectoral systems of innovation and production.Industrial and Corporate Change. 2001;10 (4): 945-974.
26. Dahmén ESvensk industriell företagarverksamhet. Stockholm: Industriens Utredningsinstitut; 1950:.
27. Dubois A,Gadde L-E.Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research.Journal of Business Research. 2002;55 (7): 553-560.
28. Etzkowitz H.Entrepreneurial scientists and entrepreneurial universities in American academic science.Minerva. 1983;21 (autumn): 198-233.
29. Etzkowitz HMIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science. New York, NY: Routledge; 2002:.
30. Etzkowitz H.Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations.Social Science Information. 2003a;42 (3): 293-337.
31. Etzkowitz H.Research groups as 'quasi-firms': The invention of the entrepreneurial university.Research Policy. 2003b;32:109-121.
32. Etzkowitz H.The evolution of the entrepreneurial university.International Journal of Technology and Globalisation. 2004;1 (1): 64-77.
33. Etzkowitz HThe Triple Helix: University-industry-government innovation in action. New York, NY: Routledge; 2008:.
34. Etzkowitz HStanford and Silicon Valley: The co-evolution of technology transfer and regional absorptive capacity; 1930-2005. Stanford University, CA: Triple Helix Group, Human Sciences and Technologies Advanced Research Institute (H-STAR); 2012:.
35. Etzkowitz H,Leydesdorff L.The triple helix: University-industry-government relations. A laboratory of knowledge based economic development.EASST Review. 1995;14 (1): 11-19.
36. Etzkowitz H,Leydesdorff L.The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and 'Mode 2' to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations.Research Policy. 2000;29:109-123.
37. Etzkowitz H,Ranga MInnovation Governance in an Open Economy: Shaping regional nodes in a globalized world. Rickne A, ed. London: Routledge; 2012:51-68.
38. Etzkowitz H,Webster A,Gebhardt C,Cantisano Terra BR.The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm.Research Policy. 2000;29:313-330.
39. Freeman CTechnology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter; 1987:.
40. Girard BThe Google Way: How one company is revolutionizing management as we know it. San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press; 2009:.
41. Granovetter M.The strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology. 1973;78 (6): 1360-1380.
42. Granovetter MThe New Economic Sociology: Developments in an emerging field. Guillén MFCollins REngland PMeyer M, ed. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation; 2002:.
43. Håkansson H,Ford D.How should companies interact in business networks?.Journal of Business Research. 2002;55:133-139.
44. Håkansson H,Snehota I.No business is an island: The network concept of business strategy.Scandinavian Journal of Management. 1989;5 (3): 187-200.
45. HatakeyamaKRuppelD (2004) Sábato's Triangle and international academic cooperation: The importance of extra-relations for the Latin American enhancement. In: ICEER 2004 - International Conference on Engineering Education and Research 'Progress Through Partnership'. Olomouc, Czech Republic. Available at: http://www.ineer.org/Events/ICEER2004/Proceedings/papers/0535.pdf.
46. Hauser C,Tappeiner G,Walde J.The learning region: The impact of social capital and weak ties on innovation.Regional Studies. 2007;41 (1): 75-88.
47. Iyer B,Davenport TH.Google's innovation machine.Harvard Business Review. 2008;:.
48. Johannisson BBusiness and local community: Swedish experiences in bottom-up planning for local industrial development. Östersund, Sweden: Högskolan i Östersund; 1985:.
49. LeydesdorffLEtzkowitzH (2001) The transformation of university-industry-government relations. Electronic Journal of Sociology. Available at: http://sociology.org/content/vol005.004/th.html.
50. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Lundvall B-Å, ed. London: Pinter; 1992:.
51. Lundvall B-Å.Why study national systems and national styles of innovation?.Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. 1998;10 (4): 403-422.
52. Mair J,Martí I.Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight.Journal of World Business. 2006;41:36-44.
53. Mairesse J,Mohnen P.Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application.The American Economic Review. 2002;92 (2): 226-230.
54. Malerba F.Sectoral systems of innovation and production.Research Policy. 2002;31:247-264.
55. Marshall APrinciples of Economics: An introductory volume. 1890/1916) Principles of Economics: An introductory volume. London: Macmillan. (7th edn)London: Macmillan; 1890/1916:.
56. Mason C,Harrison R.Why 'Business Angels' say no: A case study of opportunities rejected by an informal investor syndicate.International Small Business Journal. 1996;14 (2): 35-51.
57. National Innovation Systems - A Comparative Analysis. Nelson RR, ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1993:.
58. Nelson RR,Winter SGAn Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1982:.
59. Nelson RR,Winter SG.Evolutionary theorizing in economics.Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2002;16 (2): 23-46.
60. Nooteboom B,Van Haverbeke W,Duysters G,Gilsing V, et al.Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity.Research Policy. 2007;36:1016-1034.
61. Page L,Brin S,Motwani R,Winograd T.The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing order to the Web.Stanford Digital Libraries. 1998;:.
62. Porter METhe Competitive Advantage of Nations. London: Macmillan; 1990:.
63. Powell WW,Koput KW,Smith-Doerr L.Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1996;41 (1): 116-145.
64. RangaM (2011) University-industry-government interactions in the knowledge society: From 'spheres' to 'spaces'. International Institute Casa de Mateus. Available at: www.iicm.pt/Encontro2011/M_Ranga_Presentation_Portugal.ppt.
65. Rogers EMDiffusion of Innovations. 1995) Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: Free Press. (4th edn)New York, NY: Free Press; 1995:.
66. SábatoJBotanaN (1968) La Ciencia y la tecnologia en el desarrollo futuro de América Latina. Revista de la Integración. Available at: http://tecale.org/documCurso/POCI_Sabato-Botana_Unidad_3.pdf.
67. Saxenian A.Regional networks and the resurgence of Silicon Valley.California Management Review. 1990;33 (1): 89-112.
68. Saxenian ARegional Advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1994:.
69. Schumpeter JAThe Theory of Economic Development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1934:.
70. Schumpeter JASocialism, Capitalism and Democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers; 1942:.
71. The Stanford Digital Library Project.Communications of the ACM. 1995;38 (4): 59-60.
72. SteiberA (2012) Organizational innovations: A conceptualization of how they are created, diffused and sustained. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
73. Steiber A,Alänge S.A corporate system for continuous innovation: The case of Google Inc.European Journal of Innovation Management. 2013;16 (2): 243-264.
74. Sölvell Ö,Lindqvist G,Ketels CThe Cluster Initiative Greenbook. Stockholm: Ivory Tower AB; 2003:.
75. Ter Wal ALJ,Boschma R.Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space.Regional Studies. 2011;45 (7): 919-933.
76. Tuominen M,Rajala A,Möller K.How does adaptability drive firm innovativeness?.Journal of Business Research. 2004;57 (5): 495-506.
77. Utterback JMMastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1994:.
78. Vise DThe Google Story. New York, NY: Bantam Dell Publishing Group; 2005:.
79. Wessner CWInnovation, Employment and Growth Policy Issues in the EU and the US. Welfens PJJAddison JT, ed. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2009:173-187.
80. Williamson PJ,De Meyer A.Ecosystem advantage: How to successfully harness the power of partners.California Management Review. 2012;55 (1): 24-46.