Converging scientific fields and new technological paradigms as main drivers of the division of scientific labour in drug discovery process: the effects on strategic management of the R&D corporate change

References

• Afshar, M. 2003. From genes to products: Innovations in drug discovery. Drug Discovery Today 8: 392–94 doi: 10.1016/S1359-6446(03)02679-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Amir-Aslani, A., and V. Mangematin. 2010. The future of drug discovery and development: Shifting emphasis towards personalized medicine. Technology Forecasting & Social Change 77: 203–17. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora, A., and A. Gambardella. 1995. The division of innovative labour in biotechnology. In Sources of medical technology: Universities and industry, ed. by N. Rosenberg, A.C. Gelijns and H. Dawkins, ch. 8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Astra Zeneca. 2012. Web page on Research of Astra Zeneca. http://www.astrazeneca.ca/. (accessed September, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Billitteri, C., G. Lo Nigro, and G. Perrone. 2013. How risk influences the choice of governance mode in biopharmaceutical inter-firm relationships. International Business Review, 22: 932–50. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.01.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boehringer-Ingelheim. 2012. Web page on Research & Development of Boehringer-Ingelheim. http://www.boehringer-ingelheim.com. (accessed October, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Bosse, D.A., and S.A. Alvarez. 2010. Bargaining power in alliance governance negotiations: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Technovation 30: 367–75. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2010.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiesa, V., and F. Frattini. 2009. Evaluation and performance measurement of research and development: Techniques and perspectives for multi-level analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2001. A basic model for evaluating R&D performance: Theory and application in Italy. R&D Management 31: 453–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2004. New models for measuring the R&D performance and identifying the productivity of public research institutes. R&D Management 34: 267–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2005a. Technometrics: Origins, historical evolution and new direction. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 72: 944–79. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2005.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2005b. Measuring intensity of technological change: The seismic approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 72: 117–44. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2004.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2005c. A scientometric model for the assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes. Scientometrics 65: 307–21. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0276-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2008a. Measuring scientific performance of public research units for strategic change. Journal of Informetrics 2: 183–94. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2008.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2008b. New organizational behaviour of public research institutions: Lessons learned from Italian case study. International Journal of Business Innovation and Research 2: 402–19. doi: 10.1504/IJBIR.2008.018589
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2009a. Measuring the impact of sustainable technological innovation. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning 5: 276–88. doi: 10.1504/IJTIP.2009.026749
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2009b. What is the optimal rate of R&D investment to maximize productivity growth? Technological Forecasting & Social Change 76: 433–46. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2008.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2010a. Public and private R&D investments as complementary inputs for productivity growth. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management 10: 73–91. doi: 10.1504/IJTPM.2010.032855
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2010b. Foresight of technological determinants and primary energy resources of future economic long waves. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy 6: 225–32. doi: 10.1504/IJFIP.2010.037468
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2010c. Democratization is the driving force for technological and economic change. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 77: 248–64. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2010d. The asymmetric path of economic long waves. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 77: 730–8. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2010.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2011. The interaction between public and private R&D expenditure and national productivity. Prometheus – Critical Studies in Innovation 29: 121–30. doi: 10.1080/08109028.2011.601079
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012a. Evolutionary growth of knowledge in path-breaking targeted therapies for lung cancer: Radical innovations and structure of the new technological paradigm. International Journal of Behavioural and Healthcare Research 3: 273–90. doi: 10.1504/IJBHR.2012.051406
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012b. Cartilage tissue engineering with chondrogeneic cells versus artificial joint replacement: The insurgence of new technological paradigms. Health and Technology 2: 235–47. doi: 10.1007/s12553-012-0032-5
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012c. Driving forces of technological change in medicine: Radical innovations induced by side effects and their impact on society and healthcare. Technology in Society 34: 271–83. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2012.06.002
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012d. Political economy of R&D to support the modern competitiveness of nations and determinants of economic optimization and inertia. Technovation 32: 370–9. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2012.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012e. Evolutionary trajectories of the nanotechnology research across worldwide economic players. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 24: 1029–50. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2012.705117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2012f. Converging genetics, genomics and nanotechnologies for ground-breaking pathways in biomedicine and nanomedicine. International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management 13: 184–97. doi: 10.1504/IJHTM.2012.050616
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2013. The effect of country wealth on incidence of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 141: 225–29. doi: 10.1007/s10549-013-2683-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia M. 2014a. Path-breaking target therapies for lung cancer and a far-sighted health policy to support clinical and cost effectiveness. Health Policy and Technology 3: 74–82. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.09.007
   Google Scholar
• Coccia M. 2014b. Socio-cultural origins of the patterns of technological innovation: What is the likely interaction among religious culture, religious plurality and innovation? Towards a theory of socio-cultural drivers of the patterns of technological innovation. Technology in Society 36: 13–25. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.11.002
   Google Scholar
• Coccia, M. 2014c. Driving forces of technological change: The relation between population growth and technological innovation. Technology Forecasting and Social Change 82: 52–65. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coccia, M., and U. Finardi. 2012. Emerging nanotechnological research for future pathway of biomedicine. International Journal of Biomedical Nanoscience and Nanotechnology 2: 299–317. doi: 10.1504/IJBNN.2012.051223
   Google Scholar
• Corley K.G., and D.A. Gioia. 2011. Building theory about theory building: what constitutes a theoretical contribution. The Academy of Management Review 36: 12–32. doi: 10.5465/AMR.2011.55662499
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Maggio P.J. 1995. Comments on What theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 391–7. doi: 10.2307/2393790
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias, C., and A. Escoval. 2012. The open nature of innovation in the hospital sector: The role of external collaboration networks. Health Policy and Technology 1: 181–6. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2012.10.002
   Google Scholar
• Dimitri, N. 2008. On the stage division mechanism in pharmaceuticals development processes. Drug Discovery Today 13: 902–6. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2008.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolfsma, W., and L. Leydesdorff. 2009. Lock-in and break-out from technological trajectories: Modeling and policy implications. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76: 932–41. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.02.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dosi, G. 1982. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 2: 147–62. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dosi, G. 1988. Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature 26: 1120–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K.M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review 14: 532–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K.M., and M.E. Graebner. 2007. Theory Building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. The Academy of Management Review 50: 25–32. doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florida, R., and M. Kenney. 1990. The breakthrough illusion: Corporate America's failure to move from innovation to mass production. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gelijns, A.C., and N. Rosenberg. 1995a. The changing nature of medical technology development, In Sources of Medical Technology: Universities and Industry, ed. by N. Rosenberg, A.C. Gelijns and H. Dawkins, ch. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gelijns, A.C., and N. Rosenberg. 1995b. From the scalpel to the scope: Endoscopic innovations in gastroenterology, gynecology, and surgery, In Sources of Medical Technology: Universities and Industry, ed. by N. Rosenberg, A.C. Gelijns and H. Dawkins, ch. 4. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gershon, E.S. 1998. Making progress: Does clinical research lead to breakthroughs in basic biomedical sciences? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 42: 95–102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gioia, D., and K. Chittipeddi. 1991. Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal 12: 433–48. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250120604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guan, J., and Q. Zhao. 2013. The impact of university–industry collaboration networks on innovation. Nanobiopharmaceuticals Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80: 1271–86. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.11.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haeussler, C., H. Patzelt, and S.A. Zahra. 2012. Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities. Journal of Business Venturing 27: 217–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hage, J. 2011. Restoring the innovative edge, driving the evolution of science and technology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heimeriks, G., and L. Leydesdorff. 2012. Emerging search regimes: Measuring co-evolutions among research, science, and society. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 24: 51–67. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2012.643562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hempel, C.G. 1965. Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, R. 1994. The evolution of integrative capability: Innovation in cardiovascular drug discovery. Industrial and Corporate Change 3: 607–30. doi: 10.1093/icc/3.3.607
   Google Scholar
• Hirsh, J. 1997. The role of clinical investigation in medicine: Historical perspective from the Rockefeller University. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 41: 108–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, H.-C. 2011. Technological innovation capability creation potential of open innovation: A cross-level analysis in the biotechnology industry. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23: 49–63. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2011.537105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain, K.K. 2000. Transforming innovation and commercialization in drug discovery. Drug Discovery Today 5: 318–20. doi: 10.1016/S1359-6446(00)01537-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, C.-S., and A.C. Inkpen. 2005. Cross-border R&D alliances, absorptive capacity and technology learning. Journal of International Management 11: 313–29. doi: 10.1016/j.intman.2005.06.002
   Google Scholar
• Kim, L., and R.R. Nelson. 2000. Technology, learning and innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• König, M.D., S. Battiston, M. Napoletano, and F. Schweitzer. 2011. Recombinant knowledge and the evolution of innovation networks. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 79: 145–64. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2011.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kukla, A. 1998. Studies in Scientific Realism. NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lakatos, I. 1978. The methodology of scientific research programmes. Vol. 1: Philosophical papers, ed. by J. Worrall and G. Currie. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lenfant, C. 2003. Clinical research to clinical practice. Lost in translation? New England Journal of Medicine 349: 868–74. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa035507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindpaintner, K. 1999. Genetics in drug discovery and development: Challenge and promise of individualizing treatment in common complex diseases. British Medical Bulletin 55: 471–91. doi: 10.1258/0007142991902385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu, A., and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. 2010. A note on the drivers of R&D intensity. Research in World Economy 1: 56–65. doi: 10.5430/rwe.v1n1p56
   Google Scholar
• Morlacchi, P., and R.R. Nelson. 2011. How medical practice evolves: Learning to treat failing hearts with an implantable device. Research Policy 40: 511–25. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Cancer Institute. 2013. Web page of types of treatment of National Cancer Institute. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/treatment/types-of-treatment (accessed November, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R.R. 2008. Factors affecting the power of technological paradigms. Industrial and Corporate Change 17: 485–97. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtn010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, R.R., and S.G. Winter. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.
   Google Scholar
• Quintana-García, C., and C.A. Benavides-Velasco. 2011. Knowledge organisation in R&D alliances: Its impact on product innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23: 1047–61. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2011.621300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche. 2012. Web page R&D of Roche. http://www.rochecanada.com (accessed December, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Rosegger, G. 1980. The economics of production and innovation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, N., A.C. Gelijns, and H. Dawkins, eds. 1995. Sources of medical technology: universities and industry. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, N. 1983. Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sabatier, V., A. Craig-Kennard, and V. Mangematin. 2012. When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: Insights from the drugs industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 79: 949–62. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahal, D. 1981. Patterns of technological innovation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Sahal, D. 1985. Technological guideposts and innovation avenues. Research Policy 14: 61–82. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(85)90015-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolwijk, C.C.M., J.R. Ortt, and E. den Hartigh. 2013. The joint evolution of alliance networks and technology: A survey of the empirical literature. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80: 1287–305. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.11.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, R.I, and B.W. Staw. 1995. What theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 371–84. doi: 10.2307/2393788
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teece, D.J. 2008. Dosi's technological paradigms and trajectories: Insights for economics and management. Industrial and Corporate Change 17: 507–12. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtn014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thagard P. 1988. Computational Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• von Tunzelmann, N., F. Malerba, P. Nightingale, and S. Metcalfe. 2008. Technological paradigms: Past, present and future. Industrial and Corporate Change 17: 467–84. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtn012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weick, K.E. 1995. What theory is Not Theorizing Is. Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 385–90. doi: 10.2307/2393789
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whetten, D.A. 1989. What constitutes a theoretical contribution. The Academy of Management Review 14: 490–5. doi: 10.5465/AMR.1989.4308371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xia, T., and S. Roper. 2008. From capability to connectivity – absorptive capacity and exploratory alliances in biopharmaceutical firms: A US–Europe comparison. Technovation 28: 776–85. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2008.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, B. 2006. Market differential evaluations of strategic alliances in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry. Journal of High Technology Management Research 17: 43–52. doi: 10.1016/j.hitech.2006.05.004
   Google Scholar