A framework of industrial knowledge spillovers in big-science centers

Abstract We employed the grounded theory method to construct a framework describing the distinctive mechanisms through which big-science centers generate industrial knowledge spillovers in the economy. Our focus is on large-scale big-science installations typically associated with experimental physics. We draw on social network, social capital, and inter-organizational learning theories to examine knowledge spillovers accruing to industrial partner companies in big-science–industry dyads. The context for the study is provided by CERN’s new particle accelerator project, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). In addition to building a grounded theory framework for the study of industrial knowledge spillovers, our study demonstrates the distinctive potential that big-science centers offer as a source of knowledge spillovers in national innovation systems.

[1]  B. Kogut,et al.  What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning , 1996 .

[2]  R. Nelson,et al.  American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry , 1994 .

[3]  Jeffrey L. Furman,et al.  The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity , 2000 .

[4]  Alexander Kaufmann,et al.  Science–industry interaction in the process of innovation: the importance of boundary-crossing between systems , 2001 .

[5]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Scientific instrumentation and university research , 1992 .

[6]  Andrew C. Inkpen.  Creating Knowledge through Collaboration , 1996 .

[7]  Markku V. J. Maula,et al.  Prerequisites for the creation of social capital and subsequent knowledge acquisition in corporate venture capital , 2003 .

[8]  K. Weick,et al.  Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. , 1993 .

[9]  Scott Shane,et al.  Executive Forum: University technology transfer to entrepreneurial companies , 2002 .

[10]  M. Nordberg.  Transaction Costs and Core Competence Implications of Buyer-Supplier Linkages : The Case of CERN , 1997 .

[11]  Edward B. Roberts,et al.  Entrepreneurs in high technology : lessons from MIT and beyond , 1991 .

[12]  M. Nordberg,et al.  Tendering and contracting of new, emerging technologies , 1999 .

[13]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Technology transfer from U.S. government and university R&D laboratories , 1991 .

[14]  E. Autio,et al.  SOCIAL CAPITAL, KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION, AND KNOWLEDGE EXPLOITATION IN YOUNG TECHNOLOGY-BASED FIRMS , 2001 .

[15]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[16]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[17]  Z. Ács,et al.  Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size , 1987 .

[18]  Patrick Cohendet,et al.  Technology transfer revisited from the perspective of the knowledge-based economy , 2001 .

[19]  Elaine Romanelli,et al.  New Venture Strategies in the Minicomputer Industry , 1987 .

[20]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[21]  Catherine P. Ailes,et al.  Impacts of research universities on technological innovation in industry: evidence from engineering research centers , 2002 .

[22]  Stephen Tallman,et al.  Effects of International Diversity and Product Diversity on the Performance of Multinational Firms , 1996 .

[23]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[24]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[25]  Robert A. Burgelman.  A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm , 1983 .

[26]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technical Change and Economic Theory , 1989 .

[27]  Paul D. Reynolds,et al.  New venture strategies: theory development with an empirical base , 1994 .

[28]  K. Pavitt.  SPRU Electronic Working Paper No 5 The Social Shaping of the National Science Base , 1998 .

[29]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave , 1995 .

[30]  Corinne Autant-Bernard,et al.  Science and knowledge flows: evidence from the French case , 2001 .

[31]  Scott Shane,et al.  Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others? , 2003 .

[32]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[33]  E. Hippel.  The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process , 1993 .

[34]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[35]  Ari-Pekka Hameri,et al.  A framework of motivations for industry-big science collaboration: A case study , 1996 .

[36]  P. Ring,et al.  Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships , 1994 .

[37]  E. Autio,et al.  Effects of Age at Entry, Knowledge Intensity, and Imitability on International Growth , 2000 .

[38]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[39]  Arnold Reisman,et al.  Toward meta research on technology transfer , 1992 .

[40]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[41]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[42]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[43]  Ari-Pekka Hameri,et al.  Using basic research as a catalyst to exploit new technology-based innovations — a case study , 1996 .

[44]  H. Schmied.  Results of attempts to quantify the secondary economic effects generated by big research centers , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[45]  Peter J. Lane,et al.  Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning , 1998 .

[46]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

[47]  Eric von Hippel,et al.  A Customer-active Paradigm for Industrial Product Idea Generation , 1978 .

[48]  Lois S. Peters,et al.  Managing Discontinuous Innovation , 1998 .

[49]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory , 2000 .

[50]  D. Leonard-Barton.  CORE CAPABILITIES AND CORE RIGIDITIES: A PARADOX IN MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1992 .

[51]  Marian Beise,et al.  Public research and industrial innovations in Germany , 1999 .