Getting Competition Down to a Science: The Effects of Technological Competition on Firms' Scientific Publications

Prior research about the interaction between private firms and the scientific community has largely viewed firms' articles in scientific publications as a means to improve research and development productivity—by encouraging their researchers to publish scientific papers, firms can maintain linkages with the scientific community, attract talent, and access external knowledge on which they can build to create innovations. This paper, in contrast, emphasizes the role of scientific publications in firms' battles for market dominance and examines how competitive conditions shape firms' propensities to publish scientific articles about their innovations. Focusing on the context of pharmaceutical drugs, we develop propositions about how the competition that one drug faces from similar drugs and potential substitutes influences the innovating firm's inclination to publish articles in the top medical journals about that drug to facilitate its assessment by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the medical community. We also propose that scientific articles about competing drugs compel a firm to highlight its own drug in scientific papers to assert the drug's uniqueness and mitigate the threat of substitution. Whereas prior research has elucidated how science contributes to enhancing firms' competence at creating innovations, which is critical to their ability to compete in technology-intensive environments, this paper draws attention to how competition, in turn, permeates into the scientific arena, creating inducements for firms to use scientific publications to position their innovations in the marketplace.

[1]  Arie Rip,et al.  The Nelson-Winter-Dosi model and synthetic dye chemistry , 1987 .

[2]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[3]  E Marshall,et al.  Publishing sensitive data: who calls the shots? Secretiveness found widespread in life sciences. , 1997, Science.

[4]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories , 1993 .

[5]  Jeffrey T. Macher,et al.  Experience and scale and scope economies: Trade-offs and performance in development. , 2006 .

[6]  Michael T. Hannan,et al.  Niche Width and the Dynamics of Organizational Populations , 1983, American Journal of Sociology.

[7]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[8]  Norman Kaplan,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .

[9]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  Asset accumulation, interdependence and technological change: evidence from pharmaceutical drug discovery , 2002 .

[10]  Partha Dasgupta,et al.  Patents, Priority and Imitation or, the Economics of Races and Waiting Games , 1988 .

[11]  R. Nelson Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? , 1991 .

[12]  J. Rask-Madsen,et al.  WITHHOLDING UNFAVOURABLE RESULTS IN DRUG COMPANY SPONSORED CLINICAL TRIALS , 1987, The Lancet.

[13]  N. Rosenberg Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[14]  Susan Mayor,et al.  NICE removes β blockers as first line treatment for hypertension , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[16]  C P Bradley,et al.  Prescribing new drugs: qualitative study of influences on consultants and general practitioners , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  H. Rao The Social Construction of Reputation: Certification Contests, Legitimation, and the Survival of Organizations in the American Automobile Industry: 1895–1912 , 1994 .

[18]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[19]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  Competing for Attention in Knowledge Markets: Electronic Document Dissemination in a Management Consulting Company , 2001 .

[20]  Marcia Angell,et al.  Industry-sponsored clinical research: a broken system. , 2008, JAMA.

[21]  M. Hannan,et al.  The Population Ecology of Organizations , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[22]  J. Liebeskind,et al.  Knowledge, Strategy, and the Theory of the Firm , 1996 .

[23]  T. P. Hughes,et al.  The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology , 1989 .

[24]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[25]  Andrew Hargadon,et al.  When Innovations Meet Institutions: Edison and the Design of the Electric Light , 2001 .

[26]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Inside the black box: How exogenous is science? , 1983 .

[27]  G Vogel,et al.  Long-Suppressed Study Finally Sees Light of Day , 1997, Science.

[28]  J. Barney Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[29]  H. Kennedy,et al.  Physicians' interpretation of "class effects": a need for thoughtful re-evaluation. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  B. Djulbegovic,et al.  Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[31]  J. Ziman,et al.  Public knowledge. An essay concerning the social dimension of science , 1970, Medical History.

[32]  R. Nelson,et al.  Government and technical progress : a cross-industry analysis , 1983 .

[33]  Anurag Sharma,et al.  Linking Product Development Outcomes to Market Valuation of the Firm: The Case of the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry* , 2004 .

[34]  K. Arrow Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention , 1962 .

[35]  George A. Akerlof The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism , 1970 .

[36]  Benoît Godin,et al.  Research and the practice of publication in industries , 1996 .

[37]  Gary P. Pisano,et al.  Science Business: The Promise, the Reality, and the Future of Biotech , 2006 .

[38]  Mary K Olson,et al.  Are novel drugs more risky for patients than less novel drugs? , 2004, Journal of health economics.

[39]  John Travis Saving the Mind Faces High Hurdles , 2005, Science.

[40]  Clayton M. Christensen The Innovator's Dilemma: The Revolutionary Book That Will Change the Way You Do Business , 2011 .

[41]  D. Hicks Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge , 1995 .

[42]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Thinking About Technology: Applying a Cognitive Lens to Technical Change , 2008 .

[43]  Douglas J. Skinner WHY FIRMS VOLUNTARILY DISCLOSE BAD-NEWS , 1994 .

[44]  A. Kumaraswamy,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA * , 2002 .

[45]  Mary K. Olson,et al.  Agency Rulemaking, Political Influences, Regulation, and Industry Compliance , 1999 .

[46]  Lawrence J Appel,et al.  The verdict from ALLHAT--thiazide diuretics are the preferred initial therapy for hypertension. , 2002, JAMA.

[47]  Pierre Azoulay,et al.  Do Pharmaceutical Sales Respond to Scientific Evidence , 2002 .

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

[49]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery , 2003 .

[50]  W. Mitchell Whether and When? Probability and Timing of Incumbents' Entry into Emerging Industrial Subfields , 1989 .

[51]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutional conditions for diffusion , 1993 .

[52]  J. DiMasi,et al.  The economics of follow-on drug research and development , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[53]  A. Gambardella Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s * , 1992 .

[54]  Nicola Jones,et al.  Ghosts still present in the medical machine , 2009, Nature.

[55]  D. Carpenter,et al.  The political economy of FDA drug review: processing, politics, and lessons for policy. , 2004, Health affairs.

[56]  Bryan G. Reuben,et al.  Pharmaceutical Chemicals in Perspective , 1989 .

[57]  L. Joseph Melton,et al.  LONG-TERM USE OF THIAZIDE DIURETICS AND RISK OF HIP FRACTURE , 1989, The Lancet.

[58]  James D. Thompson Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[59]  Michelle Gittelman,et al.  Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[60]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Relationships between academic institutions and industry in the life sciences--an industry survey. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[61]  Insup Lee,et al.  Wealth effects of food and drug administration (FDA) decisions , 1994 .

[62]  Marcia Angell,et al.  Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research , 2008 .

[63]  David M Herrington,et al.  Are drugs within a class interchangeable? , 1999, The Lancet.

[64]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Measuring competence?: exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research , 1994 .

[65]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[66]  R Hartley,et al.  Scientific versus commercial sources of influence on the prescribing behavior of physicians. , 1982, The American journal of medicine.

[67]  F. Scherer The pharmaceutical industry , 2000 .

[68]  Mary Tripsas Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry , 1997 .

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

[70]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1975, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

[71]  A. Hollis,et al.  Comment on “The economics of follow-on drug research and development: Trends in entry rates and the timing of development” , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[72]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study , 1994 .

[73]  E. Mansfield,et al.  Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study , 1981 .

[74]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change , 1990 .

[75]  Scott H. Hutchins,et al.  Publish or Perish: A Business and Professional Argument for Private-Sector Scientists to Publish in Refereed Journals , 2001 .

[76]  J. Shaver,et al.  Does international research and development increase patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms , 2005 .

[77]  W. Bijker The social construction of bakelite: toward a theory of invention , 1987 .

[78]  Margaret A. Peteraf The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource‐based view , 1993 .

[79]  Allan Afuah,et al.  Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: the case of cholesterol drugs , 2002 .

[80]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship , 1984 .

[81]  R. Noll Economic perspectives on the politics of regulation , 1989 .

[82]  M. Steinman,et al.  The Neurontin legacy--marketing through misinformation and manipulation. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[83]  J. DiMasi,et al.  Risks in new drug development: Approval success rates for investigational drugs , 2001, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[84]  R. Nelson The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research , 1959, Journal of Political Economy.

[85]  H. Mamtora,et al.  Renovascular disease and renal complications of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. , 1990, The Quarterly journal of medicine.

[86]  M. Trajtenberg A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .