Creating innovation systems: How resource constellations affect the strategies of system builders

Abstract Novel technologies require the support of larger technological innovation systems (TIS). A key feature of innovation systems are system resources - collective structures such as common standards, support programs, shared expectations or testing facilities all actors can use. System resources emerge either uncoordinated or as a result of strategic action by ‘system builders’. In this paper we explore the conditions of system building. Taking a strategy perspective, we analyze how system building depends on resource constellations at a certain point in time. Drawing from research in the field of stationary fuel cells in Germany, we identify three generic modes, of system building: a) the “single mode”, in which a system builder uses its own organizational resources to create a system resource, b) the “partner mode”, in which a system builder joins forces with partners in order to co-create system resources, and c) the “intermediary mode”, in which a system builder collaborates with other actors to set up an intermediary organization, which then works towards the creation of system resources. We show that the modes were chosen depending on i) what resources were initially available and ii) how they were distributed in the innovation system. Our paper contributes to a more differentiated understanding of system building in the TIS literature and beyond.

[1]  Saras D. Sarasvathy,et al.  Effectuation , 2008 .

[2]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  In Search of Useful Public Policies — Key Lessons and Issues for Policy Makers , 1997 .

[3]  Jochen Markard,et al.  Technology users and standardization: Game changing strategies in the field of smart meter technology , 2017 .

[4]  L. Klerkx Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: insights from the Dutch agricultural sector , 2009 .

[5]  Paula Kivimaa Government-affiliated intermediary organisations as actors in system-level transitions , 2014 .

[6]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  Opportunities for and limits to Academics as System builders—The case of realizing the potential of gasified biomass in Austria , 2009 .

[7]  S. Sarasvathy Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency , 2001 .

[8]  Silvia Dorado,et al.  Institutional Entrepreneurship, Partaking, and Convening , 2005 .

[9]  Andrew H. Van de Ven,et al.  A community perspective on the emergence of innovations , 1993 .

[10]  Robin Gustafsson,et al.  Emergence of Industries: A Review and Future Directions , 2016 .

[11]  M. Hekkert,et al.  Networks and network resources in technological innovation systems: Towards a conceptual framework for system building , 2012 .

[12]  Björn Andersson,et al.  Monitoring and assessing technology choice: the case of solar cells , 2000 .

[13]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  What to Do Next? The Case for Non-Predictive Strategy , 2006 .

[14]  Fernando F. Suarez Battles for Technological Dominance: An Integrative Framework , 2004 .

[15]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research , 2000 .

[16]  Jane Summerton Changing Large Technical Systems , 1994 .

[17]  B. Leca,et al.  Agency and Institutions: A Review on Institutional Entrepreneurship , 2009 .

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

[19]  Marko P. Hekkert,et al.  The complexities in system building strategies — The case of personalized cancer medicines in England , 2015 .

[20]  C. Hardy,et al.  Institutional Entrepreneurship in Emerging Fields: HIV/AIDS Treatment Advocacy in Canada , 2004 .

[21]  Raghu Garud,et al.  Distributed Agency and Interactive Emergence , 2005 .

[22]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  Outlines of a behavioral theory of the entrepreneurial firm , 2008 .

[23]  K. Fichter Innovation Communities: The Role of Networks of Promotors in Open Innovation , 2009 .

[24]  Hayagreeva Rao,et al.  Caveat Emptor: The Construction of Nonprofit Consumer Watchdog Organizations1 , 1998, American Journal of Sociology.

[25]  Andrew H. Van de Ven,et al.  Running in Packs to Develop Knowledge-Intensive Technologies , 2005, MIS Q..

[26]  N. Fligstein,et al.  Social Skill and Institutional Theory , 1997 .

[27]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[28]  Joel West,et al.  How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies , 2003 .

[29]  Raghu Garud,et al.  Path Creation as a Process of Mindful Deviation , 2013 .

[30]  R. Garud,et al.  Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship , 2003 .

[31]  Paul DiMaggio Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory , 1988 .

[32]  H. V. D. Ven The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship , 1993 .

[33]  Linda S. Lotto Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods , 1986 .

[34]  J. Howells Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation , 2006 .

[35]  Marko P. Hekkert,et al.  Institutional power play in innovation systems: The case of Herceptin® , 2016 .

[36]  M. Hekkert,et al.  Cumulative causation in the formation of a technological innovation system: The case of biofuels in the Netherlands , 2009 .

[37]  Thomas P. Hughes,et al.  The Electrification of America: The System Builders , 2023 .

[38]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis , 2008 .

[39]  L. Lynn,et al.  Linking technology and institutions: the innovation community framework , 1996 .

[40]  Marc J. Ventresca,et al.  Regime-building for REDD+: Evidence from a cluster of local initiatives in south-eastern Peru , 2011 .

[41]  Jochen Markard,et al.  Creating and shaping innovation systems: Formal networks in the innovation system for stationary fuel cells in Germany , 2011 .

[42]  Laurens Klerkx,et al.  The interaction of multiple champions in orchestrating innovation networks: Conflicts and complementarities , 2013 .

[43]  Jochen Markard,et al.  Actor-oriented analysis of innovation systems: exploring micro–meso level linkages in the case of stationary fuel cells , 2008, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[44]  Nicholas Dew,et al.  New market creation through transformation , 2005 .

[45]  Annette Ruef,et al.  What happens after a hype? How changing expectations affected innovation activities in the case of stationary fuel cells , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[46]  Jochen Markard,et al.  Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework , 2008 .

[47]  Gurneeta Vasudeva,et al.  How national institutions influence technology policies and firms' knowledge-building strategies: A study of fuel cell innovation across industrialized countries , 2009 .

[48]  Anders Lundgren,et al.  Technological Innovation and Network Evolution , 1995 .

[49]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  Transforming the Energy Sector : The evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology , 2004 .

[50]  Jane M. Howell,et al.  Champions of Technological Innovation. , 1990 .

[51]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Achieving high momentum in the evolution of wireless infrastructures: the battle over the 1G solutions , 2002 .

[52]  Stefan Kuhlmann,et al.  Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change , 2007 .

[53]  Raghu Garud,et al.  The innovation journey , 1999 .