Modes of organizing biomedical innovation in the UK and US and the role of integrative and relational capabilities

Abstract

Biomedical innovation typically involves intense collaboration across diverse disciplines, occupations and organizations. Given this, a nation's integrative capabilities (the ability to move between basic science and clinical development) and relational capabilities (the ability to collaborate with diverse organizations) have been identified as crucial for encouraging innovation. However, the impact of such capabilities on innovation has been considered, to date, mainly in macro, structural terms -explaining US national competitive advantage, for example. This paper draws, instead, from a qualitative analysis of biomedical innovation in the UK and US to identify mechanisms influencing innovation at the project level through which macro level capabilities may be having effects. From this we develop a propositional framework that helps to explain the likely impact of such capabilities for characteristically different kinds of innovation projects at the micro level.

Networked innovation in the health sector: comparative qualitative study of the role of Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care in translating research into practice

“…The impact of the institutional and policy context on innovations in health care is widely reflected in the existing literature. 40,65,78,79 One conclusion here, then, is that, while much can be learned from models of KT in other nations, we must also be sensitive to the need to adapt and appropriate such models for the UK health-care setting.…”

“…A study of networked forms of biomedical innovation, for example, highlights the influence of the national institutional context on UK firms' capabilities as compared with their US counterparts, highlighting in particular the constraints on the development of more 'hybrid' roles that combine scientific and entrepreneurial skills. 79 …”

“…By creating teams that span a variety of diverse groups, this approach has the potential to develop an innovative programme of work, creating capacity for innovation through the co-production of knowledge at the interstices of many different perspectives. 34 For 'blurring' mechanisms, 'figureheads' did not have the same importance as has been shown for 'bridging' mechanisms, 79 as there was a greater onus on all members of the initiative to be flexible in their work practices and epistemic commitments. At the same time, support from CLAHRC senior management was crucial to creating an environment where the perspectives of diverse groups were respected and were enabled to inform the direction and focus of the work programme.…”

“…98 At a basic level, thematic analysis of interview data is simply where coding 'is used to break up and segment the data into simpler, general categories and expand and tease out the data in order to formulate new questions and levels of interpretation' (p. 30). 99 It was important to recognise that, in building our study on a theoretical concern with networked innovation, 31,79 we had already made assumptions and developed ideas about the focus for the analysis. However, it was also important to allow our analysis to be data driven to allow new ideas to emerge during the process of coding.…”

Novel product innovation in project-based firms: explaining innovation where interdependent firms deliver complex system-level outcomes

“…Specifically, firms manage multiple and sometimes redundant connections with other firms in order to quickly and easily augment capability across projects (Gann & Salter, 2000;Jones & Lichtenstein, 2008). In particular, having a latent network of potential collaborators promotes a combinatory approach to research development and commercialisation (Swan et al, 2007). The items comprising the NETWORK construct are shown in the Table 20.…”