Organizing Innovation. How policies are translated into practice

Abstract

ORGANIZING INNOVATIONHow policies are translated into practiceFredrik LavénAKADEMISK AVHANDLINGFör avläggande av ekonomie doktorsexamen i företagsekonomi som med tillstånd avHandelshögskolans fakultetsnämnd vid Göteborgs Universitet framlägges föroffentlig granskning lördagen den 14 juni 2008, 13.15 i CG-salen vidFöretagsekonomiska institutionen, Vasagatan 1, Göteborg.ABSTRACTUniversity of Gothenburg Author: Fredrik LavénSchool of Business, Economics, and Law Language: EnglishDepartment of Business Administration ISBN: 978-91-7246-264-9P.O. Box 600 Doctoral thesis, 2008405 30 Göteborg, Sweden 289 pagesOrganizing InnovationHow Policies are Translated into PracticeInnovation is commonly seen as a driver of economic growth, which in turn is regarded asnecessary for societal prosperity. Government agencies therefore prepare innovation policiesand programmes in efforts to stimulate economic development. Following an organizingperspective and ethnographically inspired research techniques, this thesis explores how suchpolicies are translated into practice in organizing a microwave innovation initiative.The views on innovation have shifted over time and the latest fashion is to focusinnovation systems, clusters and triple helix constellations, which all highlight interorganizationalrelations as the locus of innovation. These theories are central to internationaland Swedish policymaking. This thesis begins with studying how such theories ofinnovation-producing arrangements are translated into a Swedish agency for innovationsystems and inscribed into policy aimed at developing regional innovation systems andclusters. Theories are thus combined and edited as hybridized innovation scripts, orprogrammes-for-action, for how innovation initiatives should be organized. Theseinnovation scripts are then prescribed in programme competitions where governmentagencies evaluate and fund winning innovation initiatives.One such competition triggered the establishment of a cluster and innovation systeminitiative called Microwave Road (MWR), which aimed to further collaborative microwavetechnology development. In organizing MWR, microwave related companies, researchinstitutes and public organizations were grouped together in an inter-organizationalarrangement, as the innovation scripts were seen as prescribing. Once established,representatives for MWR organized meetings and seminars, and engaged in efforts ofcontinuous recruiting of members, and government support and funding. However,organizing a microwave network resulted in a structural precedence were form wasprioritized over content, and MWR struggled to initiate its desired technology developmentactivities. Two technology initiatives were consequently launched. One aimed at groupingmicrowave and automotive companies to stimulate joint technology development, but theautomotive representatives showed little interest and the group dissolved. The second builton local experiences and practices and was more successful as it focused work in a specificfield of microwave technology, as opposed to organizational structuring. The two initiativesthus followed different organizing scripts: one focusing structure and one action.This study shows how the innovation scripts became organizing scripts as they wereenacted in MWR, resulting in inertia as organizational structure was focused rather thaninnovation activities. However, when the scripts edited and adjusted to the local setting, theyafforded collaborative innovation work. This suggests that innovation policy shouldfacilitate innovation initiatives, not impose structural prescriptions on how to organize.Key words: innovation policy, cluster, innovation systems, network, microwave technology,organizing, practice, script, translation, structural precedence, editing, plans, action.Printed in Sweden © 2008 Fredrik Lavén and BAS Publishingby Intellecta Docusys, Göteborg

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.