IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbr/cbrwps/wp230.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Casper
  • Richard Whitley

Abstract

Innovative firms face two major kinds of risks in developing new technologies: competence destruction and appropriability. High levels of technical uncertainty and radical changes in knowledge in some fields generate high technical failure risks and make it difficult to plan research and development programmes. They therefore encourage high levels of flexibility in acquiring and using skilled staff. Appropriability risks, on the other hand, encourage innovative firms to develop organisation-specific competences through investing in complementary assets, such as marketing and distribution capabilities, that involve longer-term employer-employee commitments to building complex organisations. These connections between technology risks and employment policies help to explain why different kinds of market economies with contrasting labour market institutions develop varied innovation patterns. This study focuses on subsectors of the computer software and biotechnology industries in three distinct Europea n countries, UK, Germany and Sweden, that vary in their level of technical change and appropriability.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Casper & Richard Whitley, 2002. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Working Papers wp230, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp230
    Note: PRO-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/cbrwp230/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Casper & Henrik Glimstedt, 2001. "Economic Organization, Innovation Systems, and the Internet," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 17(2), pages 265-281, Summer.
    2. Paul Almeida & Bruce Kogut, 1999. "Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 905-917, July.
    3. Henrik Glimstedt, 2001. "Competitive Dynamics Of Technological Standardization: The Case Of Third Generation Cellular Communications," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 49-78.
    4. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201, September.
    6. Steven Casper & Mark Lehrer & David Soskice, 1999. "Can High-technology Industries Prosper in Germany? Institutional Frameworks and the Evolution of the German Software and Biotechnology Industries," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 5-24.
    7. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Miller,Gary J., 1992. "Managerial Dilemmas," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521372817, September.
    9. Kitschelt, Herbert, 1991. "Industrial governance structures, innovation strategies, and the case of Japan: sectoral or cross-national comparative analysis?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 453-493, October.
    10. David Soskice, 1997. "German technology policy, innovation, and national institutional frameworks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 75-96.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Massón Guerra, José Luis, 2007. "El capital empresarial como determinante de la productividad y el crecimiento en España [The Impact of Entrepreneurship Capital on Spanish's Labor Productivity and Economic Growth]," MPRA Paper 4073, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Thomas, Jayan Jose, 2005. "Kerala's industrial backwardness: a case of path dependence in industrialization?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 763-783, May.
    3. Ibert, Oliver, 2004. "Projects and firms as discordant complements: organisational learning in the Munich software ecology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1529-1546, December.
    4. Cornelia Storz & Werner Pascha, 2011. "Japan’s Silver Market: Creating a New Industry under Uncertainty," Chapters, in: Werner Pascha & Cornelia Storz & Markus Taube (ed.), Institutional Variety in East Asia, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Whitley, Richard, 2003. "Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1015-1029, June.
    6. Pascha, Werner & Storz, Cornelia, 2008. "How are markets created? The case of Japan's silver market," Working Papers on East Asian Studies 78/2008, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute of East Asian Studies IN-EAST.
    7. Werner Pascha & Cornelia Storz & Markus Taube, 2011. "Coordination between Inertia and Dynamic Development: An Overview of Issues and Contributions," Chapters, in: Werner Pascha & Cornelia Storz & Markus Taube (ed.), Institutional Variety in East Asia, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Laforet, Sylvie, 2013. "Organizational innovation outcomes in SMEs: Effects of age, size, and sector," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 490-502.
    9. Casper, Steven & Whitley, Richard, 2004. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 89-106, January.
    10. Hugh Whittaker & Philippe Byosiere & Junpe Higuchi & Thelma Quince, 2006. "Entrepreneurs, HRM Orientations and Environmental Fit: A UK-Japan Comparison in High Tech Manufacturing," Working Papers wp330, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Casper, Steven & Whitley, Richard, 2004. "Managing competences in entrepreneurial technology firms: a comparative institutional analysis of Germany, Sweden and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 89-106, January.
    2. Andrea Bassanini & Ekkehard Ernst, 2002. "Labour market regulation, industrial relations and technological regimes: a tale of comparative advantage," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 391-426, June.
    3. Whitley, Richard, 2003. "Competition and pluralism in the public sciences: the impact of institutional frameworks on the organisation of academic science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1015-1029, June.
    4. Werle, Raymund, 2011. "Institutional analysis of technical innovation: A review," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2011-04, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    6. Gilbert, Brett Anitra, 2012. "Creative destruction: Identifying its geographic origins," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 734-742.
    7. Casper, Steven, 1999. "High technology governance and institutional adaptiveness: do technology policies usefully promote commercial innovation within the German biotechnology industry?," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economic Change and Employment FS I 99-307, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Gittelman, Michelle, 2006. "National institutions, public-private knowledge flows, and innovation performance: A comparative study of the biotechnology industry in the US and France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1052-1068, September.
    9. Montanari de Matos, Murilo & Robles Reis de Queiroz, Sergio, 2013. "Technological and market capabilities and competitiveness in the Brazilian computer industry:a case study," MPRA Paper 67151, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Engelhardt, Lutz, 2005. "Geschäftsmodelle und nationale Institutionen: Ein Vergleich britischer und deutscher Neuemissionen aus der IT-Service- und Softwareindustrie 1996-2002," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions, States, Markets SP II 2005-01, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Casper, Steven, 2007. "How do technology clusters emerge and become sustainable?: Social network formation and inter-firm mobility within the San Diego biotechnology cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 438-455, May.
    12. Malerba, Franco, 2007. "Innovation and the dynamics and evolution of industries: Progress and challenges," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 675-699, August.
    13. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    14. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger, 2006. "The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 463-480, May.
    15. Joly, P. B. & Mangematin, V., 1996. "Profile of public laboratories, industrial partnerships and organisation of R & D: the dynamics of industrial relationships in a large research organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 901-922, September.
    16. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    17. Marian Beise, 2004. "Lead Markets, Innovation Differentials and Growth," Discussion Paper Series 157, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    18. Jatinder S. Sidhu & Harry R. Commandeur & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "The Multifaceted Nature of Exploration and Exploitation: Value of Supply, Demand, and Spatial Search for Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 20-38, February.
    19. Grillitsch, Markus & Nilsson , Magnus, 2013. "Technological competencies and firm performance: Analyzing the importance of internal and external competencies," Papers in Innovation Studies 2013/24, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    n/a;

    JEL classification:

    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • P5 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.