Walter W. Powell

Bio: Walter W. Powell is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: New institutionalism & Organizational analysis. The author has an hindex of 56, co-authored 120 publications receiving 82637 citations. Previous affiliations of Walter W. Powell include University of Michigan & University of Arizona.

Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences

Abstract: The realms of science and technology in the life sciences are converging through the commercialization of university research. Major changes in the mandate of research universities were facilitated by both federal legislation that has promoted technology transfer, and the increased reliance of business firms on university research and development (R&D). This article discusses the primary factors that are blurring the division of labor between industry and academia in the life sciences, and analyzes the consequences for universities of treating knowledge as intellectual property. Universities’ efforts to enhance the commercial value of life sciences research is causing increased politicization of government research funding, a growing winner-take-all contest between the “have” and “have-not” universities, and subtle but potentially profound changes in the culture of academic research.

Network Position and Firm Performance: Organizational Returns to Collaboration in the Biotechnology Industry

Abstract: We examine the relationship between position in a network of relationships and organizational performance Drawing on ten years of observations (1988-1997) for nearly 400 firms in the human biotechnology industry, we utilize three types of panel regressions to unravel the complex linkages between network structure, patenting, and various firm-level outcome measures Our results highlight the critical role of collaboration in determining the competitive advantage of individual biotech firms and in driving the evolution of the industry We also find that there are decreasing returns to network experience and diversity, suggesting that there are limits to the learning that occurs through interorganizational networks

Cultivating an institutional ecology of organizations: comment on Hannan, Carroll, Dundon, and Torres

Abstract: Les AA. considerent que le concept de legitimation est une notion clef pour la sociologie. En revanche son caractere a la fois de processus et de resultat pose d'enormes problemes de mesure. Ils rejettent donc le modele de « densite-dependance ». Selon eux on ne peut se limiter a croire qu'une croissance des effectifs puisse par elle-meme etre le signe d'une legitimation d'une pratique, d'une strategie. Ils s'opposent donc a Hannan et alii en arguant que l'on peut, sur ce point, developper des modeles, fins et a portee generale et pourtant non fondes sur la densite

Careers and contradictions: Faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences

Abstract: Drawing on interviews with more than 80 scientists on two university campuses, we create a typology that offers insights into how transformations in the nature and locus of life science innovation influence academic careers and work practices. Our analyses suggest that a strong outcome of increased academic concern with research commercialization is the appearance of new fault lines among faculty, between faculty and students, and even between scientists' interests and those of their institutions. We argue that life science commercialization is driven by a mix of new funding opportunities, changing institutional mandates for universities, and novel research technologies that bring basic research and product development into much closer contact. The rise of patenting and commercially motivated technology transfer on U.S. campuses stands to alter faculty work practices and relationships, while transforming the criteria by which success is determined and rewards are allocated. Through close analysis of interviews with four researchers who typify a range of academic responses to commercialism, we demonstrate emerging patterns of conflict and agreement in faculty responses to commercial opportunities in the life sciences.

Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches

Abstract: This article synthesizes the large but diverse literature on organizational legitimacy, highlighting similarities and disparities among the leading strategic and institutional approaches. The analysis identifies three primary forms of legitimacy: pragmatic, based on audience self-interest; moral, based on normative approval: and cognitive, based on comprehensibility and taken-for-grantedness. The article then examines strategies for gaining, maintaining, and repairing legitimacy of each type, suggesting both the promises and the pitfalls of such instrumental manipulations.

Dynamic capabilities, what are they?

Abstract: This paper focuses on dynamic capabilities and, more generally, the resource-based view of the firm. We argue that dynamic capabilities are a set of specific and identifiable processes such as product development, strategic decision making, and alliancing. They are neither vague nor tautological. Although dynamic capabilities are idiosyncratic in their details and path dependent in their emergence, they have significant commonalities across firms (popularly termed ‘best practice’). This suggests that they are more homogeneous, fungible, equifinal, and substitutable than is usually assumed. In moderately dynamic markets, dynamic capabilities resemble the traditional conception of routines. They are detailed, analytic, stable processes with predictable outcomes. In contrast, in high-velocity markets, they are simple, highly experiential and fragile processes with unpredictable outcomes. Finally, well-known learning mechanisms guide the evolution of dynamic capabilities. In moderately dynamic markets, the evolutionary emphasis is on variation. In high-velocity markets, it is on selection. At the level of RBV, we conclude that traditional RBV misidentifies the locus of long-term competitive advantage in dynamic markets, overemphasizes the strategic logic of leverage, and reaches a boundary condition in high-velocity markets. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage

Abstract: In this article we offer a view that suggests that a firm's critical resources may span firm boundaries and may be embedded in interfirm resources and routines. We argue that an increasingly important unit of analysis for understanding competitive advantage is the relationship between firms and identify four potential sources of interorganizational competitive advantage: (1) relation-specific assets, (2) knowledge-sharing routines, (3) complementary resources/capabilities, and (4) effective governance. We examine each of these potential sources of rent in detail, identifying key subprocesses, and also discuss the isolating mechanisms that serve to preserve relational rents. Finally, we discuss how the relational view may offer normative prescriptions for firm-level strategies that contradict the prescriptions offered by those with a resource-based view or industry structure view.

“Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital”

Abstract: After briefly explaining why social capital (civil society) is important to democracy, Putnam devotes the bulk of this chapter to demonstrating social capital’s decline in the United States across the last quarter century. (See Putnam 1995 for a similar but more detailed argument.) While he acknowledges that the significance of a few countertrends is difficult to assess without further study, Putnam concludes that crucial factors such as social trust are eroding rapidly in the United States. He offers some possible explanations for this erosion and concludes by outlining the work needed to consider these possibilities more fully.

Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts

Abstract: Stakeholder theory has been a popular heuristic for describing the management environment for years, but it has not attained full theoretical status. Our aim in this article is to contribute to a theory of stakeholder identification and salience based on stakeholders possessing one or more of three relationship attributes: power, legitimacy, and urgency. By combining these attributes, we generate a typology of stakeholders, propositions concerning their salience to managers of the firm, and research and management implications.