This handbook looks to provide academics and students with a comprehensive and holistic understanding of the phenomenon of innovation. Innovation spans a number of fields within the social sciences and humanities: Management, Economics, Geography, Sociology, Politics, Psychology, and History. Consequently, the rapidly increasing body of literature on innovation is characterized by a multitude of perspectives based on, or cutting across, existing disciplines and specializations. Scholars of innovation can come from such diverse starting points that much of this literature can be missed, and so constructive dialogues missed. The editors of The Oxford Handbook of Innovation have carefully selected and designed twenty-one contributions from leading academic experts within their particular field, each focusing on a specific aspect of innovation. These have been organized into four main sections, the first of which looks at the creation of innovations, with particular focus on firms and networks. Section Two provides an account of the wider systematic setting influencing innovation and the role of institutions and organizations in this context. Section Three explores some of the diversity in the working of innovation over time and across different sectors of the economy, and Section Four focuses on the consequences of innovation with respect to economic growth, international competitiveness, and employment. An introductory overview, concluding remarks, and guide to further reading for each chapter, make this handbook a key introduction and vital reference work for researchers, academics, and advanced students of innovation. Contributors to this volume - Jan Fagerberg, University of Oslo William Lazonick, INSEAD Walter W. Powell, Stanford University Keith Pavitt, SPRU Alice Lam, Brunel University Keith Smith, INTECH Charles Edquist, Linkoping David Mowery, University of California, Berkeley Mary O'Sullivan, INSEAD Ove Granstrand, Chalmers Bjorn Asheim, University of Lund Rajneesh Narula, Copenhagen Business School Antonello Zanfei, Urbino Kristine Bruland, University of Oslo Franco Malerba, University of Bocconi Nick Von Tunzelmann, SPRU Ian Miles, University of Manchester Bronwyn Hall, University of California, Berkeley Bart Verspagen , ECIS Francisco Louca, ISEG Manuel M. Godinho, ISEG Richard R. Nelson, Mario Pianta, Urbino Bengt-Ake Lundvall, Aalborg

The Oxford Handbook of Innovation

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

This is a study in industrial sociology; it a partial report, to be followed by another, of an investigation of singel factory seen in the light of Max Weber's theory of bureacracy.

Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy.

Never before? Every age tends to think it is special, facing problems that have never occurred before-the arrogance of the present'. Disruption has occurred before, yet this generation (or the last, or the next) might well be facing unique problems. There is good evidence that special times are here or hereabouts. Globalisation is new - mankind has always totally remade or devastated small areas of the planet, but now we have the capacity to affect everywhere at once. The Max Plank Institute predicts demographic trends. One such prediction says that around 2070 the human population will start to decline for reasons other than disaster or disease - that will be the first time in history that material success has led to fewer people on Earth. So maybe there are some truly new effects to be considered. What might be new about disruption this time are its speed, strength of impact, and the global compass of its effect.

What makes a revolution? Disruptive technology and social change : Disruptive technology

Additive Manufacturing (AM) is widely gaining popularity as an alternative manufacturing technique for complex and customized parts. AM materials are used for various medical applications in both metal and polymer options. Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence technology is a rapid, user-friendly method of quantifying surface cleanliness and was used in this study to gather quantitative data on levels of contamination on AM materials at three different stage processes: post build, post cleaning and post sterilization. The surface cleanliness of eleven AM materials, three metals and eight polymers, was tested. ATP bioluminescence provided the sensitivity to evaluate different material surface characteristics, and specifically the impact of surface finishing techniques on overall cleanliness.

The development of innovative patient-specific surgical guides

This study investigates a recent UK Government Intervention established to develop Micro- and Nano- Technologies (MNTs) for technology-based economic growth. While the need for such innovation policies is well recognised, there is also a need to understand the key challenges to developing effective policy interventions for the innovation process that will create sound economic leverage (Harvey, 2010).
A new method that helps us understand the innovation process at the organisational level has been developed, by working across disciplines and synthesising different methodologies. Constructs adopted from the Minnesota Innovation Research Programme (MIRP) were used to gather and analyse data. The methodological approach followed was a fusion of the Interactive Process Perspective (IPP) and Institutional Theory (IT). This method has been used to further explain the complexities of the innovation process by demonstrating the co-operation and contestation between actors from different interest groups in terms of agency and structure.
Evidence of how innovation centres exhibit different characteristics relating to their local context along with the specific actors populating them is provided. Those actors bring their own institutional logics, belief systems and associated practices to their centres. The importance which the local context of an MNT Centre has within the extra-local context of the state intervention is shown to have a major bearing on its original purpose.
For practitioners some important points have been raised: the intended purpose of the MNT government intervention was shown to evolve across MNT centres; the key influential actors of each centre demonstrably followed different institutional systems of reasoning, which in some cases resulted in internal conflicts.
As demonstrated in this study, the ingrained institutional thinking and reasoning of actors can be difficult to change for the intended purpose of an intervention, once funding has already been awarded.

An investigation of the UK micro- and nano- technology government intervention

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Peter Dorrington

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

An investigation of the UK micro- and nano- technology government intervention