[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v53y2024i4s0048733324000325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How technoscientific knowledge advances: A Bell-Labs-inspired architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Narayanamurti, Venkatesh
  • Tsao, Jeffrey Y.
Abstract
Understanding how science and technology advance has long been of interest to diverse scholarly communities. Thus far, however, such understanding has not been easy to map to, and thus to improve, the operational practice of research and development. Indeed, one might argue that the operational practice of research and development, particularly its exploratory research half, has become less effective in recent decades. In this paper, we describe a rethinking of how science and technology advance, one that is consistent with many (though not all) of the perspectives of the scholarly communities just mentioned, and one that helps bridge the divide between theory and practice. The result is an architecture we call “Bell's Dodecants,” to reflect its six mechanisms and two flavors, and their balanced nurturing at Bell Labs, the iconic 20th century industrial research and development laboratory.

Suggested Citation

  • Narayanamurti, Venkatesh & Tsao, Jeffrey Y., 2024. "How technoscientific knowledge advances: A Bell-Labs-inspired architecture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:4:s0048733324000325
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2024.104983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324000325
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2024.104983?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    2. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    3. Michael Park & Erin Leahey & Russell J. Funk, 2023. "Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time," Nature, Nature, vol. 613(7942), pages 138-144, January.
    4. Michael Muthukrishna & Joseph Henrich, 2019. "A problem in theory," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 221-229, March.
    5. Sylvain Lenfle & Christoph Loch, 2010. "Lost Roots: How Project Management Came to Emphasize Control Over Flexibility and Novelty," Post-Print hal-00557549, HAL.
    6. Yiling Lin & Carl Benedikt Frey & Lingfei Wu, 2022. "Remote Collaboration Fuses Fewer Breakthrough Ideas," Papers 2206.01878, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    7. Russell J. Funk & Jason Owen-Smith, 2017. "A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 791-817, March.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    9. John P. A. Ioannidis, 2011. "Fund people not projects," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7366), pages 529-531, September.
    10. Nicholas Dew & S. Sarasvathy & S. Venkataraman, 2004. "The economic implications of exaptation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 69-84, January.
    11. Andriani, Pierpaolo & Carignani, Giuseppe, 2014. "Modular exaptation: A missing link in the synthesis of artificial form," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1608-1620.
    12. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 527-554, September.
    13. Tsao, J.Y. & Boyack, K.W. & Coltrin, M.E. & Turnley, J.G. & Gauster, W.B., 2008. "Galileo's stream: A framework for understanding knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 330-352, March.
    14. repec:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:12590-12594 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Mokyr, Joel, 1990. "Punctuated Equilibria and Technological Progress," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 350-354, May.
    16. Richard Nelson, 1962. "The Link Between Science and Invention: The Case of the Transistor," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 549-584, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Grazzi, 2010. "On the nature of technologies: knowledge, procedures, artifacts and production inputs," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 173-184, January.
    18. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    19. Nightingale, Paul, 1998. "A cognitive model of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 689-709, November.
    20. Pierpaolo Andriani & Gino Cattani, 2016. "Exaptation as source of creativity, innovation, and diversity: introduction to the Special Section," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(1), pages 115-131.
    21. Sotaro Shibayama & Jian Wang, 2020. "Measuring originality in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 409-427, January.
    22. Levinthal, Daniel A, 1998. "The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(2), pages 217-247, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    2. Macher, Jeffrey T. & Rutzer, Christian & Weder, Rolf, 2024. "Is there a secular decline in disruptive patents? Correcting for measurement bias," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(5).
    3. De Noni, Ivan & Ganzaroli, Andrea & Pilotti, Luciano, 2021. "Spawning exaptive opportunities in European regions: The missing link in the smart specialization framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    4. Aaltonen, Päivi Hanna Maria, 2020. "Piecing together a puzzle—A review and research agenda on internationalization and the promise of exaptation," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4).
    5. Giovanni Bonifati, 2013. "Exaptation and emerging degeneracy in innovation processes," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Anuraag Singh & Giorgio Triulzi & Christopher L. Magee, 2020. "Technological improvement rate estimates for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Papers 2004.13919, arXiv.org.
    7. Andriani, Pierpaolo & Kaminska, Renata, 2021. "Exploring the dynamics of novelty production through exaptation: a historical analysis of coal tar-based innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    8. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    9. Tian Heong Chan & Shi-Ying Lim, 2023. "The Emergence of Novel Product Uses: An Investigation of Exaptations in IKEA Hacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2870-2892, May.
    10. Sam Arts & Nicola Melluso & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2023. "Beyond Citations: Measuring Novel Scientific Ideas and their Impact in Publication Text," Papers 2309.16437, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    11. Uwe Cantner & Holger Graf & Ekaterina Prytkova & Simone Vannuccini, 2018. "The Compositional Nature of Productivity and Innovation Slowdown," Jena Economics Research Papers 2018-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    12. James, Steffan & Liu, Zheng & Stephens, Victoria & White, Gareth R.T., 2022. "Innovation in crisis: The role of ‘exaptive relations’ for medical device development in response to COVID-19," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    13. Nylund, Petra A. & Amores-Bravo, Xavier & Ferràs-Hernández, Xavier & Brem, Alexander, 2023. "Crisis as a catalyst of idle innovation ecosystems: Evidence from ecosystem exaptation of a water partnership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    14. Charles Ayoubi & Michele Pezzoni & Fabiana Visentin, 2021. "Does It Pay to Do Novel Science? The Selectivity Patterns in Science Funding," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(5), pages 635-648.
    15. Ludovic Dibiaggio & Benjamin Montmartin & Lionel Nesta, 2018. "Regional alignement and productivity growth," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03471579, HAL.
    16. Boris Forthmann & Mark A. Runco, 2020. "An Empirical Test of the Inter-Relationships between Various Bibliometric Creative Scholarship Indicators," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-16, June.
    17. Joshua S. Gans & Michael Kearney & Erin L. Scott & Scott Stern, 2021. "Choosing Technology: An Entrepreneurial Strategy Approach," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 39-53, March.
    18. Codini, Anna Paola & Abbate, Tindara & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2023. "Business Model Innovation and exaptation: A new way of innovating in SMEs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    19. Paiola, Marco & Schiavone, Francesco & Khvatova, Tatiana & Grandinetti, Roberto, 2021. "Prior knowledge, industry 4.0 and digital servitization. An inductive framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    20. Besancenot, Damien & Vranceanu, Radu, 2024. "Reluctance to pursue breakthrough research: A signaling explanation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technoscientific method; Scientific method; Engineering method; Question-and-answer-finding; Punctuated equilibria; R&D; Bell Labs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:4:s0048733324000325. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.