IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v51y2022i3s0048733321002614.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic framing of enabling technologies: Insights from firms digitizing smell and taste

Author

Listed:
  • Bojovic, Neva

Abstract

Strategic framing of a technology refers to activities that firms undertake to create favorable meaning for their technologies and foster their adoption. The success of such framing depends on the extent to which these technologies resonate with audiences within local settings. This paper examines how firms approach strategic framing activities to establish resonance in multiple local contexts when producing enabling technologies, i.e., novel technologies that address multiple and heterogeneous markets. Through a longitudinal case study of three companies that produce technologies to digitize smell and taste, this study offers a dynamic understanding of strategic framing by companies as they switch between different frames to establish resonance with audiences within and across markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Bojovic, Neva, 2022. "Strategic framing of enabling technologies: Insights from firms digitizing smell and taste," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:51:y:2022:i:3:s0048733321002614
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733321002614
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104469?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. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: the power of analogy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 691-712, August.
    2. Grid Thoma, 2009. "Striving for a large market: evidence from a general purpose technology in action," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(1), pages 107-138, February.
    3. Sergio Petralia, 2020. "Mapping General Purpose Technologies with Patent Data," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2027, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2020.
    4. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    5. Jan Youtie & Maurizio Iacopetta & Stuart Graham, 2008. "Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 315-329, June.
    6. Teece, David J., 2018. "Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1367-1387.
    7. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.
    8. Jean Clarke & Joep P. Cornelissen, 2011. "Language, Communication, and Socially Situated Cognition in Entrepreneurship," Post-Print hal-02312340, HAL.
    9. van Lente, Harro & Spitters, Charlotte & Peine, Alexander, 2013. "Comparing technological hype cycles: Towards a theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1615-1628.
    10. Mahka Moeen & Rajshree Agarwal & Sonali K. Shah, 2020. "Building Industries by Building Knowledge: Uncertainty Reduction over Industry Milestones," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 218-244, September.
    11. Woodson, Thomas S., 2016. "Public private partnerships and emerging technologies: A look at nanomedicine for diseases of poverty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1410-1418.
    12. Marx, Matt & Hsu, David H., 2015. "Strategic switchbacks: Dynamic commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1815-1826.
    13. Alfonso Gambardella & Sohvi Heaton & Elena Novelli & David J. Teece, 2021. "Profiting from Enabling Technologies?," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 75-90, March.
    14. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Elena Novelli, 2019. "Specializing in general purpose technologies as a firm long-term strategy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(2), pages 351-364.
    15. Jean Clarke & Joep P. Cornelissen, 2011. "Language, Communication, and Socially Situated Cognition in Entrepreneurship," Post-Print hal-02276729, HAL.
    16. Scott Shane, 2000. "Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 448-469, August.
    17. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    18. Yuliya Snihur, 2016. "Developing optimal distinctiveness: organizational identity processes in new ventures engaged in business model innovation," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3-4), pages 259-285, March.
    19. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel & Giuliani, Antonio Paco, 2014. "Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1177-1188.
    20. Nathan Rosenberg & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2009. "A General-Purpose Technology at Work: The Corliss Steam Engine in the Late-Nineteenth-Century United States," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 6, pages 97-135, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    21. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    22. Maine, Elicia & Garnsey, Elizabeth, 2006. "Commercializing generic technology: The case of advanced materials ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 375-393, April.
    23. Lipsey, Richard G. & Carlaw, Kenneth I. & Bekar, Clifford T., 2005. "Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Long-Term Economic Growth," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199290895, Decembrie.
    24. Hoppmann, Joern & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2020. "Why matter matters: How technology characteristics shape the strategic framing of technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    25. Snihur, Yuliya & Thomas, Llewellyn D. W. & Burgelman, Robert A., 2018. "An Ecosystem-Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Research Papers 3662, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    26. Maryann P. Feldman & Ji Woong Yoon, 2012. "An empirical test for general purpose technology: an examination of the Cohen--Boyer rDNA technology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(2), pages 249-275, April.
    27. Petralia, Sergio, 2020. "Mapping general purpose technologies with patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    28. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Elena Novelli, 2019. "Specializing in Generality: Firm Strategies When Intermediate Markets Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 126-150, February.
    29. Boon, Wouter & Moors, Ellen, 2008. "Exploring emerging technologies using metaphors - A study of orphan drugs and pharmacogenomics," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1915-1927, May.
    30. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Christopher B. Bingham, 2017. "Superior Strategy in Entrepreneurial Settings: Thinking, Doing, and the Logic of Opportunity," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 246-257, December.
    31. Lempiälä, Tea & Apajalahti, Eeva-Lotta & Haukkala, Teresa & Lovio, Raimo, 2019. "Socio-cultural framing during the emergence of a technological field: Creating cultural resonance for solar technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    32. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    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. Goldfarb, Avi & Taska, Bledi & Teodoridis, Florenta, 2023. "Could machine learning be a general purpose technology? A comparison of emerging technologies using data from online job postings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).

    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. Goldfarb, Avi & Taska, Bledi & Teodoridis, Florenta, 2023. "Could machine learning be a general purpose technology? A comparison of emerging technologies using data from online job postings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    2. Waßenhoven, Anna & Rennings, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "What constitutes a “Key Enabling Technology” for transition processes: Insights from the bioeconomy's technological landscape," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    3. Heikkilä, Jussi & Rissanen, Julius & Ali-Vehmas, Timo, 2023. "Coopetition, standardization and general purpose technologies: A framework and an application," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4).
    4. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    5. Kemeny, Tom & Petralia, Sergio & Storper, Michael, 2022. "Disruptive innovation and spatial inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115953, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Haessler, Philipp & Giones, Ferran & Brem, Alexander, 2023. "The who and how of commercializing emerging technologies: A technology-focused review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    7. Zhang, Yi & Wu, Mengjia & Miao, Wen & Huang, Lu & Lu, Jie, 2021. "Bi-layer network analytics: A methodology for characterizing emerging general-purpose technologies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    8. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel & Giuliani, Antonio Paco, 2014. "Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1177-1188.
    9. Sergio Petralia, 2020. "GPTs and Growth: Evidence on the Technological Adoption of Electrical & Electronic Technologies in the 1920s," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2033, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    10. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    11. Anavir Shermon & Mahka Moeen, 2022. "Zooming in or zooming out: Entrants' product portfolios in the nascent drone industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2217-2252, November.
    12. Rahul Kapoor & Thomas Klueter, 2021. "Unbundling and Managing Uncertainty Surrounding Emerging Technologies," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 62-74, March.
    13. Sean T. Hsu & Susan K. Cohen, 2022. "Overcoming the Incumbent Dilemma: The Dual Roles of Multimarket Contact During Disruption," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 319-348, March.
    14. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Martini, Antonella & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2017. "The light and shade of knowledge recombination: Insights from a general-purpose technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 154-165.
    15. Kokshagina, Olga & Gillier, Thomas & Cogez, Patrick & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoit, 2017. "Using innovation contests to promote the development of generic technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 152-164.
    16. Conti, Raffaele & Novelli, Elena, 2022. "Not all technologies are created equal for stakeholders: Constituency statutes, firm stakeholder orientation and investments in technology generality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    17. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    18. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    19. RAITERI Emilio, 2015. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of innovative public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-05, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    20. Lehrer, Mark & Banerjee, Preeta M. & Wang, I. Kim, 2017. "When the sky is the limit on scale: From temporal to multiplicative scaling in process-based technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 151-159.

    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:51:y:2022:i:3:s0048733321002614. 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.