IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v47y2020i2p271-282..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governance mechanisms enabling inter-organizational adaptation: Lessons from grand challenge R&D programs

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher S Hayter
  • Albert N Link

Abstract

From climate change to terrorism, the world is confronting complex, trans-national problems. As a contemporary response, governments and non-profit organizations have established grand challenge programs, consisting of multi-sector research and development partnerships, to access innovative new ideas and rapidly scale solutions. Following recent scholarly contributions, this article investigates how problems motivating program establishment were identified, how these problems and related contextual factors evolve over time, and how grand challenge programs evolve in response. It does so through a multi-year study of ten grand challenge programs that differ substantially in purpose and organization. This article finds that adaptive capabilities—inter-organizational governance mechanisms—and operational aspects such as purpose, scope, temporal factors, and partner capabilities are critical to program evolution and impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher S Hayter & Albert N Link, 2020. "Governance mechanisms enabling inter-organizational adaptation: Lessons from grand challenge R&D programs," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 271-282.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:47:y:2020:i:2:p:271-282.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scaa003
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglas J. Besharov & Heidi Williams, 2012. "Innovation Inducement Prizes: Connecting Research to Policy," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 752-776, June.
    2. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    3. William B. Bonvillian, 2014. "The new model innovation agencies: An overview," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 425-437.
    4. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    5. Stefan Kuhlmann & Arie Rip, 2018. "Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 448-454.
    6. Dolores Modic & Maryann P. Feldman, 2017. "Mapping the human brain: comparing the US and EU Grand Challenges†," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 440-449.
    7. Rajeev Goel, 2007. "Research spending under regulatory uncertainty," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 593-604, December.
    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. Sebastian Aparicio & David Audretsch & David Urbano, 2022. "Governmental Support for Entrepreneurship in Spain: An Institutional Approach," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 243(4), pages 29-49, December.

    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. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2021. "How do firms use innovations to hedge against economic and political uncertainty? Evidence from a large sample of nations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 407-430, April.
    2. Stephen Brammer & Layla Branicki & Martina Linnenluecke & Tom Smith, 2019. "Grand challenges in management research: Attributes, achievements, and advancement," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 517-533, November.
    3. Dirk Dohse & Rajeev K. Goel & James W. Saunoris, 2023. "Patenting uncertainty and its impact on innovation: evidence from the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1839-1859, October.
    4. German Blanco & Rajeev K. Goel, 2023. "Do weak institutions undermine global innovation production efficiency?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1813-1838, October.
    5. Herrmann, Roland & Schröck, Rebecca, 2011. "Determinanten des Innovationserfolgs: eine Analyse mit Scannerdaten für den deutschen Joghurtmarkt," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 60(03), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Gilberto Tadeu Lima, 2000. "Market concentration and technological innovation in a dynamic model of growth and distribution," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 447-475.
    7. Helen Weeds, 2002. "Strategic Delay in a Real Options Model of R&D Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 729-747.
    8. Symeonidis, George, 2001. "Price Competition, Innovation and Profitability: Theory and UK Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2816, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    10. Park, Walter G., 1997. "A note on innovation and patent protection: Intertemporal imitation-risk smoothing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 185-189, February.
    11. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    12. Xiding Chen & Qinghua Huang & Weilun Huang & Xue Li, 2018. "The Impact of Sustainable Development Technology on a Small Economy—The Case of Energy-Saving Technology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, February.
    13. Liotard, Isabelle & Revest, Valérie, 2018. "Contests as innovation policy instruments: Lessons from the US federal agencies' experience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 57-69.
    14. Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola, 1998. "Common carriers' entry into multimedia services," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 77-105, March.
    15. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:5:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Marin, Dalia, 1992. "Is the Export-Led.Growth Hypothesis Valid for Industrialized Countries?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(4), pages 678-688, November.
    17. Salvacruz, Joseph C., 1996. "Competitiveness Of The United States And The Asean In The International Agricultural Market," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 27(1), pages 1-9, February.
    18. Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2000. "Market Entry Strategy Under Firm Heterogeneity and Asymmetric Payoffs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 313-327, November.
    19. Kumar, Nagesh & Saqib, Mohammed, 1996. "Firm size, opportunities for adaptation and in-house R & D activity in developing countries: the case of Indian manufacturing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 713-722, August.
    20. Petrakis, Panagiotis E. & Kostis, Pantelis C. & Valsamis, Dionysis G., 2015. "Innovation and competitiveness: Culture as a long-term strategic instrument during the European Great Recession," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1436-1438.
    21. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    grand challenges; R&D partnerships; governance; innovation policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation

    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:oup:scippl:v:47:y:2020:i:2:p:271-282.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.