IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v39y2010i9p1133-1147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rethinking the role of the state in technology development: DARPA and the case for embedded network governance

Author

Listed:
  • Fuchs, Erica R.H.

Abstract

This paper explores the role of the state in re-architecting social networks and thereby new technology directions in the United States. It draws on a case study of DARPA's Microsystems Technology Office from 1992 to 2008. Leveraging one of the most radical directorships in DARPA's history, I argue that the perceived "death" of DARPA under Tony Tether was because past analyses, by focusing on the organization's culture and structure, overlooked a set of lasting, informal institutions among DARPA program managers. I find that despite significant changes in the recipients and outcomes of DARPA attentions, these same institutions for directing technology were in place both before and during Tether's directorship. Drawing on these results, I suggest that we must add to technology policy-making a new option--embedded network governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2010. "Rethinking the role of the state in technology development: DARPA and the case for embedded network governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1133-1147, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:39:y:2010:i:9:p:1133-1147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(10)00158-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Lee Fleming & David M. Waguespack, 2007. "Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 165-180, April.
    2. Sirbu, Marvin Jr., 1978. "Government aid for the development of innovative technology: lessons from the French," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 176-196, April.
    3. Allen, Thomas J. & Utterback, James M. & Sirbu, Marvin A. & Ashford, Nicholas A. & Hollomon, J. Herbert, 1978. "Government influence on the process of innovation in Europe and Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 124-149, April.
    4. Fong Glenn R., 2001. "ARPA Does Windows: The Defense Underpinning of the PC Revolution," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-26, November.
    5. Dan Breznitz, 2005. "Collaborative Public Space in a National Innovation System: A Case Study of the Israeli Military's Impact on the Software Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 31-64.
    6. Bill McEvily & Akbar Zaheer, 1999. "Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(12), pages 1133-1156, December.
    7. Fransman,Martin, 1993. "The Market and Beyond," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521435253.
    8. Sabel, Charles F., 1996. "A measure of federalism: assessing manufacturing technology centers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 281-307, March.
    9. Fong, Glenn R., 2001. "ARPA Does Windows: The Defense Underpinning of the PC Revolution," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 213-237, November.
    10. Mowery, David C. & Langlois, Richard N., 1996. "Spinning off and spinning on(?): the federal government role in the development of the US computer software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 947-966, September.
    11. Whitford, Josh, 2005. "The New Old Economy: Networks, Institutions, and the Organizational Transformation of American Manufacturing," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286010.
    12. Raghu Garud, 2008. "Conferences as Venues for the Configuration of Emerging Organizational Fields: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(6), pages 1061-1088, September.
    13. Alice H. Amsden & Wan-wen Chu, 2003. "Beyond Late Development: Taiwan's Upgrading Policies," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011980, 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. Paolo CASTELNOVO & Massimo FLORIO, 2019. "Mission-oriented Public Organizations for Knowledge Creation," Departmental Working Papers 2019-09, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    2. Deborah Dougherty & Danielle D. Dunne, 2011. "Organizing Ecologies of Complex Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1214-1223, October.
    3. Gilbert, Brett Anitra & Campbell, Joanna Tochman, 2015. "The geographic origins of radical technological paradigms: A configurational study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 311-327.
    4. Zhi, Qiang & Su, Jun & Ru, Peng & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2013. "The evolution of China's National Energy RD&D Programs: The role of scientists in science and technology decision making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1568-1585.
    5. Anita Williams Woolley & Erica Fuchs, 2011. "PERSPECTIVE---Collective Intelligence in the Organization of Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1359-1367, October.
    6. Pierre Azoulay & Erica Fuchs & Anna P. Goldstein & Michael Kearney, 2018. "Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the "ARPA Model"," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 69-96, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Steven Samford, 2015. "Innovation and public space: The developmental possibilities of regulation in the global south," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 294-308, September.
    8. Goldstein, Anna P. & Kearney, Michael, 2020. "Know when to fold ‘em: An empirical description of risk management in public research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    9. David Audretsch & Taylor Aldridge, 2014. "The Development of US Policies directed at stimulating Innovation and Entrepreneurship," JRC Research Reports JRC87894, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Margaret Dalziel, 2018. "Why are there (almost) no randomised controlled trial-based evaluations of business support programmes?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    11. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2012. "Why Pre-Commercial Procurement is notInnovation Procurement," Papers in Innovation Studies 2012/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    12. Dugoua, Eugenie & Dumas, Marion, 2021. "Green product innovation in industrial networks: A theoretical model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Coburn, Josie & Yaqub, Ohid & Chataway, Joanna, 2022. "Targeting research to address societal needs: What can we learn from 30 years of targeting neglected diseases?," SocArXiv 65ws7, Center for Open Science.
    14. Marian Negoita, 2014. "Globalization, state, and innovation: An appraisal of networked industrial policy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 371-393, September.
    15. Jason M. Rathje & Riitta Katila, 2021. "Enabling Technologies and the Role of Private Firms: A Machine Learning Matching Analysis," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 5-21, March.
    16. Helveston, John P. & Wang, Yanmin & Karplus, Valerie J. & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2019. "Institutional complementarities: The origins of experimentation in China’s plug-in electric vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 206-222.
    17. Martin Ho & Henry CW Price & Tim S Evans & Eoin O'Sullivan, 2023. "Order in Innovation," Papers 2302.13076, arXiv.org.
    18. Castelnovo, Paolo, 2022. "Innovation in private and state-owned enterprises: A cross-industry analysis of patenting activity," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 98-113.
    19. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    20. Kurakova, Natalia (Куракова, Наталия) & Zinov, Vladimir (Зинов, Владимир) & Komarov, Vladimir (Комаров, Владимир) & Pavlov, Pavel (Павлов, Павел), 2014. "Long-term projections as a tool for the formation of science and technology policy [Долгосрочные Прогнозы Как Инструмент Формирования Научно-Технологической Политики]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 4, pages 7-32.
    21. Sofia Patsali, 2021. "University Procurement-led Innovation," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-13, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    22. Ingmar Meerkerk & Jurian Edelenbos, 2014. "The effects of boundary spanners on trust and performance of urban governance networks: findings from survey research on urban development projects in the Netherlands," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(1), pages 3-24, March.
    23. Bingxiu Gui & Yun Liu & Yanbing Ju & Xuanting Ye, 2018. "Disruptive Innovation Patterns Driven by Mega-Projects: A Sustainable Development Pattern Case of China’s High-Speed Rail," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    24. Doblinger, Claudia & Surana, Kavita & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2019. "Governments as partners: The role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1458-1475.

    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. Marco R. Di Tommaso & Stuart O. Schweitzer, 2013. "Industrial Policy in America," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13749.
    2. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    3. Gholz, Eugene & James, Andrew D. & Speller, Thomas H., 2018. "The second face of systems integration: An empirical analysis of supply chains to complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1478-1494.
    4. Henry Wai-chung Yeung & Neil M. Coe, 2015. "Toward a Dynamic Theory of Global Production Networks," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 91(1), pages 29-58, January.
    5. Zou, Xi & Ingram, Paul, 2013. "Bonds and boundaries: Network structure, organizational boundaries, and job performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 98-109.
    6. Birgit Leick & Susanne Gretzinger, 2018. "Brokerage and governance for business networks: a metasynthesis-based discussion," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 22(4), pages 773-804, December.
    7. Kenney, Martin & Breznitz, Dan & Murphree, Michael, 2013. "Coming back home after the sun rises: Returnee entrepreneurs and growth of high tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 391-407.
    8. Heracleous, Loizos & Papachroni, Angeliki & Andriopoulos, Constantine & Gotsi, Manto, 2017. "Structural ambidexterity and competency traps: Insights from Xerox PARC," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 327-338.
    9. Jörn H. Block & Christian Fisch & Walter Diegel, 2024. "Schumpeterian entrepreneurial digital identity and funding from venture capital firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 119-157, February.
    10. Avery Sen, 2017. "Island + Bridge: how transformative innovation is organized in the federal government," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 707-721.
    11. Liang, Liang & Alam, Ashraful & Sorwar, Ghulam & Yazdifar, Hassan & Eskandari, Rasol, 2021. "The combined network effect of sparse and interlocked connections in SMEs’ innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    12. Steven Samford, 2015. "Innovation and public space: The developmental possibilities of regulation in the global south," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 294-308, September.
    13. William Bonvillian & Richard Atta, 2011. "ARPA-E and DARPA: Applying the DARPA model to energy innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 469-513, October.
    14. Anita Williams Woolley & Erica Fuchs, 2011. "PERSPECTIVE---Collective Intelligence in the Organization of Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1359-1367, October.
    15. Robert Huggins & Daniel Prokop & Piers Thompson, 2020. "Universities and open innovation: the determinants of network centrality," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 718-757, June.
    16. Breznitz, Dan & Zehavi, Amos, 2010. "The limits of capital: Transcending the public financer-private producer split in industrial R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 301-312, March.
    17. Pierre Azoulay & Erica Fuchs & Anna P. Goldstein & Michael Kearney, 2018. "Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the "ARPA Model"," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 69-96, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Peterman, Andrew & Kourula, Arno & Levitt, Raymond, 2014. "Balancing act: Government roles in an energy conservation network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1067-1082.
    19. Jaideep Anand & Gerald McDermott & Ram Mudambi & Rajneesh Narula, 2021. "Innovation in and from emerging economies: New insights and lessons for international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(4), pages 545-559, June.
    20. Mariani, Marcello M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2020. "Exploring how consumer goods companies innovate in the digital age: The role of big data analytics companies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 338-352.

    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:39:y:2010:i:9:p:1133-1147. 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.