IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Challenging incommensurability – What we can learn from Ludwik Fleck for the analysis of complex technical systems

  • Alexander Peine

    ()

Registered author(s):

    This paper explores the work of Ludwik Fleck and its applicability for the analysis of innovation in complex technical systems. The objectives of the paper are twofold. First, it strives to bring Ludwik Fleck back on the map of technology analysis. For this purpose, it develops a Fleckian perspective on technological change and innovation that augments the well-known concept of technological paradigms with insights about thought styles and collectives. Secondly, the paper shows that this perspective provides important cues to understand the interactions of different industrial sectors in innovation – a common yet under-researched occurrence in innovation of complex technical systems.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.geo.uu.nl/isu/pdf/isu0821.pdf
    File Function: Version October 2008
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies in its series Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series with number 08-21.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: Oct 2008
    Date of revision: Oct 2008
    Handle: RePEc:uis:wpaper:0821
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.uu.nl/faculty/geosciences/EN/research/institutesandgroups/researchinstitutes/copernicusinstitute/research/Innovation/Pages/default.aspx

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Sahal, Devendra, 1985. "Technological guideposts and innovation avenues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 61-82, April.
    2. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1977. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 36-76, January.
    3. Ufuah, Allan N & Utterback, James M, 1997. "Responding to Structural Industry Changes: A Technological Evolution Perspective," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 183-202.
    4. Dieter Ernst, 2005. "Limits to Modularity: Reflections on Recent Developments in Chip Design," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 303-335.
    5. Fleck, James, 1994. "Learning by trying: the implementation of configurational technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 637-652, November.
    6. Nicholas Dew, 2006. "Incommensurate technological paradigms? Quarreling in the RFID industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(5), pages 785-810, October.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni, 1982. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 147-162, June.
    8. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    9. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    10. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2001. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199241071, March.
    11. Saviotti, P. P., 1988. "Information, variety and entropy in technoeconomic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 89-103, April.
    12. Andrea Prencipe & Stefano Brusoni, 2005. "Making Design Rules: A Multi-Domain Perspective," SPRU Working Paper Series 136, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    13. Nightingale, Paul, 1998. "A cognitive model of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 689-709, November.
    14. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uis:wpaper:0821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Floortje Alkemade)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.