The Role of Firm differences in An evolutionary Theory Of technical Advance

  • Richard R. Nelson
Part of the Recent Economic Thought book series (RETH, volume 36)


There is a curious disjunction between the treatment of firms and firm differences in the business management literature, and the treatment in much of economics. The former treats firms as complex organisms, but with management having considerable discretionary authority over broad firm policies. It is presumed that firms in roughly comparable situations often will differ in what they do, and that these differences will matter in terms of how they do. The question of what makes for good policies is what the business management field is all about.


Evolutionary Theory Technical Advance Business Management Dynamic Capability Organizational Capability 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abernathy, W.J., and Utterback, J.M. 1978. “Patterns of Industrial Innovation.” Technology Review.Google Scholar
  2. Armour, H., and Teece, D. 1978. “Organizational Structure and Economic Performance: A Test of the Multidivisonal Hypothesis.” Bell Journal of Economics.Google Scholar
  3. Burgelman, R., and Rosenbloom, R. 1989. “Technology Strategy: An EvolutionaryProcess Perspective.” Research on Technological Invention, Management, and Policy 4.Google Scholar
  4. Cantwell, J. 1989. Technological Innovation and Multinational Corporations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Cantwell, J. 1990. “The Technological Competence Theory of International Production and its Implications.” University of Reading Discussion paper #149, University of Reading, PA.Google Scholar
  6. Chandler, A.D., Jr. 1966. Strategy and Structure. New York: Doubleday & Co. Anchor Books Edition.Google Scholar
  7. Chandler, A. 1990. Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, K., and Fujimoto, T. 1991. Product Development Performance: Strategy Management and Organization in the World Auto Industry. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, W., and Levinthal, D. 1989. “Innovation and Learning: the Two Faces of R & D.” Economic Journal.Google Scholar
  10. Cyert, R., and March, J. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Dosi, G., Teece, D.J., and Winter, S. 1989. “Toward a Theory of Corporate Coherence: Preliminary Remarks.” Unpublished paper, Center for Research in Management, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
  12. Florida, R., and Kenney, M. 1991. “Transplanted Organizations: The Transfer of Japanese Industrial Organization to the United States.” American Sociological Review.Google Scholar
  13. Freeman, C. 1982. The Economics of Industrial Innovation. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  14. Freeman, C. 1989. “The Nature of Innovation and the Evolution of the Production System.” Xerox Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  15. Hays, R., Wheelwright, S., and Clark, K. 1988. Dynamic Manufacturing: Creating the Learning Organization. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  16. Henderson, R. 1990. “Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry.” Cambridge: MIT Sloan School discussion paper.Google Scholar
  17. Henderson, R., and Clark, K. 1990. “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfigurationof Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Existing Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly.Google Scholar
  18. Hounshell, D., and Smith, J. 1988. Science and Corporate Strategy: Dupont R&D 1902–1980. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hughes, T. 1983. Networks of Power: Electrical Supply Systems in the U.S., England, and Germany. Baltimore, MO: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kogut, B. 1987. “Country Patterns in International Competition: Appropriabilityand Oligopolistic Agreement.” In Strategies in Global Competition. N. Hoodand J. Vahlae, eds. London: Croom-Helm.Google Scholar
  21. Langlois, R. 1986. “Rationality, Institutions, and Evolution.” In Economics as aProcess. R. Langlois ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Langlois, R. 1992. “Transaction Cost Economics in Real Time.” Industrial and Corporate Change.Google Scholar
  23. Mansfield, E. 1989. “Technological Creativity: Japan and the United States.” Business Horizons March/April.Google Scholar
  24. Nelson, R., and Winter, S. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Pavitt, K. 1987. “On the Nature of Technology.” Inaugural lecture given at the University of Sussex, June 23, 1987.Google Scholar
  26. Pavitt, K. 1992. “The Nature and Determinants of Innovation: A Major Factor in Firms’ (and Countries’) Competitiveness.” Paper prepared for the conference “Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda for the 1990s.”Google Scholar
  27. Penrose, E. 1959. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Pisano, G. 1990. “The R&D Boundaries of the Firm.” Administrative Science Quarterly.Google Scholar
  29. Porter, M.E. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  30. Prahalad, C.K., and Hamel, G. 1990. “The Core Competence of the Corporation.” Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
  31. Reich, L. 1985. The Making of American Industrial Research: Science and Businessat G.E. and Bell. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rosenbloom, R., and Cusumano, M. 1987. “Technological Pioneering and Competitive Advantage: The Birth of the VCR Industry.” California Management Review.Google Scholar
  33. Rumelt, R.P. 1984. “Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm.” Competitive Strategic Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  34. Sachwald, F. 1990. “Which Theory of the Firm to Understand Competitiveness.” Paris: Institut Francais des Relations Internationales.Google Scholar
  35. Schumpeter, J. 1934. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Schumpeter, J. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  37. Teece, D. 1980. “Economics of Scope and the Scope of an Enterprise.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.Google Scholar
  38. Teece, D. 1982. “Towards an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.Google Scholar
  39. Teece, D. 1986. “Profiting from Technological Innovation.” Research Policy.Google Scholar
  40. Teece, D., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. 1990. “Firm Capabilities, Resources, and the Concept of Strategy.” CCC Working Paper 90-8, Center for Research on Management, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  41. Tushman, M., and Anderson, P. 1986. “Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments.” Administrative Science Quarterly.Google Scholar
  42. Tushman, M., Newman, W.H., and Romanelli, E. 1986. “Convergence and Upheaval: Managing the Unsteady Pace of Organizational Evolution.” California Management Review.Google Scholar
  43. Womack, J., Jones, D., and Roos, D. 1991. The Machine that Changed the World. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard R. Nelson
    • 1
  1. 1.School of International and Public Affairs Public Policy Research CentreColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations