Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management of Knowledge-Intensive Organizations

  • 504 Accesses

Abstract

This study investigates governance models that address innovative and ethical academic scientists and organizations. It bases on management and governance theory of knowledge-intensive organizations (KIOs) that originates in research streams of knowledge-intensive firms and professional service firms. The focus is on the basic science stage of translational science that applies discoveries to humans. Despite the overall progress of understanding disease mechanisms, there are several understudied fields in biomedical sciences. Previous literature ascribes the biased agenda to the involvement of practical interests. Though there are undoubtedly such external forces, several institutional and organizational constraints are also contributing to biases. Examples include neurobiological aspects of translational pain science. This study investigates contributing factors and governance models by seeking corresponding parts between self-regulation of sciences, agency-based governance, and stakeholder theories.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, M. D., Kelley, J. M., Gocayne, J. D., Dubnick, M., Polymeropoulos, M. H., Xiao, H., … Venter, C. (1991). Complementary DNA sequencing: Expressed sequence tags and human genome project. Science, 252, 1651–1656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcacer, J., & Chung, W. (2007). Location strategies and knowledge spillovers. Management Science, 53(5), 760–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., Barney, J., & Anderson, P. (2013). Forming and exploiting opportunities: The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research. Organization Science, 2, 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anand, N., Gardner, K., & Morris, T. (2007). Knowledge-based innovation: Emergence and embedding of new practice areas in managing consulting firms. The Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 406–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2010). Extending the Mertonian norms: Scientists’ subscription to norms of research. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(3), 366–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argandona, A. (1998). Stakeholder theory and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1093–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armour, J., Hansmann, H., & Kraaman, R. (2017). Agency problems and legal strategies. In R. Kraaman, J. Armour, P. Davies, L. Enriques, H. Hansmann, G. Hertig, … E. Rock (Eds.), The anatomy of corporate law: A comparative and functional approach. Oxford University Press-Oxford Scholarship Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198739630.001.0001.

  • Arora, A., Belenzon, S., & Patacconi, A. (2015). Killing the golden goose? The decline of science in corporate R&D (NBER Working Paper 20902). Available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w20902.

  • Attas, D. (2004). A moral stakeholder theory of the firm. Ethics and Economics, 2(2), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azoulay, P., Zivin, J. S. G., & Manso, G. (2011). Incentives and creativity: Evidence from the academic life sciences. RAND Journal of Economics, 42(3), 527–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, S. F. (1992). What is a profession? Professional Ethics: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1(1–2), 73–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, S., Wadhwa A., & Kotha, S. (2016). Corporate venture capital: Important themes and future directions. In S. A. Zahra, D. O. Neubaum, & J. C. Hayton (Eds.), Handbook of research on corporate entrepreneurship (pp. 203–234). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettencourt, L. A., Ostrom, A. L., Brown, S. W., & Roundtree, R. I. (2002). Client co-production in knowledge-intensive business services. California Management Review, 44(4), 100–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bikard, M., Murray, F. E., & Gans J. (2013). Exploring tradeoffs in the organization of scientific work: Collaboration and scientific reward (NBER Working Paper No. 18958).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgers, H., & Vrande, V. V. (2016). Who is the corporate entrepreneur: Insights from opportunity discovery and creation theory. In S. A. Zahra, D. O. Neubaum, & J. C. Hayton (Eds.), Handbook of research on corporate entrepreneurship (pp. 64–86). Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buse, K., & Walt, G. (2002). The world health organization and global public-private health partnerships: In search of ‘good’ global health governance. In M. R. Reich (Ed.), Public-private partnerships for public health (pp. 169–195). Cambridge, US: Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, D. (2014). Detecting and measuring capture. In D. Carpenter & D. A. Moss (Eds.), Preventing Regulatory Capture: Special Interest Influence and How to Limit It (pp. 57–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, D., & Moss, D. A. (Eds.). (2014a). Preventing regulatory capture: Special interest influence and how to limit it. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, D., & Moss, D. A. (2014b). Introduction. In D. Carpenter & D. A. Moss (Eds.), Preventing regulatory capture: Special interest influence and how to limit it (pp. 1–24). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cayabyab, M. J., Macovei, L., & Campos-Nelo, A. (2012). Current and novel approaches to vaccine development against tuberculosis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol, 2, 154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, S. K., & Dilts, D. M. (2013). Building expertise in translational processes through partnerships with schools of business. In B. Alving, K. Dai, & S. H. H. Chan (Eds.), Translational medicine—What, why and how; An international perspective (Translational Research Biomedicine 3) (pp. 74–81). Basel: Kager.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., & McGrath, R. G. (2001). Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive economy. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1135–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, C., & Millar, C. (2005). Knowledge entanglement. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, C. J., Hilton, B., & Millar, C. (2004). Emerging business systems. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T. (2011). University governance reforms: Potential problems of more autonomy? Higher Education, 62, 503–517. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., Ntzani, E. E., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2003). Translation of highly promising basic science research into clinical applications. The American Journal of Medicine, 114(6), 477–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contreras, J. L. (2011). Bermuda’s legacy: Policy, patents, and the design of the genome commons. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 12(1), 61–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czamitzki, D., Glänzel, W., & Hussinger, K. (2008). Heterogeneity of patenting activity and its implications for scientific research. Research Policy, 38(1), 26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Energy & National Institute of Health (DOE & NIH). (1992). The guidelines on rapid sharing of data and material produced, Washington, D.C. Human Genome News, 4(5) January 1993. Retrieved from https://www.genome.gov/edkit/pdfs/1992b.pdf.

  • Disis, M. L., Tarczy-Hornoch, P., & Ramsey, B. W. (2013). Clinical research with innovative services and informatics tools. In B. Alving, K. Dai, & S. H. H. Chan (Eds.), Translational Medicine—What, Why and How: An International Perspective (Translational Research in Biomedicine, 3) (pp. 89–97). Basel: Karger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydoesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national system and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Webster, A. (1995). Science as intellectual property. In S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen, & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 480–505). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012). Knowledge-intensive (business) service in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern cooperation: Kantian capitalism. In T. L. Beauchamp & N. E. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (3rd ed.) (pp. 97–106). Englewood Cliff: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, F. C., Stern, R. G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct account for the majority of retracted publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 42(109), 17028–17033. Corrections: 2013. PNAS, 110(3), 1137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2004). Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management, 25(8–9), 909–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fort, T. L. (2001). Ethics and governance: Business as mediating institution. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: Stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghobadian, A., Gallear, D., Viney, H., & O’Regan, N. (2004). Future of the public-private partnership. In A. Ghobadian, D. Gallear, N. O’Regan, & H. Viney (Eds.), Public-private partnerships: Policy and experience (pp. 271–302). Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402(C81), 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goleman, D. (2004). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 82(1), 82–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottweis, H., Salter, B., & Waldby, C. (2009). The global politics of human embryonic stem cell science: Regenerative medicine in transition. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R. (2007). Redefining professionalism? The impact of management change. In L. Empson (Ed.), Managing the modern law firm: New challenges and new perspectives (pp. 186–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., & Empson, L. (2003). The professional partnership: Relic or exemplary form of governance? Organization Studies, 24, 909–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunz, H., Gunz, S., & Dinovitzer, R. (2015). Professional ethics: Origins, applications, and developments. In B. Hinings, D. Muzio, J. Broschak, & L. Empson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of professional service firms (pp. 113–134). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & May, D. R. (2011). Moral maturation and moral conation: A capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 663–685.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Hertog, P. (2000). Knowledge-intensive business services as co-production of innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 4(4), 491–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinings, B., Muzio, D., Broschak, J., & Empson, L. (Eds.). (2015a). The Oxford handbook of professional service firms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinings B., Muzio, D., Broschak, J., & Empson, L. (2015b). Researching professional service firms: An introduction and overview. In B. Hinings, et al. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of professional service firms (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2012). Evolution of translational omics: Lessons learned and the path forward. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2004). Materializing research promisses: Opportunities, priorities and conflicts in translational medicine. Journal of Translational Medicine, 2(1), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Majchrzak, A. (2016). Interactive self-regulation theory for sharing and protecting in interorganizational collaborations. Academy of Management Review, 41(1), 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1983). Organization theory and methodology. The Accounting Review, 58(2), 319–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Mechling, W. H. (1976). Theory of firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., Hesterly, W. S., & Borgatti, S. P. (1997). A general theory of network governance: Exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, N., MacKenzie, R., & Lee, K. (2016). Case studies on corporations and global health governance. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2017). Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry’s responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4). https://doi.org/10.5465/1556362.

  • Klein, H. J. (1989). An integrated control theory model of work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 14(2), 150–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D. (1994). The ground of professional ethics. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky, S. (2007). When conflict-of-interest is a factor in scientific misconduct. Medicine and Law, 26, 447–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunneman, H. (2010). Viable alternatives for commercialized science: The case of humanistics. In H. Radder (Ed.), The commodification of academic research: Science and the modern university (pp. 307–336). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Links, A. E., Draper D., Lee, E., Guzman, J., Valivullah Z., Maduro, V., … Sincan M. (2016). Distributed cognition and process management enabling individualized translational research: The NIH undiagnosed diseases program experience. Frontiers in Medicine, 3(39). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2016.00039.

  • Lynn, M. L. (2005). Organizational buffering: Managing boundaries and cores. Organization Studies, 26(1), 37–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1942). A note on science and democracy. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1, 115–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, C. C. J. M., Peters, K., & Millar, P. H. (2018). Culture, the missing link in value creation and governance in knowledge-intensive institutions? Journal of Public Affairs, 18(1), e1702. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1702.

  • Miller, F. G., & Wertheimer, A. (2011). The fair transaction model of informed consent: An alternative to autonomous authorization. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 21(3), 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Ziedonis, A. A. (2002). Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States. Research Policy, 31(3), 399–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukunda, G. (2012). Indispensable: When leaders really matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, K. L. (Ed.). (2008). Serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE): Methods and protocols. Totowa: Humana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Nordenflycht, A. (2010). What is a professional service firm? Towards a theory and taxonomy of knowledge intensive firms. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okada, E. (2018). Knowledge corruption and governance in academic knowledge-intensive organizations: The case of molecular mutations research. Journal of Public Affairs, 18(1), e1698. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1698.

  • Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of growth of the firm. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. P. (2006). Science business: The promise, the reality, and the future of biotech. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prabowo, S. A., Groschel, M. L., Schmidt, E. D. L., Skrahina, A., Mihaescu, T., & Hastuk, S., et al. (2013). Targeting multidrug-resistant tuberculosis by therapeutic vaccines. Medical Microbiology and Immunology, 302, 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radder, H. (Ed.). (2010a). The commodification of academic research: Science and the modern university. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radder, H. (2010b). The commodification of academic research. In H. Radder (Ed.), The commodification of academic research: Science and the modern university (pp. 1–23). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rangan, S., Samii, R., & van Wassenhove, L. K. (2006). Constructive partnerships: When alliances between private firms and public actors can enable creative strategies. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 738–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappuoli, R., Blank, S., & Lambert, P. H. (2011). Vaccine discovery and translation of new vaccine technology. Lancet, 378, 360–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1958/1999). Justice as fairness. In S. Freeman (Ed.), John Rawls: Collected Papers (pp. 47–72). Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, M. R. (Ed.). (2002). Public-private partnerships for health. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, J., & Sprenger, J. (2017). Scientific objectivity. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed.), Summer 2017. Available at https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/scientific-objectivity/.

  • Resnik, D. B. (2008). Scientific autonomy and public oversight. Philosophy of Science, 5(2), 220. https://doi.org/10.3366/e1742360000800336, available as author’s manuscript in PMC2009 Sept 22.

  • Riordan, M., & Williamson, O. (1985). Asset specificity and economic organization. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3(4), 365–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J., & Czempiel, E. (1992). Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (2001). Thinking boldly. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 79(8), 772.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2005). Organizational boundaries and theories of organization. Organization Science, 16(5), 491–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schut, M., von Paassen, A., Leeuwis, C., & Klerlx, L. (2014). Towards dynamic research configurations: A framework for reflection on the contribution of research to policy and innovation processes. Science and Public Policy, 41(2), 207–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherer, P. D., & Leblebici, H. (2015). Governance in professional service firms. In B. Hinings, D. Muzio, J. Broschak, & L. Empson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of professional service firms (pp. 189–212). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, R. G. (2011). Retractions in the medical literature: How many patients are put at risk by flawed research? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(11), 688–692.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamas, B. (2013). The future of drug discovery: Who decides which diseases to treat? London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2011). Has the Bayh-Dole act compromised basic research? Research Policy, 40(8), 1077–1083.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trispas, M. (2009). Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of ‘the digital photography company’. Organization Science, 20(2), 441–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truog, R. D. (2017). The United Kingdom sets limits on experimental treatments. JAMA, 318(11). https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.10410.

  • Velculescu, V. E., Zhang, L., Vogelstein, B., & Kinzler, K. W. (1995). Serial analysis of gene expression. Science, 270(5235), 484–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries, M. S. (2013). The challenge of good governance. The Innovation Journal The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 18(1), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organization. Thousand Oaks and London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (2000). The intellectual and social organization of science (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, A. C., Gilbert, D. R., & Freeman, R. E. (1994). A feminist reinterpretation of the stakeholder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4, 475–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. The Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1981). The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87(3), 548–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Hayton, J. C. (2016). Handbook of research on corporate entrepreneurship. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (2000). Real science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Boston Cancer Policy Institute, Somerville, MA, USA

    Ellie Okada

Authors
  1. Ellie Okada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ellie Okada .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Okada, E. (2019). Introduction. In: Management of Knowledge-Intensive Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97373-9_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation