25rd November 2011
Warwick Business School
What I will talk about
The challenges of the research context
knowledge intensive work across nations
 Example research study
 Doing the research

Warwick Business School
I won’t talk about
-
Much theory on KIFs/globalization
-
Analysis/findings
-
A review of the academic literature on qualitative
research
-
A recipe for doing qualitative research
-
The challenges of working across a 6-person team!
-
The many trials of publication….
Warwick Business School
Researching Knowledge-Intensive
Organizations – The Context

The Evolution of Biomedical Knowledge: Interactive
Innovation in the UK and US
 Jacky Swan, Sue Newell, Maxine Robertson, Mike Bresnen, Anna
Goussevskaia, Ademola Obembe
 Research Policy (2007), 36, 529-547.

Research Context: Biomedical innovation – creation and
application of scientific and technological knowledge to
improve the delivery of human healthcare and the
treatment of disease (Rasmussen, 2005)
 Novel therapeutics

Main Question: What processes at the institutional and
project levels facilitate or impede the development of
knowledge for biomedical innovation
Warwick Business School
Networked/Interactive Innovation

The locus of innovation is ‘the network of inter-organizational
relationships that sustain a fluid and evolving community’
(Powell et al. 1996).
 university scientists, hospital clinicians, biotech, large pharma, clinical
research organizations, investors (e.g. VCs), regulators


Innovation highly knowledge-intensive & NON LINEAR
Emergence (of knowledge, problems, unanticipated events) is
the norm (Dougherty & Dunne, 2011)
 Knowledge evolves in an open-ended, ‘inherently indeterminate’
manner (Tsoukas, 1996).
 Outcomes and potential applications of new discoveries are unknown
(or even unknowable) at the start (Dougherty, 2007; Pisano, 2006)

Poses significant challenges for research
Warwick Business School
Why the US and UK?





Global knowledge-intensive industry (global pharma
and regulation)
US & UK both ‘Liberal Market’ economies (Whitley,
2000)
Both world class in R&D & market leaders in biotech
Both highly professionalised with similar regulatory
frameworks
But national/institutional differences
 availability of human resources, access to technology, access
to finance (Casper,2000,Casper & Kettler, 2000), healthcare
systems
Warwick Business School
Institutional Differences Summarised
As…
US more supportive than UK of ‘integrative’ and
‘relational’ capabilities (Owen-Smith et al, 2002)
 Integrative capabilities - the ability to integrate
knowledge by moving back and forth between basic
science, commercial and clinical development
 Relational capabilities - the ability to collaborate
with diverse organizations


What is the impact project level?
Warwick Business School
Zooming In and Zooming Out (Cf Nicolini, 2009)
MESO
Network dynamics
MICRO
Innovation projects
Knowledge integration
Practice theory
ZOOMING IN
Warwick Business School
MACRO
national differences
Institutional theory
ZOOMING OUT
Research design
3-year study
 Zooming In – Longitudinal case studies of
innovation projects (N =10)

 Early stage development of novel therapeutics
 Interview, materials, & observation of project
practices

Zooming Out
 Interview based survey of key stakeholders groups
involved in early-stage biomedical innovation (N=97)
 Secondary data sources
Warwick Business School
Example: project meetings
I walked into the boardroom at around 11.58 pm and saw MH
(Clinical Director). I introduced myself. She asked if I was doing a
presentation. I said no because the agenda is full. She said that it
was always full. The Project Manager chaired the meeting. Items on
the agenda were timed to as little as 2-minute slots. Every item was
almost exactly on time and many conversations were cut off. As I
was chatting with the scientist afterwards she confessed her
antipathy at having to stick to such ‘ridiculous’ schedules. “We never
have time to talk about what is really happening. We should just tear
up these stupid gannt charts”
What did I learn about?
time compression/commodification, the absurdity of project
management tools in emergent contexts
Warwick Business School
Formal Criteria for design and evaluation
(National Science Foundation Report)
Mastering of
literature
Hypothesis
development
Selection of
method
Collection
of data
Analysis
Hypothesis
(dis)confirmed
conclusion
Warwick Business School
Doing QR - an iterative process (just like the innovation
processes being observed!)
General
question
Initial Data
Collection
Preliminary
interpretation
Focused
observation
Further
Interpretation
& Theorizing
Warwick Business School
“You learn something (‘collect some data’), then you try
and make sense out of it (‘analysis’), then you go back
and see if the interpretation makes sense in light of new
experience (‘collect more data’), then you refine your
interpretation (‘more analysis’), and so on. The process is
dialectic, not linear.” (Agar, 1996, p. 62)
Formal criteria cannot be applied directly
 Research fails if it is formulaic (Feldman)
 In your project, you need to innovate and be
imaginative. You can’t just apply a method!

Warwick Business School
Zooming Out - Challenges

Where to start/who to speak to esp in nonhome country
 Advice from SAB
 Researcher’s networks influence network analysis!

Learning while asking questions
 Both expert and novice
Mundane matters matter
 Confidences & confidentiality
 Relative importance of the research

Warwick Business School
Handling Cultural Norms &
Expectations
We both speak English but…
 Access in US actually easier

 Reflects the inst differences (integrative capabilities)
Credibility institutionally based
 More legalistic/formal in US

 But non disclosure agreements made conversations
more open
Expectations of ‘payback’ also differed
 Some advantage in being a ‘foreign’ researcher

Warwick Business School
Zooming In - Challenges




Locating bounded areas of practice/projects
where work/interactions are so fluid
Emergence means projects disappear and
reappear
Innovation defined post-hoc (same process
can be described as a mistake!)
Challenge of observing/discussing when you
lack contributory expertise (Evans and Collins)
Warwick Business School
Zooming in Challenges (Contd)

Post-hoc rationalization is natural to sensemaking in
fluid situations
 Longitudinal research helps
 Participants don’t always like what you say!

Paradox of national ‘comparative’ research
 Myth of matching (cases and data sets)
 Not a problem if your position is interpretivism
(Alvesson and Skoldberg, 2000)

Creating knowledge/insights = Drawing new
distinctions (cf Tsoukas) not comparing along
prefixed dimensions
Warwick Business School
Practical Tactics

Practiced interactive innovation
 SAB in both countries
 Feedback workshops (esp in non home country)
Having a US-based researcher
 Study leave period
 Started with more than we needed (because
projects disappear and reappear)
 Travelled in packs (or 2 anyway)!

Warwick Business School
Practical Tactics (Contd)
DIY – do your own fieldwork (or at least some of
it!)
 Work with the institutionalised practices

 E.g. used NDAs in the US
Expect to be ‘lost’
 Sort the mundane stuff early
 Go with the flow & follow the practices
opportunistically
 Throw away your project management tools!

 It is not a linear process
Warwick Business School
Resources (2)

Langley, A. (1999) 'Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data', Academy of
Management Review, 24(4): 691-710

Barley, S. (1990) ‘Images of Imaging: Notes on Doing Longitudinal Field Work,
Organization Science, vol. 1 no. 3 220-247

Heracleous, L. (2006) A Tale of Three Discourses: The Dominant, the Strategic
and the Marginalized, Journal of Management Studies, 43(5) 1059-1087

Spradley, J. 1979. Ethnographic Interview. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York

Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming In and Out: Studying Practices by Switching
Theoretical Lenses and Trailing Connections. Organization Studies, 30(12), 13911418.

Barley, S. R. (1986). TECHNOLOGY AS AN OCCASION FOR STRUCTURING EVIDENCE FROM OBSERVATIONS OF CT SCANNERS AND THE SOCIAL-ORDER OF
RADIOLOGY DEPARTMENTS. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 78-108.
Warwick Business School
Resources (3)

Bailey, D. E., Leonardi, P. M., & Chong, J. (2010). Minding the Gaps:
Understanding Technology Interdependence and Coordination in Knowledge
Work. ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 21(3), 713-730.

Pettigrew, A. (1990) Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and
Practice,Organization Science, 1 (3), 267- 292

Pettigrew, A. (1997) What is Processual Analysis?, Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 13 (4), 337-348

Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (1990) Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons,
and Evaluative Criteria, Qualitative Sociology, 13 (1), 3- 21
Warwick Business School