Innovation Blindness: Culture, Frames, and Cross-Boundary Problem Construction in the Development of New Technology Concepts

References

• Alvesson M.Understanding Organizational Culture (2002) (Sage, London) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile T. M.Creativity in Context (1996) (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) Google Scholar
• Bechky B. A. Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on the production floor. Organ. Sci. (2003) 14(3):312–330Link, Google Scholar
• Benford R. D., Snow D. A. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Rev. Sociol. (2000) 26:611–639Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowker G., Star S. L., Bud-Frierman L. Knowledge and infrastructure in international information management: Problems of classification and coding. Information Acumen: The Understanding and Use of Knowledge in Modern Business (1994) (Routledge, London) 187–216Google Scholar
• Callon M. The state and technical innovation: A case study of the electric vehicle in France. Res. Policy (1980) 9(4):358–376Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlile P. R. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organ. Sci. (2002) 13(4):442–455Link, Google Scholar
• Carlile P. R. Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(5):555–568Link, Google Scholar
• Carlson W. B., Bijker W. E., Law J. Artifacts and frames of meaning: Thomas A. Edison, his managers, and the cultural construction of motion pictures. Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (1992) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) 175–198Google Scholar
• Cohen M. D., March J., Olsen J. P. A garbage can model of organizational choice. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1972) 17(1):1–25Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collins H. M., Pinch T. J.Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science (1982) (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London) Google Scholar
• Collins S. T. Using ethnography to identify cultural domains within a systems engineering organization. Bull. Sci. Tech. Soc. (2003) 23(4):246–255Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidson E. Technology frames and framing: A socio-cognitive investigation of requirments determination. MIS Quart. (2002) 26(4):329–358Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidson E. A technological frames perspective on information technology and organizational change. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. (2006) 42(1):23–39Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiMaggio P. J. Culture and cognition. Annual Rev. Sociol. (1997) 23:263–287Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dougherty D. J. Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(2):179–202Link, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A. C., Bohmer R. M., Pisano G. P. Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2001) 46(4):685–716Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenberg E. M. Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Comm. Monographs (1984) 51(3):227–242Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenberg E. M., Riley P., Jablin F. M., Putnam L. L. Organizational culture. The New Handbook of Organizational Communication: Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods (2001) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) 291–322Crossref, Google Scholar
• Entman R. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J. Comm. (1993) 43(4):51–58Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ettlie J. E. Empirical generalization and the role of culture in new product development. J. Product Innovation Management (2007) 24(2):180–183Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiske S. T., Taylor S. E.Social Cognition (1991) (McGraw Hill, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerson E. M., Star S. L. Analyzing due process in the workplace. ACM Trans. Office Inform. Systems (1986) 4(3):257–270Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert C. G. Change in the presence of residual fit: Can competing frames coexist? Organ. Sci. (2006) 17(1):150–167Link, Google Scholar
• Goffman E.Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience (1974) (Harper Colophon, New York) Google Scholar
• Kaghan W. N., Bowker G. C. Out of machine age?: Complexity, sociotechnical systems and actor network theory. J. Engrg. Tech. Management (2001) 18(3–4):253–269Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan S. Framing contests: Strategy making under uncertainty. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19(5):729–752Link, Google Scholar
• Leonardi P. M. Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organ. Sci. (2007a) 18(5):813–831Link, Google Scholar
• Leonardi P. M. Organizing technology: Toward a theory of socio-material imbrication. (2007b) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
• Leonardi P. M. Why do people reject new technologies and stymie organizational changes of which they are in favor? Exploring misalignments between social interactions and materiality. Human Comm. Res. (2009) 35(3):975–984Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonardi P. M. When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quart. (2011) 35(1):147–167Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonardi P. M., Barley S. R. Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing. Inform. Organ. (2008) 18(3):159–176Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKenzie D.Knowing Machines: Essays on Technological Change (1996) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Martin J.Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain (2002) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orlikowski W. J. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(3):398–427Link, Google Scholar
• Orlikowski W. J. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ. Sci. (2000) 11(4):404–428Link, Google Scholar
• Orlikowski W. J., Gash D. C. Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Trans. Inform. Systems (1994) 12(2):174–207Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saxe J. G.The Poems of John Godfrey Saxe, Complete Edition (1873) (James R. Osgood and Company, Boston) Google Scholar
• Schein E. H.Organizational Culture and Leadership (2004) 3rd ed.(Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco) Google Scholar
• Snow D. A., Brochford E. B., Worden S. K., Benford R. D. Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1986) 51(4):464–481Crossref, Google Scholar
• Star S. L., Gasser L., Huhns M. N. The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. Distributed Artificial Intelligence (1989) (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco) 37–54Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strauss A., Corbin J.Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (1998) 2nd ed.(Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• Swidler A. Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. Amer. Sociol. Rev. (1986) 51(2):273–286Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swidler A.Talk of Love: How Culture Matters (2001) (University of Chicago Press, Chicago) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trice H. M.Occupational Subcultures in the Workplace (1993) (ILR Press, Ithaca, NY) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van de Ven A. H. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Sci. (1986) 32(5):590–607Link, Google Scholar
• Van Maanen J., Barley S. R., Cummings L. L., Staw B. M. Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior (1984) (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 287–365Google Scholar
• Yin R. K.Case Study Research: Design and Methods (1994) (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) Google Scholar