Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions

References

• Aghion P, Dewatripont M, Stein JC (2008) Academic freedom, private-sector focus, and the process of innovation. RAND J. Econom. 39(3):617–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Lampert CM (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough innovations. Strategy Management J. 22(6–7):521–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Lampert CM, Tandon V (2008) Moving beyond Schumpeter: Management research on the determinants of technological innovation. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):1–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison PD (1996) Fixed-effects partial likelihood for repeated events. Sociol. Methods Res. 25(2):207–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison PD (2002) Bias in fixed-effects Cox regression with dummy variables. Working paper, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. http://www.statisticalhorizons.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/BiasFE-Cox.pdf.Google Scholar
• Argote L, Miron-Spektor E (2011) Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1123–1137.Link, Google Scholar
• Audia PG, Goncalo JA (2007) Past success and creativity over time: A study of inventors in the hard disk drive industry. Management Sci. 53(1):1–15.Link, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Manso G, Graff ZJ (2011) Incentives and creativity: Evidence from the academic life sciences. RAND J. Econom. 42(3):527–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blossfeld HP, Rohwer G (1995) Techniques of Event History Modeling: New Approaches to Causal Analysis (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
• Cabral L (2000) Introduction to Industrial Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cardinal LB (2001) Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The use of organizational control in management research and development. Organ. Sci. 12(1):19–36.Link, Google Scholar
• Chase WG, Simon HA (1973) Perception in chess. Cognitive Psych. 4(1):55–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cowen EL (1952) Stress reduction and problem-solving rigidity. J. Consulting Psych. 16(6):425–428.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahl DW, Moreau CP (2007) Thinking inside the box: Why consumers enjoy constrained creative experiences. J. Marketing Res. 44(3):357–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Aveni RA (1994) Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Dennis W (1966) Creative productivity between the ages of 20 and 80 years. J. Gerontol. 21(1):1–8.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L (2007) Breakthroughs and the “long tail” of innovation. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 49(1):69–74.Google Scholar
• Gambardella A, Harhoff D, Verspagen B (2008) The value of European patents. Eur. Management Rev. 5(2):69–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gino F, Argote L, Miron-Spektor E, Todorova G (2010) First get your feet wet: The effect of direct and indirect experience on team creativity. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 111(2):102–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girotra K, Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2010) Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Sci. 56(4):591–605.Link, Google Scholar
• Giuri P, Mariani M, Brusoni S, Crespi G, Francoz D, Gambardella A, Garcia-Fontes Wet al. (2007) Inventors and innovation processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey. Res. Policy 36(8):1107–1127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gupta AK, Tesluk PE, Taylor MS (2007) Innovation at and across multiple levels of analysis. Organ. Sci. 18(6):885–897.Link, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econom. 36(1):16–38.Google Scholar
• Hall B, Mairesse J, Turner L (2007) Identifying age, cohort and period effects in scientific research productivity: Discussion and illustration using simulated and actual data on French physicists. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 16(2):159–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D, Narin F, Scherer FM, Vopel K (1999) Citation frequency and the value of patented innovation. Rev. Econom. Statist. 81(3):511–515.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horrace WC, Oaxaca RL (2006) Results on the bias and inconsistency of ordinary least squares for the linear probability model. Econom. Lett. 90(3):321–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyengar SS, Lepper MR (2000) When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 79(6):995–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeppesen LB, Lakhani KR (2010) Marginality and problem solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1016–1033.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones B (2010) Age and great innovation. Rev. Econom. Statist. 92(1):1–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King G (1989) Unifying Political Methodology (Cambridge University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Lacetera N, Cockburn IM, Henderson R (2004) Do firms change capabilities by hiring new people? A study of the adoption of science-based drug discovery. Adv. Strategic Management 21:133–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levin S, Stephan P (1991) Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. Amer. Econom. Rev. 81(1):114–32.Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategy Management J. 14(S2):95–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manso G (2011) Motivating innovation. J. Finance 66(5):1823–1869.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Mariani M, Romanelli M (2007) “Stacking” and “picking” innovations: The patenting behavior of European inventors. Res. Policy 36(8):1128–1142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR (1961) Uncertainty, learning, and the economics of parallel research and development efforts. Rev. Econom. Statist. 43(4):351–364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Panico C (2009) Employment relationships in knowledge-based firms: Who should have power? Eur. Management Rev. 6(2):120–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phene A, Fladmoe-Lindquist K, Marsh L (2005) Breakthrough innovations in the U.S. biotechnology industry: The effect of technological space and geographic origin. Strategy Management J. 27(4):369–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rhee M, Haunshild PR (2006) The liability of good reputation: A study of product recalls in the U.S. automobile industry. Organ. Sci. 17(1):101–117.Link, Google Scholar
• Shilling MA, Hill CW (1998) Managing the new product development process: Strategic imperatives. Acad. Management Executive 12(3):67–81.Google Scholar
• Simonton DK (1997) Creative productivity: A predictive and explanatory model of career trajectories and landmarks. Psych. Rev. 104(1):66–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonton DK (1999) Creativity as blind variation and selective retention: Is the creative process Darwinian? Psych. Inquiry 10(4):309–328.Google Scholar
• Singh J, Fleming L (2010) Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. 56(1):41–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Stuart TE (2000) Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Staw BM, Sandelands LE, Dutton JE (1981) Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 26(4):501–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stern S (2004) Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Sci. 50(6):835–853.Link, Google Scholar
• Stokes PD (1999) Learned variability levels: Implications for creativity. Creativity Res. J. 12(1):37–45.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor A, Greve HR (2006) Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Acad. Management J. 49(4):723–740.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M (1990) A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND J. Econom. 21(1):172–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Anderson P (1986) Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31(3):439–465.Crossref, Google Scholar