The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change

When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: Insights from the drugs industry

“…Biotechnology has been very innovative, often producing new versions of existing products using completely different sets of technical competencies (Walsh and Kirchhoff, 2002), discarding existing processes and requiring learning processes instead (Linton and Walsh, 2004). These technological discontinuities have been leading to the emergence of several different business models (Sabatier et al, 2010a) but did not suffice to disrupt the dominant logic of the drugs industry (Allarakhia and Walsh, 2011;Durand et al, 2008;Hopkins et al, 2007;Pisano, 2006). In other words, technological discontinuities appeared to be necessary, but not sufficient in and of themselves, to trigger disruption of the dominant logic: iit seems that other triggers are necessary to drive this change in this case.…”

“…Biotechnology has profoundly altered drug discovery heuristics and generated many new technologies for both discovery and development, bringing big technological discontinuities in terms of product and process innovation to the industry (Hopkins et al, 2007). During its emergence, most new biotech entrants were start-ups founded by scientists from universities and laboratories (Ebers and Powell, 2007) engaged in bridging upstream academic research, venture capital and large firms (Rothaermel, 2001a).…”

“…However, the drug industry, which has been facing several waves of technological discontinuities, does not seem to be following that path when technological discontinuities occur (Allarakhia and Walsh, 2011;Galambos and Sturchio, 1998;Hopkins, Martin et al, 2007;Rothaermel, 2000), which questions the notion of drivers of evolution in technology based industries. But when technological discontinuity does not lead to disruptions of its dominant logic, what other forces lead to such change?…”

Changing cells: An analysis of the concept of plasticity in the context of cellular differentiation

“…Important here was the growing dominance of molecular biology and the 'biotech revolution' of the 1970s which brought a novel toolbox of powerful techniques for analysing the genetic aspects of cellular life (Hopkins et al, 2007). The rise of molecular biology with its emphasis on technique, its focus on macro-molecules generally and its privileging of the gene and DNA in particular, was accompanied by an increasingly reductionist view of the cell (Kay, 1996;Brenner, 1979).…”

“…For Daniel Kleinman, this marked a shift in which ''(…) a broad commitment to sharing in the name of scientific advance has been largely displaced by a commitment to private property associated with the development of the biotechnology industry'' (Kleinman, 2005). A new set of practices, techniques, values and priorities was reconfiguring the research culture of the life sciences, including the strengthening influence of commercial interests (Gaudillière, 2009;Hopkins et al, 2007;Smith-Hughes, 2001). The HGP at once symbolised and legitimated the power and authority of molecular biology, consolidated the dominance of genetics-based understandings of disease, and promised a new chapter in drug innovation.…”