Ratio is an interdisciplinary research institute, with a research focus on the conditions of business and enterprise.

+4684415900

info@ratio.se

802002-5212

Sveavägen 59 4trp

Box 3203

103 64 Stockholm

Bankgiro: 512-6578

About

  • About us
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Media
  • News archive
  • Cooperations
  • Eli F. Heckscher Lectures

Research

  • Areas
  • Labour Market Research
  • Competitiveness Research
  • Climate and Environmental Research
  • Ongoing research
  • Working Paper Series
People

Publications

  • Publications
  • Publications
Search Swedish flag iconSV
Swedish flag iconSVSearch

About

  • About us

    • About
    • Contact us

  • Media

    • News archive

  • Cooperations

    • Eli F. Heckscher Lectures

Research

  • Areas

    • Labour Market Research
    • Competitiveness Research
    • Climate and Environmental Research

  • Ongoing research

    • Working Paper Series
  • People

    • Publications

    • Publications

      • Publications

    Working Paper No. 21. Titanium Implants – A Comparison of a Swedish and an Ohio Firm

    PublicationWorking paper
    Ann-Charlotte Fridh, Företagandets villkor, Innovation, Institutionell ekonomi, Uppfinning
    Working Paper No. 21.
    Download

    Abstract

    Two firms in the health care market are studied in a case study of the introduction of two almost identical innovations. The two firms, both in the titanium implant business have been chosen so that they match when it comes to origin, technology and customers. But the diffusion occurred in two different (institutional) environments, the Swedish and the US. The whole process from invention to innovation and diffusion in the market is studied. The analysis takes its starting point in competence bloc theory (a Schumpeterian theory). We find that the institutional environment is crucial for firm growth.

    Fridh, A-C. (2003). Titanium Implants – A Comparison of a Swedish and an Ohio Firm. Ratio Working Paper No. 21.

    Details

    Author

    Fridh, A-C.

    Publication year

    2003

    Similar content

    Third-Generation Innovation Policy: System Transformation or Reinforcing Business as Usual?
    Book chapterPublication
    Bergkvist, J. E., Moodysson, J., & Sandström, C.
    Publication year

    2022

    Published in

    Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, 201.

    Abstract

    There has been a shift in innovation policy in recent years toward more focus on systemic transformation and changed directionality. In this chapter, we describe a collection of challenges that such policies need to address. Based on a review of dominant frameworks regarding socio-technical transitions, we compare these theories with examples of innovation policy in different countries. Systemic transformation across an economy usually requires a process of creative destruction in which new competencies may be required, actors need to be connected in novel ways, and institutions may need to be changed. Our empirical illustrations show that support programs and initiatives across Europe do not always seem to result in such a process, as they include mechanisms favoring large, established firms and universities. These actors have often fine-tuned their activities and capabilities to the existing order, and therefore have few incentives to engage in renewal. As the incumbent actors also control superior financial and relational resources, there is a risk that they captivate innovation policies and thus reinforce established structures rather than contributing to systemic transformation.

    Assessing user perceptions of the interplay between the sharing, access, platform and community‐based economies
    Article (with peer review)Publication
    Geissinger, A., Laurell, C., Öberg, C., Sandström, C. & Suseno, Y.
    Publication year

    2020

    Published in

    Information Technology & People

    Abstract

    Purpose
    Digitally intermediated peer-to-peer exchanges have accelerated in occurrence, and as a consequence, they have introduced an increased pluralism of connotations. Accordingly, this paper aims to assess user perceptions of the interplay between the sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies.

    Design/methodology/approach
    The sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies have been systematically tracked in the social media landscape using Social Media Analytics (SMA). In doing so, a total material of 62,855 publicly posted user-generated content concerning the four respective economies were collected and analyzed.

    Findings
    Even though the sharing economy has been conceptually argued to be interlinked with the access, platform, and community-based economies, the empirical results of the study do not validate this interlinkage. Instead, the results regarding user perceptions in social media show that the sharing, access, platform, and community-based economies manifest as clearly separated.

    Originality/value
    This paper contributes to existing literature by offering an empirical validation, as well as an in-depth understanding, of the sharing economy’s interlinkage to other economies, along with the extent to which the overlaps between these economies manifest in social media.

    Bureaucrats or Markets in Innovation Policy? – a critique of the entrepreneurial state
    Article (with peer review)Publication
    Karlson, N., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, K.
    Publication year

    2020

    Published in

    Review of Austrian Economics 34, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-020-00508-7

    Abstract

    This paper takes stock of recent suggestions that the state apparatus is a central and underappreciated actor in the generation, diffusion and exploitation of innovations enhancing growth and social welfare. We contrast such a view of “the entrepreneurial state” with theories and empirical evidence of the microeconomic processes of innovation in the modern economy which focus on well-functioning markets, free entry and competition among firms, and independent entrepreneurship as central mechanisms in the creation and dissemination of innovations. In doing so, we identify several deficiencies in the notion of an entrepreneurial state by showing that (i) there is weak empirical support in the many hundreds empirical studies and related meta analyses evaluating the effectiveness of active industrial and innovative policies, that (ii) these policies do not take account of the presence of information and incentive problems which together explain why attempts to address purported market failures often result in policy failures, and that (iii) the exclusive focus on knowledge creation through R&D and different forms of firm subsidies ignores the equally important mechanisms of knowledge dissemination and creation through commercial exploitation in markets. We discuss how a more theoretically well-founded focus on the state as investing in knowledge generation and securing the conditions of free and competitive markets will lead to a more innovative economy.

    Show more

    Selected publication

    Absolute income mobility and the effect of parent generation inequality: An extended decomposition approach
    Liss, E., Korpi, M., & Wennberg, K.

    Selected publication

    No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion
    Grafström, J., & Poudineh, R.