In-house Innovation Research Articles

Forward and backward transitions in pharmacy-based immunization services

Background Community pharmacies can engage in immunization services by contracting with an external workforce (outsourced mechanism) or staff pharmacists (in-house mechanism) to deliver the services. Because an outsourced mechanism generally requires lower organizational commitment, pharmacies often start with an outsourced mechanism. Later, these pharmacies can have 1 of the following transitions: sit on a fence by continuing with an outsourced mechanism, move backward by abandoning any immunization services, or move forward by implementing an in-house mechanism. Objectives Using Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations model and Behavioral Theory of the Firm as guidance, this study identified the associations between perceived characteristics of immunization services and backward/forward transitions. Methods A cross-sectional mail survey was conducted to collect data from key informants of Washington State community pharmacies during May-July 2004 (response rate = 46.9%). A total of 106 pharmacies were included in the analysis. Based on pharmacy's immunization service transitions, these pharmacies were identified as Fence sitters, Backward movers, or Forward movers. Relationships between these transitions, pharmacy characteristics, and perceived characteristics of immunization services were analyzed using bivariate and multinomial logistic regression techniques. Results Backward and Forward movers had less positive assessments of outsourced services when compared with Fence sitters. Backward and Forward movers differed in their perceptions of in-house services; Backward movers generally perceived no differences between these 2 services, whereas Forward movers generally perceived in-house services to be superior to outsourced services. Furthermore, the odds of being a Forward mover increased as perceived technical and social benefits of outsourced services decreased, perceived compatibility of in-house services increased, and perceived complexity of in-house services decreased. Conclusions Perceived characteristics of outsourced and in-house innovations were associated with backward and forward transitions. Findings can be used to guide the development of strategies for facilitating organizational change and preventing the abandonment of immunization services.

IMITATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY LICENSING: STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS FOR SMALLER FIRMS

An important aspect of strategic choice is whether to pioneer or to imitate, that is, whether to be a first-mover or a follower. It has been suggested that this is particularly important for small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) because of potential disadvantages of scale in design, production and marketing. However, empirical evidence suggests that many SMEs can be successful first-movers and that pioneering strategies enable them to compete against larger firms that have scale advantages and possess important downstream resources. This paper looks at the issue of timing of entry from a different perspective. It is concerned with the role of imitation as a strategy and its success when smaller firms are in competition with larger firms. Acquisition of technology through licensing is a frequently used strategy for firms of all sizes. It is also a classic 'imitation' strategy. The paper reports a study of imitative behaviour in a sample of UK manufacturing firms of varying sizes. A comparison of strategic motives, capabilities and outcomes is examined in the context of technology strategies involving both in-house R&D and that acquired through inward technology licensing. An important distinction is made between licensing that provides a basis for subsequent innovation and licensing for reactive imitative purposes. The study concludes that imitation is a viable policy option for smaller firms, but that complementary assets and appropriate capabilities determine whether such a policy has a major competitive impact or is merely a reaction to unsuccessful in-house innovation. The study calls into question the use of size per se as a competitive indicator, and indicates reasons underpinning imitative behaviour that may influence downstream success.