Organizational Form, Social Capital, and Scientific Problem Solving

• In Event: 3450 - Evaluating People, Work, and Organizations

Abstract

In this study, I examine how the structure of biopharmaceutical organizations enables and constrains the ability of biopharmaceutical scientists to utilize network contacts while attempting to solve research-related problems. The biopharmaceutical field is characterized as innovative because of its cutting-edge science but also because of its unique organizational form that promotes scientific learning though networks – the network organizational form. In particular, scientists are encouraged to collaborate freely across organizational boundaries, which promotes learning, awareness, and problem-solving. However, recent research suggests that the biopharmaceutical field has drifted away from the network organizational form, closer to active boundary-management. To better understand the current organizational form of biopharmaceutical organizations, I interview 36 core scientists working on research and development projects in the biopharmaceutical field about the structure of their organizations and how they dealt with scientific obstacles encountered during research and development, which is a core activity of biopharmaceutical organizations. Scientists are thought to rely on interorganizational network for novel information that is essential for solving complex problems, like those encountered in the biopharmaceutical field. But whereas proponents of the network organizational form expect the governance of interorganizational networks to fall to the scientists, proponents of the active boundary-management perspective expect network governance to reside in the formal organizational structure. Because research obstacles threaten a core activity, I argue, scientists’ accounts of how they deal with research obstacles offers unique insight into the organizational form of biopharmaceutical organizations.

Author

• David Jeremy McBee, University of Arizona