Explaining the process of innovation: The dynamic reconciliation of action and structure

Problems of action and structure underpin key issues in research on innovation processes. The question of entrepreneurial activity is an enduring one, from the risk-taking actor debate right through to recent discussions of strategic leadership and new venturing for wealth creation. But we can also detect deterministic tendencies in those arguments that find innovation activity defined by the sector's institutionalized regime or paradigm. To this extent, concern for the reconciliation of action and structure has been particularly neglected. Drawing on insights from structuration theory, institutionalism and resource dependence, this article develops a new model that attempts to reconcile the action–structure dichotomy in the innovation process in industry. The article concludes by considering the implications of this model for issues of life cycle effects, technology strategy and systems of innovation. action–structure dichotomy ᭿ innovation ᭿ structuration theory ᭿ technology path Research into innovation processes generally takes one of two approaches. Either it relies on a voluntaristic view to stress the capacity of risk-taking actors (entrepreneurs), constantly exercising creative and destructive action in an age of revolution and disruption (e.g. processes within the institutional context of structures, in which actors' actions are socially shaped (e.g. The action–structure dichotomy has provided important insights, but it does not tell the whole story. Because innovation exists in both volun-taristic (action) and deterministic (structure) realities, any adequate theoretical understanding of it must embrace both of these aspects Because innovation implies both technological revolution and technological evolution , a satisfactory innovation model must also move beyond 'a stage-to-stage conception of the innovation process, to a dynamic, continuous conception of change over time' (Van de Ven & Rogers, 1988: 638). Accordingly, building on the literature of innovation processes, as well as drawing on insights from structuration theory, this article aims to develop a model of innovation to re-integrate the schism between the voluntaristic (action) and deterministic (structure) positions of innovation. The model is defined as a technology path, referring to an ongoing process of structuration that is historically constructed by the reciprocal link between action and structure (rules and resources). To describe the model, the article begins by summarizing briefly the core arguments of the innovation process literature that fall into an either/or framework of voluntaristic–deterministic dimension. It then builds on this review to articulate a model in which innovation occurs in the reciprocal action/structure link. It goes on to discuss major arguments and key elements of the …