Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Sustainability Nexus Forum
Erschienen in: NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum | Sustainability Management Forum 3/2015

01.10.2015 | Schwerpunktthema

How stakeholder shape innovation in controversial industries: the biotechnology industry in Germany

verfasst von: Edeltraud Günther, Anne-Karen Hüske

Erschienen in: Sustainability Nexus Forum | Ausgabe 3/2015

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Excerpt

Using biotechnology in Germany as illustrating example we develop a framework to analyse innovation and its social, economic and environmental implications. Stakeholders are identified by combining the five competitive forces of the structural industry analysis with the PESTEL-analysis of political, economic, social, technological, environmental and legal factors of the macro-environment and classified according to power, legitimacy and urgency. Going beyond this classification we derive nine strategies to appropriately respond to those stakes and engage in stakeholder dialogue. The framework facilitates innovation management by focusing on central stakes when analysing innovation and its implications within a complex environment in controversial industries. …
Nächster Artikel Wenn nur gute Argumente helfen

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
Literatur
Achterkamp MC, Vos JFJ (2007) Critically identifying stakeholder: evaluating boundary critique as a vehicle for stakeholder identification. Syst Res Behav Sci 24(1):3–14. doi:10.1002/sres.760CrossRef
Amir-Aslani A, Mangematin V (2010) The future of drug discovery and development: shifting emphasis towards personalized medicine. Technol Forecast Soc Change 77(2):203–217. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2009.09.005CrossRef
Arantes-Oliveira N (2007) A case study on obstacles to the growth of biotechnology. Technol Forecast Soc Change 74(1):61–74. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.003CrossRef
Baeyens K, Vanacker T, Manigart S (2006) Venture capitalists’ selection process: the case of biotechnology proposals. Int J Technol Manag 34(1–2):28–46CrossRef
Bauer T (2013) Regulierung im Dialog: Stakeholdermanagement bei Regierung und Verwaltung. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):149–153. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0272-5
Borch K, Rasmussen B (2005) Refining the debate on GM crops using technological foresight—the Danish experience. Technol Forecast Soc Change 72(5):549–566. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2004.05.003CrossRef
Bradfield R, El-Sayed H (2009) Four scenarios for the future of the pharmaceutical industry. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 21(2):195–212. doi:10.1080/09537320802625280CrossRef
Burt G (2007) Why are we surprised at surprises? Integrating disruption theory and system analysis with the scenario methodology to help identify disruptions and discontinuities. Technol Forecast Soc Change 74(6):731–749. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2006.08.010CrossRef
Cai Y, Jo H, Pan C (2012) Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. J Bus Ethics 108(4):467–480. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-1103-7CrossRef
Calleja I, Delgado L, Eder P, Kroll A, Lindblom J, van Wunnik C et al (2004) Promoting environmental technologies: sectoral analyses, barriers and measure. A report from the Sustainable Production and Consumption Issue Group as a Contribution to the Environmental Technologies Action Plan. European Commission
Chataway J, Tait J, Wield D (2006) The governance of agro- and pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation: public policy and industrial strategy. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 18(2):169–185. doi:10.1080/09537320600624063CrossRef
Clarkson ME (1995) A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad Manage Rev 20(1):92–117
Commission of the European Communities (2003) Life sciences and biotechnology—a strategy for Europe: progress report and future orientations. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Commitee. Brüssel
Coriat B, Orsi F, Weinstein O (2003) Does biotech reflect a new science-based innovation regime? Ind Innov 10(3):231–253CrossRef
Costa-Font J, Mossialos E (2006) The public as a limit to technology transfer: the influence of knowledge and beliefs in attitudes towards biotechnology in the UK. J Technol Transf 31(6):629–645. doi: 10.1007/s10961-006-0019-3
Cummings JL, Doh JP (2000) Identifying who matters: mapping key players in multiple environments. Calif Manage Rev 42(2):83–104CrossRef
Datamonitor (2010) Biotechnology industry profile: Germany. Datamonitor Plc. London
DIN SPEC 35810: 2013 Stakeholder engagement—guidelines for decision making process dealing with climate change
Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad Manage Rev 20(1):65–91. doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9503271992
European Commission (2002) Life sciences and biotechnology—a strategy for Europe. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
Fassin Y (2009) The stakeholder model refined. J Bus Ethics 84(1):113–135. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9677-4CrossRef
Fifka MS (2013) The irony of stakeholder management in Germany: the difficulty of implementing an essential concept for CSR. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):113–118. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0268-1
Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston
Freeman RE (2004) The stakeholder approach revisited. Z Wirtsch Unternehmensethik 5(3):228–241
Frey BS, Foppa K (1986) Human behavior: possibilities explain action. J Econ Psychol 7(2):137–160. doi:10.1016/0167-4870(86)90001-2CrossRef
Friedrich C (2013) Nachhaltigkeitskommunikation als Motor für die Weiterentwicklung von Stakeholder-Dialogen. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):39–43. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0278-z
Geels FW, Pieters T, Snelders S (2007) Cultural enthusiasm, resistance and the societal embedding of new technologies: psychotropic drugs in the 20th century. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 19(2):145–165. doi:10.1080/09537320601168052CrossRef
Gibbons M (1999) Science’s new social contract with society. Nature 402(6761):C81CrossRef
Green K (2002) Biotechnology, people and markets. New Genet Soc 21(2):199–212. doi:10.1080/1463677022000007014CrossRef
Hall JK, Martin MJC (2005) Disruptive technologies, stakeholders and the innovation value-added chain: a framework for evaluating radical technology development. R&D Manage 35(3):273–284. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2005.00389.xCrossRef
Harrison JS, Bosse DA, Phillips RA (2010) Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strateg Manage J 31(1):58–74CrossRef
Hsu Y, Shyu JZ, Tzeng G (2005) Policy tools on the formation of new biotechnology firms in Taiwan. Technovation 25(3):281–292. doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00078-6CrossRef
Kranich J (2008) The spatial dynamics of the European biotech industry—a NEG approach with vertical linkages. J Bus Chem 5(1):23–38
MarketLine (2013) Biotechnology in Germany. MarketLine, London
Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manage Rev 22(4):853–886. doi:10.5465/AMR.1997.9711022105
Moutchnik A (2013) Im Glaslabyrinth der Kommunikation. Der Dialog mit Stakeholdern über Umwelt, Nachhaltigkeit und CSR in Social Media. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):19–37. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0286-z
Müller C (2002) The evolution of the biotechnology industry in Germany. Trends Biotechnol 20(7):287–290. doi:10.1016/S0167-7799(02)01966-2CrossRef
Nawroth C (2013) CSR and sustainability in times of crisis: are consumers voting with their wallets and are companies putting their money where their mouth is? Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):75–81. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0273-4
Parker DD, Zilberman D (1995) Biotechnology and the future of agriculture and natural resources—an overview. Technol Forecast Soc Change 50(1):1–7. doi:10.1016/0040-1625(95)00062-FCrossRef
Pedersen AGJ, Lagergaard D, Sanderhoff M (2013) Der Stakeholderdialog in Geschäftsberichten. Eine Analyse der dargestellten Dialogbereitschaft europäischer Energieunternehmen. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):97–104. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0271-6
Phillips R (2003) Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco
Poole MS, van de Ven AH (2004) Handbook of organizational change and innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Porter ME (1980) Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Free Press, New York
Porter ME (2008) The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harv Bus Rev 86(1):78–93
Porter ME, Kramer MR (2006) Strategy & society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92
Post JE, Preston LE, Sachs S (2002) Managing the extended enterprise: the new stakeholder view. Calif Manage Rev 45(1):6–28CrossRef
Pratt N, Beckers S, Wagner T (2013) Verbrauchergerechte CSR-Kommunikation. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):65–73. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0283-2
Riede M (2013) Determinanten erfolgreicher Stakeholderdialoge. Erfolgsfaktoren von Dialogverfahren zwischen Unternehmen und Nicht-Regierungsorganisationen. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):45–50. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0276-1
Royer S, Waterhouse J, Brown K, Festing M (2008) Employee voice and strategic competitive advantage in international modern public corporations—an economic perspective. Eur Manage J 26(4):234–246. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2008.03.002CrossRef
Sager B (2001) Scenarios on the future of biotechnology. Technol Forecast Soc Change 68(2):109–129. doi:10.1016/S0040-1625(00)00107-4CrossRef
Savage GT, Nix TW, Whitehead CJ, Blair JD (1991) Strategies for assessing and managing organizational stakeholders. Acad Manage Rev 5(2):61–75
Schawe C (2013) Intersektorale Kooperationen als Strategie der CSR-Kommunikation – Die Volkswagen-NABU Kooperation. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):145–148. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0274-3
Schreiber D (2013) Chancen für eine nachhaltige Unternehmensentwicklung: Dialog im Internet auf der Drehscheibe Nachhaltigkeit. Umw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):83–88. doi:10.1007/s00550-013-0275-2
Smith HL, Bagchi-Sen S (2006) University-industry interactions: the case of the UK biotech industry. Ind Innov 13(4):371–392. doi:10.1080/13662710601032697CrossRef
Spanos YE, Lioukas S (2001) An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter’s competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective. Strateg Manage J 22(10):907–934. doi:10.1002/smj.174CrossRef
Spence LJ, Coles A, Harris L (2001) The forgotten stakeholder? Ethics and social responsibility in relation to competitors. Bus Soc Rev 106(4):331–352CrossRef
Suchman MC (1995) Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Acad Manage Review 20(3):571–610
Tait J (2007) Systemic interactions in life science innovation. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 19(3):257–277. doi:10.1080/09537320701281524CrossRef
van Beuzekom B, Arundel A (2006) OECD biotechnology statistics 2006. OECD Publishing, Paris
Vergragt PJ, Brown HS (2008) Genetic engineering in agriculture: new approaches for risk management through sustainability reporting. Technol Forecast Soc Change 75(6):783–798. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2007.05.003CrossRef
Walsh V, Lodorfos G (2002) Technological and organizational innovation in chemicals and related products. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 14(3):273–298. doi:10.1080/0953732022000002113CrossRef
Waxenberger B, Spence LJ (2003) Reinterpretation of a metaphor: from stakes to claims. Strateg Change 12(5):239–249. doi:10.1002/jsc.638CrossRef
Windolph SE, Hörisch J, Harms D, Schaltegger S (2013) Mehr Partizipation wagen? Wirkungen und Potenziale einer intensiven Einbindung von Stakeholdern in Unternehmen. mw Wirtsch Forum 21(1–2):119–126. doi:10.1007/s00550-012-0264-x
Wydra S (2011) Production and employment impacts of biotechnology—input–output analysis for Germany. Technol Forecast Soc Change 78(7):1200–1209. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.002CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
How stakeholder shape innovation in controversial industries: the biotechnology industry in Germany
verfasst von
Edeltraud Günther
Anne-Karen Hüske
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Sustainability Nexus Forum / Ausgabe 3/2015
Print ISSN: 2948-1619
Elektronische ISSN: 2948-1627
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-014-0343-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2015

NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum | Sustainability Management Forum 3/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Aus Forschung und Praxis

Studie „E-Schrott Recycling in Rheinland-Pfalz“

Schwerpunktthema

Wenn nur gute Argumente helfen

Schwerpunktthema

Ressourceneffizienz mit FIM zur Fertigung von 3D- Faserformteilen

Schwerpunktthema

Ein Ideenlabor für Nachhaltigkeit: Forschendes Lernen im berufsbegleitende Masterstudiengang Strategisches Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement

Schwerpunktthema

Virtuelle Akademie Nachhaltigkeit – Jeder kann Nachhaltigkeit lernen!

Schwerpunktthema

Unternehmerische Klimawandelrisiken – Eine Sektor übergreifende Analyse auf der Grundlage von CDP Klima-Berichterstattungen