زمانی که ناپیوستگی های تکنولوژیکی و مدل های کسب و کار مخرب ، منطق های غالب صنعت را به چالش می کشد : بینشهایی از صنعت دارو

An industry's dominant logic is the general scheme of value creation and capture shared by its actors. In high technology fields, technological discontinuities are not enough to disrupt an industry's dominant logic. Identifying the factors that might trigger change in that logic can help companies develop strategies to enable them to capture greater value from their innovations by disrupting that logic. Based on analyzing the changes that biotechnologies and bioinformatics have brought to the drug industry, we identify and characterize three triggers of change that can create disruptive business models. We suggest that, in mature industries experiencing strong discontinuities and high technological uncertainty, entrants' business models initially tend to fit into the industry's established dominant logic and its value chains remain unchanged. But as new technologies evolve and uncertainty decreases, disruptive business models emerge, challenging dominant industry logics and reshaping established value chains.

Biotechnology and bioinformatics have brought strong technological discontinuities to the traditional ways of discovering and developing drugs. Research in technology innovation and management offers multiple definitions of terms around innovation and technology management [101]. Technological discontinuities are “those rare, unpredictable innovations which advance a relevant technological frontier by an order-of-magnitude and which involve fundamentally different product or process design” [7] but – surprisingly – those that have occurred in the drug industry seem (thus far) to have reinforced rather than challenged the positions of industry incumbents: the overall industry logics have not really changed, either in how business is done, or in how diseases are prevented or cured. Scholars have argued that technological discontinuities lead to industry shake-outs that can nullify incumbents' competitive advantages [42], [78] and [79]. An emblematic case was that of digital photography [10] and [63], where the technological discontinuities disrupted the dominant logic of the entire photographic industry and led to the reshaping of its value chain. We define the value chain as “the linked set of value-creating activities all the way through from basic raw material sources for component suppliers to the ultimate end-use product delivered into the final consumer's hands” [38] — and in this case, its reshaping allowed new competitors to enter the industry who introduced new ways of both creating and capturing value. Prahalad and Bettis [73] originally defined dominant logic at the firm level as “the way in which managers conceptualize the business and make critical resource allocation decisions”. A dominant logic can keep organizations focused on the road ahead — or it may act as set of blinkers, restricting managers' peripheral vision [72]. Dominant industry logics evolve and change over time, influencing how strategists conceive their business models and – in some cases – their company business model portfolios [82]. The evolution of dominant logics in high-tech industries has been recognized as being driven by the technologies involved [1]. Industries follow general lifecycles from emergence to maturity [3], which are sometimes disrupted by technological discontinuities that may lead either to the industry's decline, or to a new emergent phase [1]. However, the drug industry, which has been facing several waves of technological discontinuities, does not seem to be following that path when technological discontinuities occur [4], [32], [46] and [75], which questions the notion of drivers of evolution in technology based industries. But when technological discontinuity does not lead to disruptions of its dominant logic, what other forces lead to such change? The aim of this article is twofold: to provide an understanding of the engines that drive the evolution of industry logics, and to propose a complement to current theories [65], [93] and [99] by suggesting that technological discontinuities are not the only trigger for industry evolution. We argue that the convergence of business models from different industries can lead to challenges to dominant logics. While technological discontinuities can initiate industry evolution, business model innovation can also play a central role in driving change in dominant industry logics: so we examine how and why new business models emerge. The pharmaceutical industry has experienced several waves of technological discontinuities, any of which could potentially have led to the emergence of new industry logics. This paper analyzes the triggers of the evolution of the drug industry's dominant logic by interviewing industry experts and analyzing the business models of new entrants. Our findings contribute to understanding the boom, bust and recovery of biotechnology and bioinformatics by following the stories of those promising technologies that encouraged stakeholders to believe in drug industry revolution. For years, entrepreneurial firms failed to deliver the expected financial and scientific performances partly because they found it difficult to fit their business models into existing dominant industry logics in profitable ways [4], [14] and [57]. But now, by testing new business models, young entrepreneurial entrants are renewing the promise of their new technologies. The article first explains the concepts of dominant industry logic and of business models, and provides insights (based on industry lifecycle theory) into the effects of technological discontinuities on mature industries. We then describe our data collection and analysis methods, consider the drug industry's established dominant logic, and analyze the business models of seven young bioinformatics companies. Next, we outline the triggers for change in the industry's dominant logic — new healthcare philosophies, new patterns of collaboration, and new modes of network orchestration and finally discuss our findings and the links between industry evolution and business model innovation.

We can see here the beginnings of a new industry that will emerge from the upheaval of the established drug industry and its merging with the diagnostics and other industries. This observation echoes the findings of a few recent studies [4], [5], [18] and [54], which see the future of drug discovery and development in the convergence of technologies and in the trend towards personalized medicine. During the first phase after new technologies are introduced, the discontinuities they represent are not enough to induce major changes in the industry or to usher in a new logic: the industry logic remains as it was, and new ventures participate in value creation within existing value chain structures. The survival or death of incumbents is not only due to the competence-enhancing or destroying character of technological discontinuities — in fact, during this first phase, technological breakthroughs seem to have reinforced incumbents' positions in this industry. Even in the presence of major technological changes, while business models remain similar, the logic of the industry remains unchanged. But at some point a proliferation of business models emerges that challenge the dominant logic: once these supplant existing business models, new industry logics begin to form. It is business model renewal at the firm level that drives industry evolution — and alliances between entrepreneurial entrants and large external actors appear to be a key break-point in the disruption of the previous dominant logic. When technological discontinuities come from start-ups, the dominant logic of the industry evolves slowly — when they are supported by diversified entrants, we can expect faster and more radical change in dominant logics. Disrupting an industry's dominant logic involves managers creating or reinventing their firms' business models, and this research suggests business model evolution is likely to be progressive, a finding that is again consistent with those of other authors [62] and [85], and which further enriches our understanding of the impact of business model renewal on dominant logic evolution. We suggest that managers should consider the characteristics of the dominant industry logic when proposing alternative or disruptive business models. Our findings argue that the early stages of the introduction of technological discontinuities – which are often characterized by technological uncertainty due to competition, both between new technologies and between them and existing technologies [93] – are less favorable to business model innovation. Our results also indicate the conditions where existing business models could be challenged: where an industry is mature, where profitability is decreasing, where value is created by actors who cannot capture it, and where the possibility exists of allying with powerful external actors. Analyzing the significant factors that impact competition at times of technological discontinuity allows us to propose two managerial implications. First, for incumbents, their ability to compete in nascent markets will be based on their ability to negotiate their specific complementary assets. Managers should try to detect which of these are likely to become significant as the industry evolves, and focus building competence in alliance management – and on managing new networks and alliances – as necessary steps for keeping control of value capture mechanisms. Second, for new entrants, the first step is to conform to the industry's dominant logic of value creation and capture: once their technology has stabilized, they can start deploying new business models challenging one or more of its dimensions: attracting new players from other industries may help them in these disruptive efforts. Both incumbents and new entrants should consider that they must manage a double issue: complying with the existing dominant logic, but at the same time, understanding and investing in its transformation. This empirical and theoretical research shows how potential alternatives to the current dominant logic have triggered and shaped our drug industry setting, showing the outlines of a potential new style of the industry, which offers alternative ways and a more holistic approach to delivering care and preventing diseases. We argue that government policies should now sustain this emerging industry, and take the opportunity to seek a better balance between patients' and business needs.