Few studies have considered the creation of health technology organizations where the entrepreneurs seize opportunities, create their entrepreneurial organization and provide it with legitimacy, and examined the triggers, constraints and pressures involved in this process. To study the emergence of such firms, we performed semistructured interviews with 20 entrepreneurs and strategic partners involved in the development and commercialization of health technologies. For each stage of the firm emergence process, we identified triggers and enablers, as well as barriers and constraints encountered by entrepreneurs, and pressures originating from institutional actors. We found that each stage of startup emergence had triggers where the entrepreneur faced a conflicting situation in the form of boundary misalignment, competing technologies, poor performances, and resource asymmetry. Each topic is examined in the light of neo-institutional theory and finally replaced within a larger process in which the entrepreneur addresses market and healthcare system needs and interacts with other actors. In each stage, we identified a predominant institutional process taking place, whether it was decoupling, organizational field influence or legitimation seeking. The present study aimed at understanding the process by which an opportunity is seized, an organization is created and an institution as big as a healthcare system is approached. The results may help entrepreneurs and decisionmakers understand the strategies engaged following pressures from the healthcare organization. Likewise, it could increase investors’ awareness of the emergence process of health tech businesses and stimulate mutual understanding between entrepreneurs, and economic and healthcare actors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Barber, D. H., & Crelinsten, J. (2009). Understanding the early-stage and start-up R&D performing firms. (pp. 43): The Impact Group.
Barnett, J., Vasileiou, K., Djemil, F., Brooks, L., & Young, T. (2011). Understanding innovators' experiences of barriers and facilitators in implementation and diffusion of healthcare service innovations: A qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research, 11(1), 342. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-342.
Bartel, C. A., & Garud, R. (2009). The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation. [article]. Organization Science, 20(1), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0372.
Basdeo, D. K., Smith, K. G., Grimm, C. M., Rindova, V. P., & Derfus, P. J. (2006). The impact of market actions on firm reputation. [article]. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1205–1219. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.556.
Battista, R. N., & Lafortune, L. (2009). Health technology assessment and public health: A time for convergence. European Journal of Public Health, 19(3), 227. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckp054.
Beaulieu, M., & Lehoux, P. (2018). Emerging health technology firms’strategies and their impact on economicand healthcare system actors: a qualitative study. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 77(11), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-018-0092-5.
Beckert, J. (1999). Agency, entrepreneurs, and institutional change. The role of strategic choice and institutionalized practices in organizations. [article]. Organization Studies, 20(5), 777–799. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840699205004.
Bergsland, J., Elle, O. J., & Fosse, E. (2014). Barriers to medical device innovation. Medical Devices (Auckland), 7, 205–209. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S43369.
Callon, M. (1988). La science et ses réseaux. Paris, France: Éditions. La Découverte.
Christensen, C. M. (2011). The innovator's dilemna. New York, NY: Harper Business.
Clemens, E. S., & Cook, J. M. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. [review]. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.441.
Collins, D. (1996). New paradigms for change? Theories of organization and the organization of theories. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(4), 9–23.
Colomy, P. (1998). Neofunctionalism and neoinstitutionalism: Human agency and interest in institutional change. [article; proceedings paper]. Sociological Forum, 13(2), 265–300. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022193816858.
Cooper, D. J., Ezzamel, M., & Willmott, H. (2006). Examining "institutionalization": A critical theoretic perspective. In O. Greenwood, Sahlin, Suddaby, eds (Ed.), The Sage handbook of organisational institutionalism (pp. 673–701). Londres, Royaume-Uni: Sage.
Daniel, G., Colvin, H., Khaterzai, S., McClellan, M., & Aurora, P. (2015). Strengthening patient care: Building an effective national medical device surveillance system. (pp. 75). Washington, DC: Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings.
Davidsson, P. (2015). Entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurship nexus: A re-conceptualization. [article]. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 674–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2015.01.002.
Dea, N., Fisher, C. G., Batke, J., Strelzow, J., Mendelsohn, D., Paquette, S. J., et al. (2016). Economic evaluation comparing intraoperative cone beam CT-based navigation and conventional fluoroscopy for the placement of spinal pedicle screws: A patient-level data cost-effectiveness analysis. [article]. Spine Journal, 16(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.062.
Demko, P. (2014). How healthcare's Washington lobbying machine gets the job done. http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20141004/MAGAZINE/310049987. Accessed December 22 2016.
Dimaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 3–21). Pensacola, FL: Ballinger Pub Co.
Dimaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101.
Dorado, S. (2005). Institutional entrepreneurship, partaking, and convening. [article; proceedings paper]. Organization Studies, 26(3), 385–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605050873.
Drummond, M., Griffin, A., & Tarricone, R. (2009). Economic evaluation for devices and drugs-same or different? Value in Health, 12(4), 402–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00476_1.x.
Fligstein, N. (1997). Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(4), 397–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764297040004003.
Flyvberg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Garud, R., Jain, S., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of sun Microsystems and Java. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069292.
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. [article]. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151.
Giorno, G. W., & Meunier, P. B. (2015). New lobbyists’ code will restrict dealings with Canada’s federal government and agencies. http://www.fasken.com/new-lobbyists-code-will-restrict-dealings-with-canadas-federal-government-and-agencies/#_ftn1. Accessed December 22 2016.
Girling, A., Young, T., Brown, C., & Lilford, R. (2010). Early-stage valuation of medical devices: The role of developmental uncertainty. Value in Health, 13(5), 585–591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00726.x.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
Glasziou, P. (2012). Health technology assessment: An evidence-based medicine perspective. [article]. Medical Decision Making, 32(1), E20–E24.
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022–1054. https://doi.org/10.2307/259163.
Greenwood, R., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 27–48.
Greenwood, R., Suddaby, R., & Hinings, C. R. (2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized fields. [article]. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 58–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069285.
Hallet, T., & Ventresca, M. (2006). How institutions form: Loose coupling as mechanism in Gouldner's patterns of industrial bureaucracy. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 908–924.
Hatch, M. J., & AL, C. (2006). Organization theory. Modern symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Havighurst, C. C. (2008). Disruptive innovation: The demand side. Health Affairs (Millwood), 27(5), 1341–1344. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.5.1341.
Herzlinger, R. E. (2006). Why innovation in health care is so hard. Harvard Business Review, 84(5), 58–66 156.
de Holan, P. M., & Phillips, N. (2002). Managing in transition - a case study of institutional management and organizational change. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11(1), 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492602111022.
Hwang, J., & Christensen, C. M. (2008). Disruptive innovation in health care delivery: A framework for business-model innovation. Health Affairs (Millwood), 27(5), 1329–1335. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.5.1329.
Keppler, S. B., Olaru, M., & Marin, G. (2015). Fostering entrepreneurial investment decision in medical technology ventures in a changing environment. [article]. Amfiteatru Economic, 17(38), 390–407.
Lawrence, T. B. (1999). Institutional strategy. [article]. Journal of Management, 25(2), 161–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500203.
Lawrence, T. B., Leca, B., & Zilber, T. B. (2013). Institutional work: Current research, new directions and overlooked issues. [article]. Organization Studies, 34(8), 1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613495305.
Leca, B., Battilana, J., & Boxenbaum, E. (2008). Agency and institutions: A review of institutional entrepreneurship. In Harvard Business School Working Paper: Harvard Business School.
Lehoux, P., Williams-Jones, B., Miller, F., Urbach, D., & Tailliez, S. (2008). What leads to better health care innovation? Arguments for an integrated policy-oriented research agenda. Journal of Health Services Research Policy, 13(4), 251–254. https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2008.007173.
Llopis, O., & D'Este, P. (2016). Beneficiary contact and innovation: The relation between contact with patients and medical innovation under different institutional logics. [article]. Research Policy, 45(8), 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.004.
Lounsbury, M. (2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 289–307.
Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2004). Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDA treatment advocacy in Canada. [article]. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 657–679.
Martin, J. L., & Barnett, J. (2012). Integrating the results of user research into medical device development: Insights from a case study. [article]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 12, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-12-74.
Martin, J., Polisena, J., Dendukuri, N., Rhainds, M., & Sampietro-Colom, L. (2016). Local health technology assessment in Canada: Current state and next steps. [article]. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 32(3), 175–180. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462316000210.
Metrick, A., & Yasuda, A. (2010). Venture capital and the finance of innovation (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550.
Miller, D. (2015). A downside to the entrepreneurial personality? [editorial material]. Entrepreneurship. Theory and Practice, 39(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12130.
Miller, F. A., & French, M. (2016). Organizing the entrepreneurial hospital: Hybridizing the logics of healthcare and innovation. [article]. Research Policy, 45(8), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.009.
Nanda, R., & Rhodes-Kropf, M. (2012). Investment cycles and startup innovation. (pp. 56): Harvard Business School.
Oakes, L. S., Townley, B., & Cooper, D. J. (1998). Business planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field. [article]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(2), 257–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393853.
Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada (2015). Lobbyists' Code of Conduct. https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/eic/site/012.nsf/eng/h_00014.html. Accessed December 22 2016.
Oliver, C. (1988). The collective strategy framework - an application to competing predictions of isomorphism. [article]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(4), 543–561. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392643.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. [article]. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179. https://doi.org/10.2307/258610.
Organisation mondiale de la Santé. (2010). Landscape analysis of barriers to developing or adapting technologies for global health purposes. In World Health Organization (Ed.), Global initiative on health technologies. Geneva: Organisation mondiale de la Santé.
Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2008). Networks and Institutions In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 822). Londres, Royaume-Uni: SAGE Publications.
Perkmann, M., & Spicer, A. (2007). Healing the scars of history': Projects, skills and field strategies in institutional entrepreneurship. [article; proceedings paper]. Organization Studies, 28(7), 1101–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607078116.
Petkova, A. P., Rindova, V. P., & Gupta, A. (2013). No news is bad news: Sensegiving activities, media attention, and venture capital funding of new technology organizations. Organization Science, 24(3), 865–888.
Rao, H., Morrill, C., & Zald, M. N. (2000). Power plays: How social movements and collective action create new organizational forms. In B. M. Staw & R. I. Sutton (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol 22, 2000: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews (Vol. 22, pp. 237–281, research in organizational behavior). San Diego, CA: Jai-Elsevier Science.
Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2003). Institutional change in toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108(4), 795–843.
Rice, R. E., & Aydin, C. (1991). Attitudes toward new organizational technology: Network proximity as a mechanism for social information processing. [article]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), 219–244. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393354.
Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. [article]. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1033–1049.
Rindova, V. P., Petkova, A. P., & Kotha, S. (2007). Standing out: How new firms in emerging markets build reputation. [article]. Strategic Organization, 5(1), 31–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127006074389.
Sanders, C., Rogers, A., Bowen, R., Bower, P., Hirani, S., Cartwright, M., et al. (2012). Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the whole system demonstrator trial: A qualitative study. [article]. BMC Health Services Research, 12, 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-220.
Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 643–671.
Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Seo, M. G., & Creed, W. E. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. [article]. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 222–247. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.6588004.
Sherer, P. D., & Lee, K. (2002). Institutional change in large law firms: A resource dependency and institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069287.
Silva, H. P., & Viana, A. L. (2011). Health technology diffusion in developing countries: A case study of CT scanners in Brazil. Health Policy and Planning, 26(5), 385–394. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czq076.
Snowdon, A., & Cohen, J. (2011). Strengthening health systems through innovation: Lessons learned. Ivey International Centre for Health Innovation.
Snowdon, A., Zur, R., & Shell, J. (2011). Transforming Canada into a global Centre for medical device innovation and adoption. Ivey International Centre for Health Innovation.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788.
Tarabusi, C. C., & Vickery, G. (1998). Globalization in the pharmaceutical industry, part II. [article]. International Journal of Health Services, 28(2), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.2190/b6vr-nnd7-46bl-py5g.
Taylor, R. S., & Iglesias, C. P. (2009). Assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of medical devices and drugs: Are they that different? Value in Health, 12(4), 402–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00476_2.x.
Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. [article]. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 172–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.003.
Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal-structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil-service reform, 1880-1935. [article]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392383.
Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). The institutionnalization of institutional theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 175–190). London: SAGE Publications.
Tracey, P., Phillips, N., & Jarvis, O. (2011). Bridging institutional entrepreneurship and the creation of new organizational forms: A multilevel model. Organization Science, 22(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0522.
Trigub-Clover, A., & Lamarche, P. A. (2009). La coexistence des secteurs privé et public et la performance des systèmes de soins de Santé In L. P. d. l. U. d. Montréal (Ed.), Le privé dans la santé: un débat sans fin? (pp. 206–223). Montréal, QC: Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal.
Vendeville, G. (2015). Five things to know about Bill 10. http://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/bill-10-in-5-questions. Accessed December 22 2016.
World Health Organization (2010). Innovative technologies that address global health concerns: Outcome of the call global initiative on health technologies. In World Health Organization (Ed.). Geneva: World Health Organization.
Yang, C. W., Fang, S. C., & Huang, W. M. (2007). Isomorphic pressures, institutional strategies, and knowledge creation in the health care sector. [article]. Health Care Management Review, 32(3), 263–270.
Zilber, T. B. (2002). Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings and actors: The case of a rape crisis center in Israel. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 234–254.
I thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their many insightful comments, as these comments led to an improvement of the manuscript.
The author declares that there are no competing interests.
Appendix 1. Interview Questionnaire
Appendix 1. Interview Questionnaire
How can innovative health firms satisfy economic and health system actors by socially constructing themselves in its organizational field?
What is your position in the organization?
What is your training (studies, specialties)?
How long have you worked for this organization?
What is your involvement in the evaluation or use of innovations in health?
In your opinion, what are the key issues affecting the financing, development, evaluation or use of innovations in health?
Part 1 – Market Actions
The companies that market new technologies attempt to directly or indirectly influence the choice of adoption of their product. Which of the following market actions do you think might influence the acquisition of your technology, and why? As an example, you receive information about competitive actions such as (see Table 5).
Do you find that regulatory agencies (e.g., Health Canada) and / or professional associations (e.g. College of Physicians, American Heart Association) have too much say in the process of adoption and diffusion of innovation?
Do you think that too many stakeholders (a lot of decision levels, physicians, third-party payers, managers, shareholders) are involved in the innovation diffusion process? Do you think some actors impedes the process, the health system and/or the sustainability of innovation?
Part 2 – Institutional logic
What methods do you use to identify and define opportunities and needs from the healthcare system?
How do you combine your value proposition to the dynamics of a universal healthcare system? For example, do you need to develop specific business models or think “outside the box”?
On what basis did you develop your practice and your business so that it responds to health needs while being successful and profitable?
How do you explain and justify your value proposition to investors and decision makers knowing the desires of these actors can vary and even contradict each other?
How do you connect to your business logic to competitive actions oriented towards external actors?
How do you connect to your business logic to social intentions oriented external actors?
Part 3 – Disruptive innovations, startups and media coverage
Do you evaluate your relationships with other actors when your technology is a disruptive innovation (e.g. innovations which can be refocused and adapted to existing markets, or targeted for new markets, can these technologies change the rules of the market) compared to an incremental innovation? For example, in our research, a health innovation was considered “disruptive” because it consisted of risk management software for childbirth and was aimed at the obstetrician market (who had never previously used such a tool).
Similarly, do you think the response is different for emerging companies, compared with established companies with proven records?
Do you think the other actors are influenced by the media coverage of your innovation, whether by journalist interpretation or the scale of media coverage?
About this article
Cite this article
Beaulieu, M., Lehoux, P. The emergence of health technology organizations among institutional healthcare and economic actors. Int Entrep Manag J 15, 1115–1151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0551-2
- Innovation in health
- Institutional entrepreneurship
- Neo-institutional theory
- Health technologies
- Competitive actions
- Social construction