Phenomena
supporting technocapitalism
The
phenomena supporting the rise of technocapitalism are of two basic types. One typology includes macro phenomena
related to long-term accumulation. A second
typology includes micro phenomena involving processes of diffusion and
generation at the level of organizations and individuals.
The macro phenomena
The macro
phenomena are found at the societal level, they are collective and structural,
and are best understood from a long-term perspective. These phenomena are largely out of the control of any single
institution, organization or group of individuals. Together, they form a macro platform from which technocapitalism
is emerging.
The rapid accumulation of inventions has been a major macro phenomenon supporting technocapitalism. The number of inventions patented during the second half of the twentieth century increased to levels never seen before in human history. This unprecedented surge of inventive creativity has been a major cause of the rise of technocapitalism.
The higher the
number of patented inventions, the larger the stock of patents that can
potentially be used for some economic or social purpose. Intellectual property of new ideas and discoveries
became more valuable than ever during the second half of the twentieth
century. This phenomenon provided a
substantial increase in the societal innovative capacity that resulted in the
technological advancement of many fields (for insights on innovative capacity
and its effects, please visit www.innovativecapacity.com).
Second, the rapid
massification of education during the second half of the twentieth century, and
particularly technological education, was another macro phenomenon supporting
the rise of technocapitalism. After the
mid-1940s, access to higher education came to be regarded as a right in many
nations. Enrollment in higher education
in science and technology fields expanded as never before. Now, a new frontier of massification, the
spread of Internet-based distance learning programs, is taking this
massification process farther than anyone could imagine barely a decade ago.
The third macro
phenomenon supporting technocapitalism is the unprecedented accumulation of
infrastructure, both physical and intangible, during the second half of the
twentieth century. The construction of
physical infrastructure involving educational facilities, laboratories and
communications, for example, reached unprecedented levels, supporting the
massification process noted above.
Similarly, the development of intangible infrastructure, such as the
formation of communities and local networks supportive of inventors and their
lifestyles, became more obvious than ever.
The importance of
infrastructure is often ignored or taken for granted in most accounts of
technological change. However, its
support of invention and innovation is a fundamental one. Without the appropriate infrastructure, none
of the macro or micro phenomena supporting the emergence of technocapitalism
could operate effectively.
A
fourth macro phenomenon is a new geography of invention and innovation,
involving radical changes from previous times.
The second half of the twentieth century saw in the United States a
process whereby previously peripheral or undeveloped areas became the most
important sources of invention and innovation.
At the same time, the prior predominant national sources of invention
declined and were overshadowed by the new areas. Areas in Sunbelt states, such as Silicon Valley, Southern California, Eastern
Texas, North Carolina and Northern Virginia, among others, became the most
important national sources of invention and innovation. In the short span of four decades they
displaced the previously predominant areas of Eastern New York, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts and Illinois.
This radical process of regional inversion was in part a product of the rapid accumulation of inventions, infrastructure, and the massification of education noted earlier (for insights on this phenomenon, please visit www.regionalinversion.com). Internal population migration toward Sunbelt states, along with the immigration of highly skilled groups, helped this process. Military research and related activities in some Sunbelt states also contributed. The massive shift in the geographical sourcing of invention and innovation resulting from this process has not been replicated so far by any other nation in the world. It therefore remains an American phenomenon. Perhaps in coming decades we might witness a similar process of regional inversion in other nations.
The micro phenomena
The micro
phenomena involve processes of diffusion and generation of knowledge that can
lead to invention and innovation. They
occur largely at the level of organizations and individuals. Together, they constitute the micro-level
platform that supports the emergence of technocapitalism.
The
rapid diffusion of knowledge experienced during the second half of the
twentieth century is a major phenomenon supporting technocapitalism. Knowledge became easier to diffuse and acquire
than ever before, thanks largely to the massification of education discussed
earlier. The diffusion of technological
knowledge, confined mostly to elites in previous times, thus became a mass
activity.
Despite its
massive scope, the diffusion of knowledge remains largely a function of
organizations and individuals.
Knowledge, unlike information, usually requires much effort,
persistence, long periods of time to be acquired, and it confers in many cases
a lasting advantage. The second half of
the twentieth century, moreover, saw new inventions being put to work, such as
computers and the Internet, that made it easier and faster than ever for
organizations and individuals to diffuse new knowledge.
Second, the corporatization of invention and the rising importance attached to corporate R&D (research and development) became another micro phenomenon supporting the rise of technocapitalism. The rate of individual invention stagnated during the second half of the twentieth century, but corporate invention surged to levels never seen before in history. Thus, the rapid accumulation of inventions of the second half of the twentieth century was largely a corporate phenomenon.
The innovative
capacity of organizations increased to unprecedented levels during the last
decades of the twentieth century, due to the increasing importance of
R&D. This development is, in part,
behind the emergence of a new organizational form, the experimental firm, that
is a distinctive feature of technocapitalism.
Experimental firms are overwhelmingly focused on research, and depend
mostly on their discoveries for survival.
The experimental firm is therefore a product of the rising importance of
corporate R&D.
The third micro phenomenon supporting the rise of technocapitalism is the spread of continuous (or systematized) invention and innovation. This phenomenon has become most obvious in the new sectors that are representative of technocapitalism, such as biotechnology, software, nanotechnology and bioinformatics. This is in part a result of the corporatization of invention and the rising importance of R&D. Although most continuous innovation has occurred in corporate R&D units, the basic features of this phenomenon now seem to be spilling over into other corporate activities, including services. Thus, generating a continuous stream of novelty is becoming an important objective for some of the most common activities of our time.
Fourth, the rapid
reproduction of creativity is another micro-level feature supporting
technocapitalism. Technological
creativity is not a constant attribute.
It must be inspired, replenished and sustained in individuals and
organizations searching for new discoveries.
This unremitting renewal can be called reproduction, and it is not too
different from the similarly named process that takes place in nature.
This most difficult of human endeavors now occurs mostly in organizations. In the organizations typical of technocapitalism, practices to improve and sustain the reproduction of creativity are a vital necessity. This imperative has led to new forms of organizing and managing internal activities, that are quite different from those used in the organizations that were typical of industrial capitalism. Those new ways of managing the reproduction of creativity can be found in the experimental firms that are typical of technocapitalism. Reproducing creativity is one of the most important objectives of those firms.
The rising importance of networks is the fifth micro phenomenon supporting the rise of technocapitalism. Networks are vital for reproducing creativity and continuous invention, and also for diffusing new knowledge. A major factor here is that most organizations cannot hope to possess internally all the expertise and other resources needed to reproduce creativity and sustain continuous invention.
The
expertise needed to reproduce creativity and sustain continuous invention has
become more complex and multidisciplinary than ever, and the accompanying
hardware more costly. Therefore,
organizations must reach out to find external resources through networks. The rising importance of alliances, joint
ventures and outsourcing arrangements in many activities is an effect of this
phenomenon.
Networks and the
Internet are also leveling the playing field for invention and innovation. They are diluting the oligarchic power of
many large, established organizations on the sectors they control, letting new
and more innovative firms move in with new discoveries and ideas. As a result, more inventions and innovations
are able to find practical uses.
Some of the
phenomena supporting technocapitalism, or their effects, will be discussed in
greater detail in other sections of this website.
For publications on these phenomena and related topics by this author, please see the Publications section of this website.
Copyright © Luis Suarez-Villa