Technological innovation and public-private sector collaborations: The case of the Advanced Turbine System Program

Public-private sector collaborations are becoming a widely used means of supporting the innovation of technologies used in addressing societal problems and improving U.S. industrial competitiveness. This dissertation examines how the innovation of a complex commercial technology occurred within the Advanced Turbine System (ATS) Program, a U.S. Department of Energy public-private partnership. The ATS Program has successfully led to the commercialization of combined-cycle gas turbine systems that have achieved performance levels well beyond the previous state-of-the-art technology, with a 60 percent operating efficiency and nitrogen oxide emissions less than 10 parts per million.;This dissertation focused on how the turbine manufacturers acquired the capabilities and knowledge within an organizational network that were necessary to advance the technology development that is significantly different from the predecessor technologies in terms of design or performance characteristics. In addition, it examined the role of government in fostering the innovation process. The methodology employed used a combined qualitative and quantitative approach. In the qualitative method, case studies were used to observe how the turbine manufacturers, General Electric (GE) and Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation (SWPC) acquired new capabilities and knowledge that were used in the innovation of the advanced gas turbine technologies. In the quantitative method, patent and citation data were used to measure the knowledge spillovers of new inventions that were developed under the ATS program.;The evidence shows that the ATS Program was successful because it enabled the turbine manufacturers to acquire and create new knowledge from both internal and external resources residing within an organizational network. The evidence also shows that the federal government contributed to the innovation process in three ways, including (1) “filling a gap” due to market failures associated with deregulation and low gas prices, (2) creating a learning environment that supported the knowledge creation process, and (3) supporting university research that was directed towards the needs of industry. The general view was that the program accelerated the technology development 5 to 10 years beyond what would have otherwise occurred.