No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Selling Silicon Valley: Frederick Terman's Model for Regional Advantage
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2011
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
This paper explores the origins of the Silicon Valley model for regional economic development, and attempts to deploy this model elsewhere in the United States and abroad. Frederick Terman, Stanford's provost, first envisioned its unique partnership of academia and industry, and trained the first generation of students who effected it. He patiently cultivated an aggressively entrepreneurial culture in what he called “the newly emerging community of technical scholars.” Beginning in the 1960s, business groups elsewhere set out to build their own versions of Silicon Valley, some enlisting the assistance of Terman and his proteges. After discussing the emergence of the Stanford-Silicon Valley effort, the paper examines in detail the New Jersey Institute of Science and Technology, an effort led by Bell Laboratories; the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest and the SMU Foundaton for Science and Engineering in Dallas, Texas; and the Korea Advanced Insitute of Science and Technology, Terman's last and arguably most successful attempt. The paper discusses the reasons for the difficulties in creating new versions, and suggests explanations for the apparent success of the Korean experiment.
Information
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1996
References
1 Findlay, John M., Magic Lands: Western Cityscapes and American Culture After 1940 (Berkeley, Calif., 1992), 117.Google Scholar Findlay provides a perceptive overview of Silicon Valley's history, set against a background of western city building and myth making.
2 Terman, Frederick, “The Newly Emerging Community of Technical Scholars,” in Colorado and the New Technological Revolution: Proceedings of the University-Industry Liaison Conference, ed. Miernyk, William (Boulder, Colo., 1963).Google Scholar
3 Packard, David, The HP Way: How Bill Hewlett and I Built Our Company (New York, 1995), 195–99.Google Scholar
4 Ibid., 44–15.
5 Ibid., 50–51.
6 See Carlson, W. Bernard, “Academic Entrepreneurship and Engineering Education: Dugald Jackson and the MIT-GE Cooperative Engineering Course, 1907–1932,” Technology and Culture 29 (July 1988): 536–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Servos, John, “The Industrial Relations of Science: Chemical Engineering at MIT, 1900–1939,” Isis 71 (1980): 531–49Google Scholar; and Noble, David, America By Design (New York, 1977).Google Scholar
7 For the prewar electronics industry in northern California, see Norberg, Arthur, “The Origins of the Electronics Industry on the Pacific Coast,” Proceedings of the IEEE 64 (Sept. 1976): 1314–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 See Leslie, Stuart W., “How the West was Won: The Military in the Making of Silicon Valley,” in Technological Competitiveness: Contemporary and Historical Perspectives on the Electrical, Electronics, and Computer Industries, ed. Aspray, William (New York, 1993), 75–89.Google Scholar
9 Cited in Leslie, Stuart W., The Cold War and American Science: The Military-Industrial-Academic Complex (New York, 1993), 55.Google Scholar
10 For the genesis and the subsequent growth of Varian Associates, see Ginzton, Edward, “The $100 Idea,” IEEE Spectrum 10 (Feb. 1975): 30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Varian, Dorothy, The Pilot and the Inventor (Palo Alto, Calif., 1983)Google Scholar; and Varian: 25 Years, 1948–1973 (Palo Alto, Calif, 1973).
11 Packard, The HP Way, 62–65.
12 Luger, Michael and Goldstein, Harvey, Technology in the Garden: Research Parks and Regional Economic Development (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1991), 121ffGoogle Scholar, offer the best overview of the Stanford Research Park.
13 Leslie, “How the West was Won,” 77–82.
14 Packard, The HP Way, 61–62 and Saxenian, , Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994), 47–48.Google Scholar
15 Saxenian, Regional Advantage, 50–57.
16 Pierce, John R. and Tressler, Arthur, The Research State: A History of Science in New Jersey (Princeton, N.J., 1964).Google Scholar
17 “Falling Behind,” Newark Evening News (27 Sept. 1966), clipping in William O. Baker Papers, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, New Jersey. We would like to thank Dr. Baker for giving us access to his personal papers on IST.
18 Richard KixMiller, “Institute for Science and Technology—An Opportunity and a Challenge,” Remarks to a joint meeting of the North New Jersey Section of the American Chemical Society, 26 Sept. 1966 (Frederick Terman Papers, Series XIII, Department of Special Collections, Stanford University).
19 Kilbon, Kenyon, “Pioneering in Electronics: A Short History of the Origins and Growth of RCA Laboratories, Radio Corporation of America, 1919–1964,” (unpublished ms., 1964)Google Scholar, kindly made available to us by Margaret B. W. Graham.
20 Liebowitz, Jay M., “Flexible Corporate Structures: The Management of Systems Engineering in Bell Laboratories,” (master's thesis, The Johns Hopkins University, 1984), 74ff.Google Scholar
21 Sidney Millman, “Institute for Science and Technology, 1966,” Baker Papers.
22 Frederick Terman, “Institute for Science and Technology in New Jersey: The Dimensions of the University,” 15 June 1966, Terman Papers, Series XIII.
23 “The Case for Industrial Sponsorship,” Institute for Science and Technology,” Baker Papers.
24 “Presidential Possibilities,” Industry Committee meeting, 14 Aug. 1966, Terman Papers.
25 Benjamin Lax to Sidney Millman, 14 March 1967, Baker Papers.
26 “Minutes of the Meeting of the Industry Council of the Institute for Science and Technology,” 2 Nov. 1966, Baker Papers.
27 Florida, Richard and Kenney, Martin, The Breakthrough Illusion: Corporate America's Failure to Move From Innovation to Mass Production (New York, 1990), pp. 178–181Google Scholar, point out how the structure and membership costs of research consortia like SEMATECH “price out” start-up companies.
28 “IST Affiliation Possibilities,” Baker Papers.
29 Lowood, Henry, “From Steeples of Excellence to Silicon Valley,” Stanford Campus Report (9 March 1988): 11–13.Google Scholar
30 “A Proposal to set up an Interdisciplinary Institute at Princeton University,” 9 Sept. 1969, and “Princeton University Institute of Science and Technology,” 18 Sept. 1969, Baker Papers.
31 Author interview with William O. Baker, 20 March 1990.
32 James Fisk, “The New Role of Graduate Education in Industrial Innovation,” 3 Nov. 1965, Baker Papers.
33 “New Jersey—The Invention State,” Scientific American 264 (April 1991): NJ3–4.
34 For the founding and early years of Texas Instruments, see 100 Years of Science and Technology in Texas, ed. Klosterman, Leo, Swenson, Loyd, and Rose, Sylvia (Houston, Tx., 1986), 216–17.Google Scholar
35 Texas Instruments, Twenty-fifth Anniversary Observance, Transistor Radio and Silicon Transistor (Dallas, Tx., 1980), 1–3, and “Chips and Money,” Texas Monthly (July 1982), 104.
36 On Teal and his earlier work at Bell Labs, see Braun, Ernest and McDonald, Stuart, Revolution in Miniature: The History and Impact of Semiconductor Electronics (New York, 1978), 63–64Google Scholar, and A History of Engineering and Science in the Bell System: Physical Sciences, 1925–1975 (New York, 1975), 422–25.
37 Kilby, Jack, “Invention of the Integrated Circuit,” IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices (July 1976), 648–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Wolff, Michael, “The Genesis of the Integrated Circuit,” IEEE Spectrum (Aug. 1976), 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38 Braun and McDonald, Revolution in Miniature, 112–14 and Hazewindus, Nico, with Tooker, John, The U. S. Microelectronics Industry: Technical Change, Industry Growth, and Social Impact (New York, 1982), 83ff.Google Scholar
39 Berkner, Lloyd, “Renaissance in the Southwest,” Saturday Review (3 June 1961), 43.Google Scholar
40 Berkner, Lloyd, “Graduate Education in the Southwest,” Journal of the Graduate Research Center (May 1961), 95.Google Scholar
41 Berkner, “Renaissance in the Southwest.”
42 President John F. Kennedy, “Remarks Prepared for Delivery at the Trade Mart in Dallas, November 22, 1963,” Public Papers of the Presidents, 476–77. We would like to thank Allan Needell for calling this document to our attention.
43 “F. E. Terman as President of the SMU Foundation for Science and Engineering,” 20 May 1980, Terman Papers, Series XIII 1/6.
44 “Remarks by F. E. Terman at Industry-Faculty luncheon, 6 Oct. [1966],” Terman Papers, Series VIII 3/7.
45 “Frederick Terman as President of the SMU Foundation,” 9.
46 Farley, John and Glickman, Norman, “R&D as an Economic Development Strategy: The Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation Comes to Austin,” Journal of the American Planning Association (Autumn 1986), 407–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “High-Tech Companies Team up in the R&D Race,” Business Week (15 Aug. 1983), 94–95.
47 Goodwin, Irwin, “Sematech Group Selects Austin, Texas in Effort to Regain Chip Dominance,” Physics Today (Feb. 1988), 51–52Google Scholar and Johnstone, Bob, “Reinventing Research,” Far Eastern Economic Review (24 May 1990), 68–70.Google Scholar
48 Hane, Gerald J., “The Real Lessons of Japanese Research Consortia,” Issues in Science and Technology (Winter 1993–1994), 52–62.Google Scholar
49 Florida and Kenney, The Breakthough Illusion, 179–180.
50 Spencer, William J. and Grindly, Peter, “SEMATECH After Five Years: High-Technology Consortia and U. S. Competitiveness,” California Management Review (Summer 1993), 15–16.Google Scholar
51 For general background on South Korea's strategy of economic development see Amsden, Alice, Asia's Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization (New York, 1989).Google Scholar
52 Mason, Edward, et. al., The Economic and Social Modernization of the Republic of Korea (Cambridge, Mass., 1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar traces the postwar history of the Korean economy in detail.
53 Huer, Jon, Marching Orders: The Role of the Military in South Korea's ‘Economic Miracle’, (New York, 1989), 67ff.Google Scholar
54 Huer, Marching Orders, 147 and Mason, The Economic and Social Modernization of the Republic of Korea, 476–77.
55 Korea: Managing the Industrial Transition, Vol. 2, The Conduct of Industrial Policy (Washington, D.C., 1982), 189–97.
56 Boffey, Philip, “Korean Science Institute: A Model for Developing Nations?” Science 167 (6 March 1970).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57 For the history of. KIST see Lee, Jinjoo, “Contract Research and Its Utilization in a Developing Country: An Analysis of Factors Influencing the Transfer of Industrial Technology from Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) to its Clients,” (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University, 1975)Google Scholar and “Final Report on Battelle's Assistance to the Korea Institute of Science and Technology,” (Columbus, Ohio, 1971).
58 Servos, John, “Changing Partners: The Mellon Institute, Private Industry, and the Federal Patron,” Technology and Culture 35 (April 1994), 221–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar offers a perceptive look at the changing fortunes of the original contract research institute.
59 “Policy and Strategy for Science and Technology,” Ministry of Science and Education, (Seoul, 1975), 40.
60 Frederick Termen et. al., “Survey Report on the Establishment of Korea Advanced Institute of Science,” Dec. 1970, Termen Papers, Series X 3/3.
61 KunMo Chung and Frederick Terman, “Comments on Organization and Planning for Korea Advanced Institute of Science,” Jan. 1971, Terman Papers, Series X 3/4.
62 “Survey Report on the Establishment of the Korea Advanced Institute of Science,” vi.
63 Ibid., 9.
64 KunMo Chung, “Comments on Organization and Planning for Korea Advanced Institute of Science,” January 1971, Terman Papers, Series X 3/4.
65 Frederick Terman, “Mission to Korea,” 1 April 1980, Terman Papers, Series VI 20/7.
66 Ibid., 54.
67 World Bank Support for Industrialization in Korea, India, and Indonesia (Washington, D.C., 1992), 62–63.
68 Deon-Seong Oh, “High Technology Center and Its Role for Regional Innovation in Korea,” Paper presented at International Science City in Global Context, Osaka, Japan, 17–18 Oct. 1994 provides the best overview of Taedok and of recent efforts at regional development in South Korea.
69 Oh, “High-Technology Center and Its Role for Regional Innovation in Korea,” 20.
70 Anna Lee Saxenian, Regional Advantage provides a persuasive argument about the respective performance of these regions in recent years, based on differences in corporate structure and culture.
71 For a history of one would-be Silicon Valley, see Dodds, Gordon B. and Wollner, Craig E., The Silicon Forest: High Tech in the Portland Area, 1945–1986 (Portland, Or., 1990).Google Scholar
72 Luger, Michael and Goldstein, Harvey, Technology in the Garden: Research Parks and Regional Economic Development (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1991)Google Scholar capably survey the promises and perils of this strategy.
73 See Osborne, David, Laboratories of Democracy (Cambridge, Mass., 1988)Google Scholar for an overview of state experiments in technology policy, and Feller, Irwin, “American State Governments as Models for National Science Policy,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 11, (1992): 288–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for a critical assessment of the results.
74 Dobbs and Wollner, The Silicon Forest provide a history of one would-be Silicon Valley which, though initially modeled on the original, ended up moving in quite a different direction.
75 Miller, Roger and Cote, Marcel, “Growing the Next Silicon Valley,” Harvard Business Review (July-Aug. 1985): 114–123Google Scholar attests to the continuing attraction of the Silicon Valley model, while pointing out some of its pitfalls.
76 Cringley, Robert X., Accidental Empires: How the Boys of Silicon Valley Make Their Millions, Battle Foreign Competition, and Still Can't Get a Date (New York, 1992).Google Scholar
77 Rogers, Everett and Larsen, Judith, Silicon Valley Fever: Growth and High Technology Culture (New York, 1982)Google Scholar, Hansen, Dirk, The New Alchemists: Silicon Valley and the Microelectronics Revolution (Boston, Mass., 1982)Google Scholar, Malone, Michael, The Big Score: The Billion Dollar Story of Silicon Valley (New York, 1985)Google Scholar all argue a heroic entrepreneurship, while Saxenian, Regional Advantage makes the strongest case for Silicon Valley as an industrial district.
78 Florida, Richard and Kenney, Martin, The Breakthrough Illusion: Corporate America's Failure to Move from Innovation to Mass Production (New York, 1990)Google Scholar and Harrison, Bennett, Lean and Mean: The Changing Landscape of Corporate Power in the Age of Flexibility (New York, 1994)Google Scholar challenge the notion of Silicon Valley as a self-sustaining industrial district.
79 Gilder, George, “The Law of the Microcosm,” Harvard Business Review (March-April 1988)Google Scholar, and Gilder, George, Microcosm: The Quantum Revolution in Economics and Technology (New York, 1989).Google Scholar
80 Richard Florida and Martin Kenney, The Breakthrough Illusion, 98–118.
81 Saxenian, Regional Advantage.
82 Bennett Harrison, Lean and Mean, 106–122.
83 Miller and Cote, “Growing the Next Silicon Valley,” caution against ‘looking in ivory towers’ as a strategy for regional development.
84 Findlay, Magic Lands, 118.
85 Markusen, Ann, Hall, Peter, Campbell, Scott, and Deitriek, Sabina, The Rise of the Gunbelt: The Military Remapping of Industrial America (New York, 1991)Google Scholar convincingly argue for the central importance of defense contracting for high technology regions in postwar America, including Silicon Valley.
86 Saxenian, Regional Advantage, provides the best history of recent technical specialization in Silicon Valley.
87 Scott, Allen J., New Industrial Spaces: Flexible Production Organization and Regional Development in North America and Western Europe (London, 1988).Google Scholar
88 Harrison, Lean and Mean, makes the case for Silicon Valley as a integral part of a new global production system.
You have
Access
- 92
- Cited by