CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Not invented here

dysfunctional institutional culture that eschews reusing products or ideas of external origin

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 22, 2026
Entity authorityQ1782368
Source-derived summary

Not invented here (NIH) is the tendency to avoid using or buying products, research, standards, or knowledge from external origins. It is usually adopted by social, corporate, or institutional cultures. Since 2014, management research has shown the existence of a strong bias against ideas from the outside.

The reasons for not wanting to use the work of others are varied, but can include a desire to support a local economy instead of paying royalties to a foreign license-holder, fear of patent infringement, lack of understanding of the foreign work, an unwillingness to acknowledge or value the work of others, jealousy, belief perseverance, or forming part of a wider turf war. As a social phenomenon, this tendency can manifest itself as an unwillingness to adopt an idea or product because it originates from another culture, a form of tribalism.

The term is typically used in a pejorative sense. The opposite predisposition is sometimes called "invented here", "not invented there", "proudly found elsewhere" (PFE) or "invented elsewhere".

Scientific study

A 1982 study by Ralph Katz and Thomas J. Allen provides empirical evidence for the "not invented here" syndrome, showing that the performance of R&D project groups declines after about five years, which they attribute to the groups becoming increasingly insular and communicating less with key information sources outside the group.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Not invented here” is dysfunctional institutional culture that eschews reusing products or ideas of external origin. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through invented, here and dysfunctional, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2014, 1982—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, invented, here and dysfunctional is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “dysfunctional institutional culture that eschews reusing products or ideas of external origin” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1782368. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2014 and 1982.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Not invented here”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Not invented here primary sources, Not invented here archive and invented research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Not invented here”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Not invented here” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.