Talk:Kim B. Clark

Starting date
Per the cited source: he was inaugurated on October 11 not in August. Why is August listed. By definition you are not President until you are inaugurated.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 20:14, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * That is the wrong definition of inauguration, at least when it comes to university presidents. You will note it also says "installed" - this is the formal academic setting of installing a new president.  This does not happen on the first day a president assumes the new position.  In fact, it can actually be many months after, depending on different factors, including scheduling.  Go back and research recent changes at CES units for installations and it might become more clear.  In this instance, Robert Wilkes presided, as president, through the summer commencement, with Clark then taking over as that day ended. ChristensenMJ (talk) 20:21, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I disagree. Just like a "calling" you can be sustained and even act in that calling, but you are not officially in that position until you are set apart.  The same goes for presidents of the university.  Until you are installed threw the inauguration process you are not officially the president of anything.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 20:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem to disagree, that's what discussion is for. So, if Clark wasn't the president for those two months, who was?  Wilkes certainly was no longer on the campus.  Clark was the president is every sense of the word.  Did Jeffrey R. Holland not have any authority to act as an apostle from June 23, 1994 until he was formally sustained in the following October Conference?  Obviously the difference there, though slight, is that Holland was set apart in June, with sustaining later.  There is no setting apart that goes with these appointments - as noted before, it is the formal academic installation of a president, with all its associated regalia.  It has nothing to do with their authority to preside over the institution. ChristensenMJ (talk) 20:33, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * At best I would say he he was an acting President. Why would you call it "Installing" him as President and and "Inauguration" if that isn't what it is.
 * As for Jeffrey R. Holland the date he was "Set Apart" or officially "installed" is the date that we use for when he became an apostle. My point was, someone can be acting as in a position long before they officially become that position.  What matters is then they are "installed".--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 20:40, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * To call him an acting president would make absolutely no sense. It seems this is being made way too complicated.  When the church's president, or his appointee as just seen at BYU recently, makes an appointment and gives an effective date in this situation, it is far different than an ecclesiastical calling.  Maybe that is where the misunderstanding exists.  In mentioning Holland's case, consider another.  When there is a new church president, are they only the acting president until the formal solemn assembly takes place, of course not.  They are set apart, etc. but not "recognized" by the church via comment consent until sometime later.
 * Ok, I lets drop the ecclesiastical callings, how I still disagree. Why would the source say "President Gordon B. Hinckley installed Kim Bryce Clark as president of BYU-Idaho" and why would you have an "Inauguration" if that wasn't going to the be day you became that thing.  Again, someone can be acting as in a position long before they officially become that position.  For example,  Bruce C. Hafen was "on campus several times" and making changes to the structure of Ricks several times before he officially took office as president of the college".  Dose that mean he was "President" when he started making decision or when he was "installed".  If it was when he started making decisions then it would be a year prior to what is listed.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 21:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If there a source saying effective in August, I don't see it.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 21:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Great to drop the ecclesiastical stuff, it's just not as straight forward as made out to be. I don't know about Hafen's experience, it may have been different.  What I do know is that Clark started in August and was making every decision with the full authority as the appointed president.  There would not be a time when there wasn't one.  It's a smooth transition - as will be seen again in Provo in short period of time.  As for a ref, try this - http://www.byui.edu/president/biography ChristensenMJ (talk) 21:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Academic life sentence change
Currently, the article reads: 'After he and his wife, Sue, married in the Salt Lake Temple in June 1971, Clark resumed his studies at Harvard, where...' It feels irrelevant to the section to state when and where he was married. I propose the sentence be changed to: 'In 1971, Clark resumed his studies at Harvard, where..' and a date for his marriage be listed in the Family section. 65.120.92.87 (talk) 03:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Seeing no opposition, I have made the change. --206.207.158.4 (talk) 03:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Scholarly contribution
While going through Clark's research for a paper I came here and was surprised to see that almost no mention is made of his significant contributions to the study of innovation. I would propose the following paragraph (and 4 key works) be added to his career description:

With a variety of co-authors, Clark published an important series of studies on technological innovation. The organizational linkages, or integration, required to accomplish an innovation is a thread that runs through these studies. These insights culminated in his book with Carliss Baldwin (link to her page), “Design Rules: The Power of Modularity,” which explores the rules for integrating components that shaped innovation in the computer industry as well as many others. His various articles and books have been cited more than 20,000 times (Google Scholar).

Key works


 * Abernathy, W.J. & Clark K.B., 1985. Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction, Research Policy 14, pp. 3-22.
 * Henderson, R.M. & Clark K.B., 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms, Administrative Science Quarterly, v35, n1, pp9-30.
 * Iansiti, M. & Clark, K.B., 1995. Integration and dynamic capability: Evidence from product development in automobiles and mainframe computers, Industrial and Corporate Change, v3, issue 3, pp.557-605.
 * Baldwin, C.Y. & Clark, K.B., 2000. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Fchasw (talk) 13:16, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Someone added a citation request for the 20,000 citation claim. He does not have his own profile page on Google Scholar, so I linked to a search for Kim Clark. The top four articles & books in the search, which I confirmed are actually his, added up to 25,430 citations. 193.205.29.83 (talk) 09:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)