This claim is rightful if we recognize that changes in social organization of technology, new social values like environmental ones, have a consequence on what is taken as appropriate functioning of a technology and appropriate technological knowledge. This way, showing a series of differences, even when having community and cognitive tradition patterns, is technological cognition a type of cognition in its own right from this point of view too. It shows patterns. I think it is better to think of a technological tradition as system of paradigms but not a paradigm itself. A system can be changed through development of some elements that themselves are not results of paradigmatic revolutions.
Coevolutional constraints can then effect paradigm crisis on other elements.
Technological traditions only partially posses cognitive authority and autonomy. According to Gutting the partial cognitive authority of technological community is due to the existence of 'presumptive anomalies'. But beside this, as we saw, technological communities are mixed communities. This mixed nature has two consequences. One is that quite many can contribute to technological innovation, at least through 'innovating by using' or by identifying weak places in the construction.