More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

article

Technological Discontinuities and Complementary Assets: A Longitudinal Study of Industry and Firm Performance

Authors:

Frank T. Rothaermel,

Charles W. L. HillAuthors Info & Claims

Organization Science, Volume 16, Issue 1

Pages 52 - 70

https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0100

Published: 01 January 2005 Publication History

Abstract

We suggest that the type of complementary assets (generic versus specialized) needed to commercialize a new technology is critical in determining the industry- and firm-level performance implications of a competence-destroying technological discontinuity. At the industry level, we hypothesize that incumbent industry performance declines if the new technology can be commercialized through generic complementary assets, whereas incumbent industry performance improves if the new technology can be commercialized through specialized complementary assets. At the firm level, we posit that an incumbent firm's financial strength has a stronger positive impact on firm performance in the postdiscontinuity time period if the new technology can be commercialized through generic complementary assets. We hypothesize, however, that an incumbent firm's R&D capability has a stronger positive impact on firm performance in the postdiscontinuity time period if the new technology can be commercialized through specialized complementary assets. Drawing on multi-industry, time series, and panel data over a 26-year period to analyze pre- and postdiscontinuity industry and firm performance, we find broad support for our theoretical model.

References

[1]

Abernathy, W. J., K. B. Clark. 1985. Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction. Res. Policy 14 3-22.

[2]

Adams, W., J. W. Brock. 1995. The Structure of American Industry, 9th ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[3]

Anderson, P., M. L. Tushman. 1990. Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35 604-633.

[4]

Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Management 17 99-120.

[5]

Beck, N., J. Katz. 1995. What to do (and not to do) with time-series-cross-section data in comparative politics. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 89 634-647.

[6]

Ben-David, D., D. H. Papell. 1995. The great wars, the great crash, and steady state growth: Some new evidence of an old stylized fact. J. Monetary Econom. 36 453-475.

[7]

Brandenburger, A. M., B. J. Nalebuff. 1996. Co-opetition. Currency Doubleday, New York.

[8]

Caves, R. E. 1989. Mergers, takeovers, and economic efficiency. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 7 151-184.

[9]

Christensen, C. M. 1997. The Innovator's Dilemma. When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

[10]

Cohen, J., P. Cohen. 1983. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

[11]

Cohen, S. N., A. C. Y. Chang, H. W. Boyer, R. B. Helling. 1973. Construction of biologically functional bacterial plasmids in vitro. Proc. National Acad. Sci. USA 70 3240-3244.

[12]

Cohen, W. M., D. A. Levinthal. 1989. Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Econom. J. 99 569-596.

[13]

Cohen, W. M., D. A. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35 128-152.

[14]

Dougherty, D., C. Hardy. 1996. Sustained product innovation in large, mature organizations: Overcoming innovation-to-organization problems. Acad. Management J. 39 1120-1153.

[15]

Ehrnberg, E., N. Sjöberg. 1995. Technological discontinuities, competition and firm performance. Tech. Anal. Strategic Management 7 93-107.

[16]

Foster, R. N. 1986. Innovation. The Attacker's Advantage. Summit Books, New York.

[17]

Freiberger, P., M. Swaine. 2000. Fire in the Valley, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.

[18]

Giovannetti, G. T., S. W. Morrison. 2000. Convergence. The Biotechnology Industry Report. Ernst & Young, Palo Alto, CA.

[19]

Greene, W. H. 1997. Econometric Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

[20]

Grove, A. S. 1996. Only the Paranoid Survive. Doubleday, New York.

[21]

Hagedoorn, J. 2002. Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Res. Policy 31 477-492.

[22]

Hausman, J. A., W. E. Taylor. 1981. Panel data and unobserved individual effects. Econometrica 49 1377-1398.

[23]

Helfat, C. E. 1994a. Firm-specificity in corporate R&D. Organ. Sci. 5 173-184.

Digital Library

[24]

Helfat, C. E. 1994b. Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D. Management Sci. 40 1720-1747.

Digital Library

[25]

Helfat, C. E. 1997. Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management J. 18 339-360.

[26]

Henderson, R. M., K. B. Clark. 1990. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35 9-30.

[27]

Henderson, R. M., I. Cockburn. 1996. Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. 27 32-59.

[28]

Hill, C. W. L. 1992. Strategies for exploiting technological innovations: When and when not to license. Organ. Sci. 3 428-441.

Digital Library

[29]

Hill, C. W. L., F. T. Rothaermel. 2003. The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Acad. Management Rev. 28 257-274.

[30]

Hitt, M. A., J. Gimeno, R. E. Hoskisson. 1998. Current and future research methods in strategic management. Organ. Res. Methods 1 6-44.

[31]

Hsiao, C. 1986. Analysis of Panel Data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

[32]

Jensen, M. C. 1986. Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76 323-329.

[33]

King, A. A., C. L. Tucci. 2002. Incumbent entry into new market niches: The role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Sci. 48 171-186.

Digital Library

[34]

Kmenta, J. 1986. Elements of Econometrics, 2nd ed. Macmillan, New York.

[35]

Lerner, J., R. P. Merges. 1998. The control of technology alliances: An empirical analysis of the biotechnology industry. J. Industrial Econom. 46 125-156.

[36]

Lerner, J., H. Shane, A. Tsai. 2003. Do equity financing cycles matter? Evidence from biotechnology alliances. J. Financial Econom. 67 411-446.

[37]

Majewski, S. E. 1998. Causes and Consequences of Strategic Alliance Formation: The Case of Biotechnology. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

[38]

Majumdar, B. A. 1982. Innovations, Product Developments and Technology Transfers: An Empirical Study of Dynamic Competitive Advantage. University Press of America, Washington, D.C.

[39]

Mitchell, W. 1989. Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbents' entry into emerging industrial subfields. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34 208-320.

[40]

Mowery, D. C. 1983. The relationship between intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American manufacturing, 1900-1940. Explorations Econom. History 20 351-374.

[41]

Park, R. 1967. Efficient estimation of a system of regression equations when disturbances are both serially and contemporaneously correlated. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 62 500-509.

[42]

Peteraf, M. A. 1993. The cornerstones of competitive advantage. Strategic Management J. 14 179-192.

[43]

Pisano, G. P. 1991. The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative agreements in the biotechnology industry. Res. Policy 20 237-249.

[44]

Powell, W. W., K. W. Koput, L. Smith-Doerr. 1996. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41 116-145.

[45]

Quandt, R. E. 1960. Tests of hypothesis that a linear regression system obeys two separate regimes. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 55 324-330.

[46]

Rothaermel, F. T. 2000. Technological discontinuities and the nature of competition. Tech. Anal. Strategic Management 12 149-160.

[47]

Rothaermel, F. T. 2001a. Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: An empirical study of industry and firm effects in the biopharmaceutical industry. Res. Policy 30 1235-1251.

[48]

Rothaermel, F. T. 2001b. Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic Management J. 22 687-699.

[49]

Sanchez, R. 1995. Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management J. 16 135-159.

[50]

Scherer, F. M., D. Ross. 1990. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

[51]

Schilling, M. A. 2000. Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Management Rev. 25 312-334.

[52]

Schumpeter, J. A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper & Row, New York.

[53]

Stuart, T. E., H. Hoang, R. C. Hybels. 1999. Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44 315-349.

[54]

Stundza, T. 1997. Don't call them "mini" mills anymore. Purchasing 123 34B1-34B9.

[55]

Teece, D. J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15 285-305.

[56]

Teece, D. J. 1992. Competition, cooperation, and innovation. Organizational arrangements for regimes of rapid technological progress. J. Econom. Behavior Organ. 18 1-25.

[57]

Teece, D. J., G. P. Pisano, A. Shuen. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. 18 509-533.

[58]

Thomas, L. G. 1996. The two faces of competition: Dynamic resourcefulness and the hypercompetitive shift. Organ. Sci. 7 221-242.

Digital Library

[59]

Tilton, J. H. 1971. International Diffusion of Technology: The Case of Semiconductors. Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.

[60]

Tripsas, M. 1997. Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. 18 119-142.

[61]

Tushman, M. L., P. Anderson. 1986. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31 439-465.

[62]

Vogelsang, T. J. 1997. Wald-type tests for detecting breaks in the trend function of a dynamic time trend. Econometric Theory 13 818-849.

[63]

Zahra, S. A., G. George. 2002. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Acad. Management Rev. 27 185-203.

Cited By

Furr NSnow D(2024)Technology Counteroffensive StrategiesOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2018.1223935:2(719-740)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2018.12239
Agarwal SKapoor R(2023)Value Creation Tradeoff in Business EcosystemsOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2022.161534:3(1216-1242)Online publication date: 1-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2022.1615
Cozzolino AVerona G(2022)Responding to Complementary-Asset DiscontinuitiesOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2021.152233:5(1990-2017)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2021.1522
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Can external corporate venturing broaden firm's technological scope? The role of complementary assets

This study applies two theoretical perspectives-resource-based view (RBV) and organizational learning-to explore how a firm's external corporate venturing (CV) influences its technological scope. Using data from 583 electronics and information ...
Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity

Technological innovation sometimes requires industry incumbents to shift to a completely new core technology. To successfully navigate a technological transition, firms often face the ambidextrous challenge of “exploiting” existing complementary assets ...
Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms Incentives for Technology Licensing

This paper analyzes the relationship between technology licensing and the effectiveness of patent protection. Using the 1994 Carnegie Mellon survey on industrial research and development (R&D) in the United States, we develop and test a simple ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Organization Science

Organization Science Volume 16, Issue 1

Jan. - Feb. 2005

99 pages

ISSN:1526-5455

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

INFORMS

Linthicum, MD, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 January 2005

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

12
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 20 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Furr NSnow D(2024)Technology Counteroffensive StrategiesOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2018.1223935:2(719-740)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2018.12239
Agarwal SKapoor R(2023)Value Creation Tradeoff in Business EcosystemsOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2022.161534:3(1216-1242)Online publication date: 1-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2022.1615
Cozzolino AVerona G(2022)Responding to Complementary-Asset DiscontinuitiesOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2021.152233:5(1990-2017)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2021.1522
Chen XZhou DLu R(2022)Appropriability Mechanisms and the Performance of digital startups: The Moderating Role of Technology InnovativenessProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Management and Management Science10.1145/3564858.3564895(233-238)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3564858.3564895
Byun HRaffiee JGanco M(2019)Discontinuities in the Value of Relational CapitalOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.2018.126230:6(1368-1393)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.2018.1262
Mirchandani DLederer A(2014)The impact of core and infrastructure business activities on information systems planning and effectivenessInternational Journal of Information Management: The Journal for Information Professionals10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.06.00134:5(622-633)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.06.001
Ceccagnoli MForman CHuang PWu D(2012)Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystemMIS Quarterly10.5555/2208955.220897136:1(263-290)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2208955.2208971
Sood ATellis G(2011)Demystifying DisruptionMarketing Science10.5555/2806697.280670130:2(339-354)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2806697.2806701
Balasubramanian N(2011)New Plant Venture Performance Differences Among Incumbent, Diversifying, and Entrepreneurial FirmsManagement Science10.1287/mnsc.1100.129457:3(549-565)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1294
Anand JOriani RVassolo R(2010)Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological ChangeOrganization Science10.1287/orsc.1090.050221:6(1213-1232)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1287/orsc.1090.0502
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents