IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v63y2013icp1233-1239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic rigidity and foresight for technology adoption among electric utilities

Author

Listed:
  • Shah, Arsalan Nisar
  • Palacios, Miguel
  • Ruiz, Felipe

Abstract

The variation in the adoption of a technology as a major source of competitive advantage has been attributed to the wide-ranging strategic foresight and the integrative capability of a firm. These possible areas of competitive advantage can exist in the periphery of the firm's strategic vision and can get easily blurred as a result of rigidness and can permeate in the decision-making process of the firm. This article explores how electric utility firms with a renewable energy portfolio can become strategically rigid in terms of adoption of newer technologies. The reluctance or delay in the adoption of new technology can be characterized as strategic rigidness, brought upon as a result of a firm's core competence or core capability in the other, more conventional technology arrangement. This paper explores the implications of such rigidness on the performance of a firm and consequently on the energy eco-system. The paper substantiates the results by emphasizing the case of Iberdrola S.A., an incumbent firm as a wind energy developer and its adoption decision behavior. We illustrate that the very routines that create competitive advantage for firms in the electric utility industry are vulnerable as they might also develop as sources of competitive disadvantage, when firms confront environmental change and uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Shah, Arsalan Nisar & Palacios, Miguel & Ruiz, Felipe, 2013. "Strategic rigidity and foresight for technology adoption among electric utilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1233-1239.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:1233-1239
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513008069
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Cavallaro, Fausto, 2009. "Multi-criteria decision aid to assess concentrated solar thermal technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1678-1685.
    3. Nisar, Arsalan & Ruiz, Felipe & Palacios, Miguel, 2013. "Organisational learning, strategic rigidity and technology adoption: Implications for electric utilities and renewable energy firms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 438-445.
    4. Gerard George & Reddi Kotha & Yanfeng Zheng, 2008. "Entry into Insular Domains: A Longitudinal Study of Knowledge Structuration and Innovation in Biotechnology Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1448-1474, December.
    5. Jaana Woiceshyn & Urs Daellenbach, 2005. "Integrative capability and technology adoption: evidence from oil firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(2), pages 307-342, April.
    6. David Sirmon & Michael Hitt & Jean-Luc Arrègle & Joanna Tochman Campbell, 2010. "The Dynamic Interplay of Capability Strengths and Weaknesses : Investigating the Bases of Temporary Competitive Advantage," Post-Print hal-02312681, HAL.
    7. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    8. John E. Ettlie & William P. Bridges & Robert D. O'Keefe, 1984. "Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 682-695, June.
    9. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    10. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    11. Massoud Karshenas & Paul L. Stoneman, 1993. "Rank, Stock, Order, and Epidemic Effects in the Diffusion of New Process Technologies: An Empirical Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 503-528, Winter.
    12. David G. Sirmon & Michael A. Hitt & Jean‐Luc Arregle & Joanna Tochman Campbell, 2010. "The dynamic interplay of capability strengths and weaknesses: investigating the bases of temporary competitive advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(13), pages 1386-1409, December.
    13. Wüstenhagen, Rolf & Menichetti, Emanuela, 2012. "Strategic choices for renewable energy investment: Conceptual framework and opportunities for further research," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2021. "Power sector reforms and technology adoption in the Indian electricity distribution sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).
    2. Stefanie Baumgartner & Marc K Peter, 2022. "Strategic Foresight and Innovation Management: A Comparative Study across International Swiss Banks," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 8(4), pages 309-328, October.
    3. Frei, Fanny & Sinsel, Simon R. & Hanafy, Ahmed & Hoppmann, Joern, 2018. "Leaders or laggards? The evolution of electric utilities’ business portfolios during the energy transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 655-665.
    4. Valdes, Javier & Poque González, Axel Bastián & Masip Macia, Yunesky & Dorner, Wolfgang & Ramirez Camargo, Luis, 2020. "Unveiling the potential for combined heat and power in Chilean industry - A policy perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    5. Lin, Boqiang & Wang, Siquan, 2023. "The performance of specialized and oriented diversified firms: A comparative analysis from the targeted expansion of renewable energy business of listed companies," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Marinković, Milan & Al-Tabbaa, Omar & Khan, Zaheer & Wu, Jie, 2022. "Corporate foresight: A systematic literature review and future research trajectories," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 289-311.
    7. Bootz, Jean-Philippe & Michel, Sophie & Pallud, Jessie & Monti, Régine, 2022. "Possible changes of Industry 4.0 in 2030 in the face of uberization: Results of a participatory and systemic foresight study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nisar, Arsalan & Ruiz, Felipe & Palacios, Miguel, 2013. "Organisational learning, strategic rigidity and technology adoption: Implications for electric utilities and renewable energy firms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 438-445.
    2. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Lin, Hsing-Er & Hsu, I-Chieh & Hsu, Audrey Wenhsin & Chung, Hsi-Mei, 2020. "Creating competitive advantages: Interactions between ambidextrous diversification strategy and contextual factors from a dynamic capability perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. David H. Hsu & Kwanghui Lim, 2014. "Knowledge Brokering and Organizational Innovation: Founder Imprinting Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1134-1153, August.
    6. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    7. Yaqun Yi & Yuan Li & Michael A. Hitt & Yi Liu & Zelong Wei, 2016. "The influence of resource bundling on the speed of strategic change: Moderating effects of relational capital," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 435-467, June.
    8. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2013. "The success factors of technology-sourcing through mergers & acquisitions: An intuitive meta-analysis," FZID Discussion Papers 78-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    9. Slavova, Kremena & Jong, Simcha, 2021. "University alliances and firm exploratory innovation: Evidence from therapeutic product development," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Quintana-Garci­a, Cristina & Benavides-Velasco, Carlos A., 2008. "Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 492-507, April.
    11. Ng, Stephen C.H. & Rungtusanatham, Johnny M. & Zhao, Xiande & Lee, T.S., 2015. "Examining process management via the lens of exploitation and exploration: Reconceptualization and scale development," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1-15.
    12. R. Duane Ireland & Michael C. Withers & Joseph S. Harrison & David S. Boss & Richard Scoresby, 2023. "Strategic Entrepreneurship: A Review and Research Agenda," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 495-523, March.
    13. Pedota, Mattia & Cicala, Francesco & Basti, Alessio, 2024. "A Wild Mind with a Disciplined Eye: Unleashing Human-GenAI Creativity Through Simulated Entity Elicitation," OSF Preprints 3bn95, Center for Open Science.
    14. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    15. Alva Taylor, 2010. "The Next Generation: Technology Adoption and Integration Through Internal Competition in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 23-41, February.
    16. Elizabeth G. Pontikes & William P. Barnett, 2017. "The Coevolution of Organizational Knowledge and Market Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 64-82, March.
    17. Schilling, Melissa A. & Green, Elad, 2011. "Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: An analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1321-1331.
    18. Huy-Cuong Vo-Thai & Shihmin Lo & My-Linh Tran, 2021. "How Capability Reconfiguration in Coping With External Dynamism Can Shape the Performance of the Vietnamese Enterprises," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    19. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    20. Yoichi Matsumoto, 2013. "Heterogeneous Combinations of Knowledge Elements: How the Knowledge Base Structure Impacts Knowledge-related Outcomes of a Firm," Discussion Paper Series DP2013-15, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:63:y:2013:i:c:p:1233-1239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.