IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v23y2005i2p154-169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Incumbents Struggle to Extract Value from New Strategic Options:: Case of the European Airline Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Vlaar, Paul
  • De Vries, Paul
  • Willenborg, Mattijs

Abstract

Although industry transformations generally emanate from technological changes, recent examples suggest they may also be due to the introduction of new business models. Whereas many of these models contain seemingly principles and elements, and even though new entrants engage in profitable pursuits, incumbents often struggle in their attempts to extract value from them. Which factors are causing the difficulties experienced by incumbents? And, when are problems most severe? A review of the literature clarifies that incumbents face difficulties associated with cannibalization, conventional wisdom, internal and external inflexibility, and incompetence or overconfidence. The negative effects of these factors are reinforced by, among other aspects, business models consisting of many complementary elements, insufficient autonomy granted to new businesses, an absence of strong leadership or entrepreneurial alertness, and a low sense of urgency. Based on this, we develop a framework, which is illustrated with a case study of low-cost initiatives in the European airline industry, in which we compare endeavors of three incumbents (British Airways, KLM, and Lufthansa) with those of three new entrants (Ryanair, easyJet and Virgin Express). The paper contributes to the literature by shifting the attention from industry changes provoked by technological breakthroughs to transformations originating from the introduction of new business models, and by indicating why incumbents fail to extract value from these models.

Suggested Citation

  • Vlaar, Paul & De Vries, Paul & Willenborg, Mattijs, 2005. "Why Incumbents Struggle to Extract Value from New Strategic Options:: Case of the European Airline Industry," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 154-169, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:23:y:2005:i:2:p:154-169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237305000228
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Henderson, Isaac Levi & Tsui, Kan Wai Hong & Ngo, Thanh & Gilbey, Andrew & Avis, Mark, 2019. "Airline brand choice in a duopolistic market: The case of New Zealand," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 147-163.
    2. Jonathan D. Bohlmann & Michael A. Stanko & Jelena Spanjol, 2024. "Incumbent inertia, innovativeness, and performance (dis)advantages: A demand-side learning perspective," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 14(1), pages 122-142, June.
    3. Fasone, Vincenzo & Kofler, Lukas & Scuderi, Raffaele, 2016. "Business performance of airports: Non-aviation revenues and their determinants," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 35-45.
    4. Sarkar, Soumodip & Osiyevskyy, Oleksiy & Clegg, Stewart R., 2018. "Incumbent capability enhancement in response to radical innovations," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 353-365.
    5. Chaikal Nuryakin & Regi Kusumaatmadja & Natanael Waraney Gerald Massie & Alvin Ulido Lumbanraja & Sean Hambali & Devina Anindita, 2019. "The Sky in Blues: On the Recent Development of Indonesian Airlines Industry," LPEM FEBUI Working Papers 201941, LPEM, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Indonesia, revised 2019.
    6. Jim Dewald & Frances Bowen, 2010. "Storm Clouds and Silver Linings: Responding to Disruptive Innovations Through Cognitive Resilience," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(1), pages 197-218, January.

    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:eurman:v:23:y:2005:i:2:p:154-169. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    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.