IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v47y2018i1p326-341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Architectural innovation and the emergence of a dominant design: The effects of strategic sourcing on performance

Author

Listed:
  • Park, Woo-Yong
  • Ro, Young K.
  • Kim, Namwoon

Abstract

This study investigates four different sourcing strategies employed by firms in order to successfully deal with a new architectural innovation hitting the market. The four sourcing approaches reflect the varying degrees of internalization of component design and manufacturing: make, in-house design, long-term supplier, and new supplier, where make implies the highest and new supplier the lowest degree of internalization of the firm’s component sourcing in a spectrum. Comparing and contrasting the innovation performance of the four sourcing approaches in the pre- and post-dominant design eras, we suggest theoretical implications for the critical path of strategic sourcing decisions over time for a new architectural innovation. By doing so, we suggest an integrated framework of stage-contingent sourcing strategies and provide the associated empirical results that demonstrate normative strategic guidance for managers.

Suggested Citation

  • Park, Woo-Yong & Ro, Young K. & Kim, Namwoon, 2018. "Architectural innovation and the emergence of a dominant design: The effects of strategic sourcing on performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 326-341.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:1:p:326-341
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.11.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733317301889
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2017.11.003?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. Lihong Qian & Rajshree Agarwal & Glenn Hoetker, 2012. "Configuration of Value Chain Activities: The Effect of Pre-Entry Capabilities, Transaction Hazards, and Industry Evolution on Decisions to Internalize," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1330-1349, October.
    2. Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
    3. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    4. Lyra J. Colfer & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2016. "The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 709-738.
    5. Maurizio Zollo & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Harbir Singh, 2002. "Interorganizational Routines and Performance in Strategic Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 701-713, December.
    6. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    7. Jeffrey H. Dyer, 1996. "Does Governance Matter? Keiretsu Alliances and Asset Specificity as Sources of Japanese Competitive Advantage," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(6), pages 649-666, December.
    8. Jeffrey T. Macher, 2006. "Technological Development and the Boundaries of the Firm: A Knowledge-Based Examination in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 826-843, June.
    9. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    10. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "How Much You Know versus How Well I Know You: Selecting a Supplier for a Technically Innovative Component," Working Papers 02-0106, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    11. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2009. "Complementarity Among Vertical Integration Decisions: Evidence from Automobile Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 311-332, February.
    12. Lamar Pierce, 2012. "Organizational Structure and the Limits of Knowledge Sharing: Incentive Conflict and Agency in Car Leasing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1106-1121, June.
    13. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2008. "How Does Outsourcing Affect Performance Dynamics? Evidence from the Automobile Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 1963-1979, December.
    14. Nicholas S. Argyres & Teppo Felin & Nicolai Foss & Todd Zenger, 2012. "Organizational Economics of Capability and Heterogeneity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1213-1226, October.
    15. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow & Jack A. Nickerson, 2015. "Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 216-234, February.
    16. Peter Galvin & Andre Morkel, 2001. "Modularity On Industry Structure: The Case Of The World The Effect Of Product Bicycle Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 31-47.
    17. Clayton M. Christensen & Matt Verlinden & George Westerman, 2002. "Disruption, disintegration and the dissipation of differentiability," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(5), pages 955-993, November.
    18. Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2004. "A Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm—The Problem-Solving Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(6), pages 617-632, December.
    19. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, April.
    20. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?," Working Papers 02-0130, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    21. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    22. Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
    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. Chaturvedi, Tuhin & Prescott, John E., 2020. "Dynamic Fit In An Era Of Ferment: Product Design Realignment And The Survival-Enhancing Role Of Alliances And Acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    2. Gukseong Lee, 2022. "Matching Task Complexity With Supplier Management to Enhance Outsourcing Performance," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.
    3. Anna Cabigiosu, 2022. "Sustainable development and incumbents' open innovation strategies for a greener competence‐destroying technology: The case of electric vehicles," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2315-2336, July.
    4. Faisal Khurshid & Woo‐Yong Park & Felix T.S. Chan, 2019. "Innovation shock, outsourcing strategy, and environmental performance: The roles of prior green innovation experience and knowledge inheritance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 1572-1582, December.
    5. Faisal Khurshid & Woo‐Yong Park & Felix T. S. Chan, 2020. "The impact of competition on vertical integration: The role of technological niche width," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 789-800, March.
    6. Habib, Tufail & Kristiansen, Jimmi Normann & Rana, Mohammad Bakhtiar & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Revisiting the role of modular innovation in technological radicalness and architectural change of products: The case of Tesla X and Roomba," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    7. Marfri Gambal & Aleksandre Asatiani & Julia Kotlarsky, 2022. "Strategic Innovation Through Outsourcing: A Theoretical Review," Papers 2206.00982, arXiv.org.
    8. Li, Ying & Shou, Yongyi & Ding, Ronggui & Sun, Tao & Zhou, Qing, 2019. "Governing local sourcing practices of overseas projects for the Belt and Road Initiative: A framework and evaluation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 212-226.

    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. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    2. Claudine Gartenberg & Lamar Pierce, 2017. "Subprime governance: Agency costs in vertically integrated banks and the 2008 mortgage crisis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 300-321, February.
    3. Faisal Khurshid & Woo‐Yong Park & Felix T. S. Chan, 2020. "The impact of competition on vertical integration: The role of technological niche width," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 789-800, March.
    4. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    5. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    6. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    7. Meissner, Dirk & Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter & Sarpong, David & Bach, Norbert, 2021. "Understanding cross border innovation activities: The linkages between innovation modes, product architecture and firm boundaries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 762-769.
    8. Peters, Frank, 2018. "The business of video games is a multi-player game : Essays on governance choices and performance in a two-sided market in the cultural industries," Other publications TiSEM 886b3148-4bbb-4ea4-b666-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    10. Constance E. Helfat & Miguel A. Campo-Rembado, 2016. "Integrative Capabilities, Vertical Integration, and Innovation Over Successive Technology Lifecycles," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 249-264, April.
    11. Simge Tuna & Stefano Brusoni & Anja Schulze, 2019. "Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 977-1009.
    12. Raja Roy & MB Sarkar, 2016. "Knowledge, firm boundaries, and innovation: Mitigating the incumbent's curse during radical technological change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 835-854, May.
    13. Jiang Wei & Yang Yang & Sali Li, 2021. "Mirror or no mirror? Architectural design of cross-border integration of Chinese multinational enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1399-1430, December.
    14. Najoung Lim & Seojin Kim & Rajshree Agarwal, 2023. "Weathering a demand shock: The impact of prior vertical scope on post‐shock firm response," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 1965-2004, August.
    15. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    16. Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria & Gonçalves, Ricardo & Sousa, Rui, 2023. "Governance of new product design: The influence of national institutions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    17. Gerhard Speckbacher & Kerstin Neumann & Werner H. Hoffmann, 2015. "Resource relatedness and the mode of entry into new businesses: Internal resource accumulation vs. access by collaborative arrangement," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(11), pages 1675-1687, November.
    18. Jörg Claussen & Tobias Kretschmer & Nils Stieglitz, 2015. "Vertical Scope, Turbulence, and the Benefits of Commitment and Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 915-929, April.
    19. Yurong Chen, 2017. "What is behind mirroring hypothesis? Dynamics between modularity and integration in the market creation: case from electric vehicle industry," Post-Print hal-01655962, HAL.
    20. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.

    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:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:1:p:326-341. 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/respol .

    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.