IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v49y2020i6s004873332030069x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic Fit In An Era Of Ferment: Product Design Realignment And The Survival-Enhancing Role Of Alliances And Acquisitions

Author

Listed:
  • CHATURVEDI, TUHIN
  • PRESCOTT, JOHN E.

Abstract

We propose that in an era of ferment, when a firm's product design does not possess the features of the evolving dominant design, it faces a feature implementation gap defined as 'the number of features of the evolving product dominant design that are absent from a firm's product design'. Employing the performance feedback perspective of the behavioral theory of the firm, we conceptualize a feature implementation gap as a manifestation of an aspiration-performance gap that negatively affects a firm's likelihood of product market survival due to a product market 'lock-out'. To dynamically improve the alignment of their product designs with the evolving dominant design and increase their likelihood of product market survival, we suggest that firms engage in problematic search using alliances and acquisitions to decrease the feature implementation gap. We found strong support for our predictions using a longitudinally dynamic mediation model with data from an era of ferment in the digital camera product market between 1997-2004. Our study extends the behavioral theory of the firm to a novel context - eras of ferment. It demonstrates that in this context, problemistic search involved dual search modes- short-run search at the individual feature level and long-run search at the design level. It also shows the utility of adopting a demand-side (i.e. product market or customer based) perspective to explain how firms improve their likelihood of product market survival during eras of ferment. In this, it complements recent research that has examined how firms’ internal actions affect product design realignment processes and firm outcomes in eras of ferment.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:49:y:2020:i:6:s004873332030069x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004873332030069X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2020.103989?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. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    2. Ellen R. Auster, 1992. "The Relationship of Industry Evolution to Patterns of Technological Linkages, Joint Ventures, and Direct Investment Between U.S. and Japan," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 778-792, June.
    3. Violina P. Rindova & Antoaneta P. Petkova, 2007. "When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 217-232, April.
    4. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    5. Terza, Joseph V. & Basu, Anirban & Rathouz, Paul J., 2008. "Two-stage residual inclusion estimation: Addressing endogeneity in health econometric modeling," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 531-543, May.
    6. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    7. David Roodman, 2009. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(1), pages 135-158, February.
    8. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1504-1511, December.
    9. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
    10. Korcan Kavusan & Hans T. W. Frankort, 2019. "A behavioral theory of alliance portfolio reconfiguration: Evidence from pharmaceutical biotechnology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(10), pages 1668-1702, October.
    11. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
    12. Ernkvist, Mirko, 2015. "The double knot of technology and business-model innovation in the era of ferment of digital exchanges: The case of OM, a pioneer in electronic options exchanges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 285-299.
    13. Beverly B. Tyler & Turanay Caner, 2016. "New product introductions below aspirations, slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 896-910, May.
    14. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    15. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    16. 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.
    17. Toby E. Stuart, 2000. "Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 791-811, August.
    18. Linda F. Tegarden & Donald E. Hatfield & Ann E. Echols, 1999. "Doomed from the start: what is the value of selecting a future dominant design?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 495-518, June.
    19. J. Myles Shaver, 1998. "Accounting for Endogeneity When Assessing Strategy Performance: Does Entry Mode Choice Affect FDI Survival?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 571-585, April.
    20. Tanskanen, Kari & Ahola, Tuomas & Aminoff, Anna & Bragge, Johanna & Kaipia, Riikka & Kauppi, Katri, 2017. "Towards evidence-based management of external resources: Developing design propositions and future research avenues through research synthesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1087-1105.
    21. Razvan Lungeanu & Ithai Stern & Edward J. Zajac, 2016. "When do firms change technology-sourcing vehicles? The role of poor innovative performance and financial slack," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 855-869, May.
    22. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1514-1514, December.
    23. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    24. Pek‐Hooi Soh, 2010. "Network patterns and competitive advantage before the emergence of a dominant design," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 438-461, April.
    25. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    26. Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1995. "Dominant designs and the survival of firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 415-430.
    27. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    28. Susan K. Cohen & Sean T. Hsu & Kristina B. Dahlin, 2016. "With Whom Do Technology Sponsors Partner During Technology Battles? Social Networking Strategies for Unproven (and Proven) Technologies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 846-872, August.
    29. Gwendolyn K. Lee, 2007. "The significance of network resources in the race to enter emerging product markets: the convergence of telephony communications and computer networking, 1989–2001," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-37, January.
    30. 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.
    31. Edward J. Zajac & Matthew S. Kraatz & Rudi K. F. Bresser, 2000. "Modeling the dynamics of strategic fit: a normative approach to strategic change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 429-453, April.
    32. Pierre Dussauge & Laurence Capron & Will Mitchell, 1998. "Resource redeployment following horizontal acquisitions in Europe and North America, 1988-1992," Post-Print hal-00464384, HAL.
    33. Turanay Caner & Olga Bruyaka & John E. Prescott, 2018. "Flow Signals: Evidence from Patent and Alliance Portfolios in the US Biopharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 232-264, March.
    34. Cusumano, Michael A. & Mylonadis, Yiorgos & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1992. "Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 51-94, April.
    35. Henrich R. Greve & Marc-David L. Seidel, 2015. "The thin red line between success and failure: Path dependence in the diffusion of innovative production technologies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 475-496, April.
    36. Jay B. Barney, 1986. "Strategic Factor Markets: Expectations, Luck, and Business Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1231-1241, October.
    37. Rahul Kapoor & Nathan R. Furr, 2015. "Complementarities and competition: Unpacking the drivers of entrants' technology choices in the solar photovoltaic industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 416-436, March.
    38. Jaideep Anand & Bruce Kogut, 1997. "Technological Capabilities of Countries, Firm Rivalry and Foreign Direct Investments," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 28(3), pages 445-465, September.
    39. Blind, Knut & Petersen, Sören S. & Riillo, Cesare A.F., 2017. "The impact of standards and regulation on innovation in uncertain markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 249-264.
    40. Frankort, Hans T.W., 2016. "When does knowledge acquisition in R&D alliances increase new product development? The moderating roles of technological relatedness and product-market competition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 291-302.
    41. Deeds, David L. & Hill, Charles W. L., 1996. "Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 41-55, January.
    42. Markard, Jochen & Wirth, Steffen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "Institutional dynamics and technology legitimacy – A framework and a case study on biogas technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 330-344.
    43. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    44. Martin, Xavier & Mitchell, Will, 1998. "The influence of local search and performance heuristics on new design introduction in a new product market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 753-771, April.
    45. J. P. Eggers, 2016. "Reversing course: Competing technologies, mistakes, and renewal in flat panel displays," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1578-1596, August.
    46. Villalonga, Belen, 2004. "Intangible resources, Tobin's q, and sustainability of performance differences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 205-230, June.
    47. Jensen, Michael C, 1988. "Takeovers: Their Causes and Consequences," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 21-48, Winter.
    48. Windmeijer, Frank, 2005. "A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 25-51, May.
    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. Ketan Reddy & Subash Sasidharan, 2022. "Servicification and global value chain survival: Firm‐level evidence from India," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 455-473, September.

    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. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    2. Rothaermel, Frank T. & Deeds, David L., 2006. "Alliance type, alliance experience and alliance management capability in high-technology ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 429-460, July.
    3. Berg, S. & Wustmans, M. & Bröring, S., 2019. "Identifying first signals of emerging dominance in a technological innovation system: A novel approach based on patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 706-722.
    4. Brem, Alexander & Nylund, Petra A. & Schuster, Gerd, 2016. "Innovation and de facto standardization: The influence of dominant design on innovative performance, radical innovation, and process innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 79-88.
    5. Leiblein, Michael J. & Reuer, Jeffrey J., 2004. "Building a foreign sales base: the roles of capabilities and alliances for entrepreneurial firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 285-307, March.
    6. Bae, Joonhyung & Ozmel, Umit, 2024. "The interplay between product development failures and alliance portfolio properties in the formation of exploration versus exploitation alliances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Jaideep Anand & Raffaele Oriani & Roberto S. Vassolo, 2010. "Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1213-1232, December.
    8. Coombs, Joseph E. & Mudambi, Ram & Deeds, David L., 2006. "An examination of the investments in U.S. biotechnology firms by foreign and domestic corporate partners," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 405-428, July.
    9. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    10. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    11. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    12. Mahka Moeen & Rajshree Agarwal & Sonali K. Shah, 2020. "Building Industries by Building Knowledge: Uncertainty Reduction over Industry Milestones," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 218-244, September.
    13. Juan Federico & Joan-Lluis Capelleras, 2015. "The heterogeneous dynamics between growth and profits: the case of young firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 231-253, February.
    14. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    15. Erden, Zeynep & Klang, David & Sydler, Renato & von Krogh, Georg, 2014. "Knowledge-flows and firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2777-2785.
    16. 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.
    17. Shukla, Dhirendra Mani & Mital, Amita & Qureshi, Israr & Wang, Taiyuan, 2020. "Valuation effects of alliance portfolio expansion speed and strength: Evidence from high-tech firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 370-383.
    18. 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).
    19. Tammy L. Madsen & Gordon Walker, 2017. "Competitive heterogeneity, cohorts, and persistent advantage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 184-202, February.
    20. Cappelli, Riccardo & Corsino, Marco & Laursen, Keld & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2023. "Technological competition and patent strategy: Protecting innovation, preempting rivals and defending the freedom to operate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).

    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:49:y:2020:i:6:s004873332030069x. 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.