IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijeima/v18y2014i4p289-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incumbents' responses to disruptive business model innovation: the moderating role of technology vs. market-driven innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Solomon Russom Habtay
  • Magnus Holmén

Abstract

Current research argues that incumbents should respond to disruptive innovation by setting up a separate business unit. This recommendation stems from research predominantly carried out on disruptive technologies in high-tech industries but whether incumbents respond differently to other types of disruptive business model innovations and whether the type of response leads to a difference in performance have not been empirically analysed. By collecting data from 88 strategic business units (SBUs) and dividing the sample into incumbents responding to disruptive technology against those responding to disruptive market-driven innovations, the study shows that the latter type of firms can succeed in managing both disruptive and sustaining innovations without setting up structurally separated business units. We discuss the implications of our results and highlight areas for further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Solomon Russom Habtay & Magnus Holmén, 2014. "Incumbents' responses to disruptive business model innovation: the moderating role of technology vs. market-driven innovation," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 18(4), pages 289-309.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijeima:v:18:y:2014:i:4:p:289-309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=64211
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    2. Ancillai, Chiara & Sabatini, Andrea & Gatti, Marco & Perna, Andrea, 2023. "Digital technology and business model innovation: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Masoud Gholampour Rad, 2017. "Disruptive innovation in media industry ecosystem and need for improving managerial cognitive capabilities in polymediation era," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1352183-135, January.
    4. Raphaël Maucuer & Alexandre Renaud, 2019. "Business Model Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Origins and Trends," Post-Print hal-01918188, HAL.
    5. Blume, Maximilian & Oberländer, Anna Maria & Röglinger, Maximilian & Rosemann, Michael & Wyrtki, Katrin, 2020. "Ex ante assessment of disruptive threats: Identifying relevant threats before one is disrupted," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    6. Kristina Stoiber & Kurt Matzler & Julia Hautz, 2023. "Ambidextrous structures paving the way for disruptive business models: a conceptual framework," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1439-1485, May.
    7. Elfindah Princes, 2019. "Ambidextrous Leadership in Manufacture Industry in Indonesia," GATR Journals jmmr228, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    8. Haftor, Darek. M. & Climent Costa, Ricardo, 2023. "Five dimensions of business model innovation: A multi-case exploration of industrial incumbent firm’s business model transformations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    9. Konstantinos Poulis & Gregorios C. Galanakis & Gregory T. Triantafillou & Efthimios Poulis, 2020. "Value migration: digitalization of shipping as a mechanism of industry dethronement," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, December.

    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:ids:ijeima:v:18:y:2014:i:4:p:289-309. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=7 .

    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.