IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v46y2000i10p1300-1316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competing with New Product Technologies: A Process Model of Strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Shobha S. Das

    (Strategy, Management, ... Organisation, B2c-87, Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798)

  • Andrew H. Van de Ven

    (Vemon H. Heath Professor of Organizational Innovation and Change, Strategic Management ... Organization, 3-353 Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455)

Abstract

This paper draws upon research in the economics of technical change and in the social construction of technology to develop and test a process model of strategy. We conducted a longitudinal study of leading firms that were sponsoring new and competing product technologies in two industries: the videoplayer industry and the medical diagnostic imaging industry. We built original datasets on the actions of these firms, and then empirically examined the strategy process. Our findings indicate that the nature of the product technology, whether novel or evolved, and the market, whether concentrated or dispersed, influences when firms use technical or institutional strategies to get their new product technology accepted by the market.

Suggested Citation

  • Shobha S. Das & Andrew H. Van de Ven, 2000. "Competing with New Product Technologies: A Process Model of Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1300-1316, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:46:y:2000:i:10:p:1300-1316
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.46.10.1300.12276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.10.1300.12276
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.46.10.1300.12276?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henderson, Rebecca, 1995. "Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 631-643, July.
    2. Andrew Abbott, 1990. "A Primer on Sequence Methods," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 375-392, November.
    3. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    4. Andrew H. Van de Ven & Marshall Scott Poole, 1990. "Methods for Studying Innovation Development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 313-335, August.
    5. Marc H. Meyer & Edward B. Roberts, 1986. "New Product Strategy in Small Technology-Based Firms: A Pilot Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 806-821, July.
    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. repec:tiu:tiutis:e656c1f0-c869-4ee6-b49b-247830a75965 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mäkitie, Tuukka & Hanson, Jens & Steen, Markus & Hansen, Teis & Andersen, Allan Dahl, 2022. "Complementarity formation mechanisms in technology value chains," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    3. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    4. Sjoerd Bakker, 2009. "The Emergence of a Dominant Design – a study on hydrogen prototypes," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Nov 2009.
    5. Haunschmied, Josef L. & Feichtinger, Gustav & Hartl, Richard F. & Kort, Peter M., 2005. "Keeping up with the technology pace: A DNS-curve and a limit cycle in a technology investment decision problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 509-529, August.
    6. Ewald Scherm & Christian Maaß, 2006. "Zum Stellenwert der Netzwerkökonomik in der Strategie-/Marketingforschung —Eine Analyse empirischer Untersuchungen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 27-46, March.
    7. Bakker, Sjoerd & van Lente, Harro & Meeus, Marius T.H., 2012. "Dominance in the prototyping phase—The case of hydrogen passenger cars," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 871-883.
    8. Newaz, Md Tarique & Chandna, Vallari & Dass, Mayukh & Arnett, Dennis, 2023. "Using R-A theory and the optimal distinctiveness perspective to understand the strategic marketing approaches used by platform-based organizations: The cases of Facebook and Twitter in digital ecosyst," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Kostoff, Ronald N. & Geisler, Elie, 2007. "The unintended consequences of metrics in technology evaluation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 103-114.
    10. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    11. Karim Ben Slimane & Cédric Diridollou & Karim Hamadache, 2018. "How Morally Contested Innovations are Legitimized?," Post-Print hal-02948026, HAL.
    12. Ben-Slimane, Karim & Diridollou, Cédric & Hamadache, Karim, 2020. "The legitimation strategies of early stage disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    13. Leonard Tchuindjo, 2007. "Pricing of Multi-Defaultable Bonds with a Two-Correlated-Factor Hull-White Model," Applied Mathematical Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 19-39.
    14. 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.
    15. Kort, P.M. & Verheijen, P.A. & De Waegenaere, A.M.B., 2003. "The theory of the new economy firm : A dynamic analysis of human capital investment," Other publications TiSEM 2bac0c2f-d53b-4b8f-a664-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Nelson Roberto Furquim, 2017. "The Impact of Innovative Products in the Metallic Zinc Market Growth in Brazil," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 14(4), pages 403-416, July.
    17. Napier, Elizabeth & Liu, Steven Y.H. & Liu, Jingting, 2024. "Adaptive strength: Unveiling a multilevel dynamic process model for organizational resilience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    18. Malhotra, Abhishek & Zhang, Huiting & Beuse, Martin & Schmidt, Tobias, 2021. "How do new use environments influence a technology's knowledge trajectory? A patent citation network analysis of lithium-ion battery technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    19. Shaik, Aqueeb Sohail & Alshibani, Safiya Mukhtar & Mishra, Shreya & Papa, Armando & Cuomo, Maria Teresa, 2023. "Does learning from innovation failure enhance innovation performance? A quantitative investigation of small businesses," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Zhao, Shengchao & Zeng, Deming & Li, Jian & Feng, Ke & Wang, Yao, 2023. "Quantity or quality: The roles of technology and science convergence on firm innovation performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    21. Schrettle, Stefan & Hinz, Andreas & Scherrer -Rathje, Maike & Friedli, Thomas, 2014. "Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PA), pages 73-84.

    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. 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.
    2. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    3. Kevin J. Dooley & Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1999. "Explaining Complex Organizational Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 358-372, June.
    4. Jiang, Yi Dragon & Straub, Caroline & Klyver, Kim & Mauer, René, 2021. "Unfolding refugee entrepreneurs' opportunity-production process — Patterns and embeddedness," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(5).
    5. Ferriani, Simone & Lazerson, Mark H. & Lorenzoni, Gianni, 2020. "Anchor entrepreneurship and industry catalysis: The rise of the Italian Biomedical Valley," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    6. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    7. Alan D. Meyer & Vibha Gaba & Kenneth A. Colwell, 2005. "Organizing Far from Equilibrium: Nonlinear Change in Organizational Fields," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 456-473, October.
    8. Gina Colarelli O'Connor & Mark P. Rice & Lois Peters & Robert W. Veryzer, 2003. "Managing Interdisciplinary, Longitudinal Research Teams: Extending Grounded Theory-Building Methodologies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 353-373, August.
    9. Tigabu, Aschalew Demeke & Berkhout, Frans & van Beukering, Pieter, 2015. "The diffusion of a renewable energy technology and innovation system functioning: Comparing bio-digestion in Kenya and Rwanda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 331-345.
    10. Raymond-Alain Thietart, 2016. "Strategy dynamics: Agency, path dependency, and self-organized emergence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 774-792, April.
    11. Corradini, Carlo & De Propris, Lisa, 2017. "Beyond local search: Bridging platforms and inter-sectoral technological integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 196-206.
    12. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    13. Marta Gancarczyk, 2010. "Model schyłku i odrodzenia klastrów," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 1-21.
    14. Narduzzo, Alessandro & Warglien, Massimo, 1996. "Learning from the Experience of Others: An Experiment on Information Contagion," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(1), pages 113-126.
    15. John S. Earle & Klara Z. Sabirianova, 2002. "How Late to Pay? Understanding Wage Arrears in Russia," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(3), pages 661-707, July.
    16. Rehák Štefan & Hudec Oto & Buček Milan, 2013. "Path dependency and path plasticity in emerging industries: Two cases from Slovakia," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 57(1-2), pages 52-66, October.
    17. Beomjin Choi & T. S. Raghu & Ajay Vinzé & Kevin J. Dooley, 2019. "Effectiveness of standards consortia: Social network perspectives," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 405-416, April.
    18. Mahzouni, Arian, 2019. "The role of institutional entrepreneurship in emerging energy communities: The town of St. Peter in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 297-308.
    19. Georg Erber, 1994. "Verdoorn's or Okun's Law?: Employment and Growth Experiences in OECD Countries, 1960-1993," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 98, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:46:y:2000:i:10:p:1300-1316. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.