IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v55y2009i8p1409-1422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application-Specific R& D Capabilities and the Advantage of Incumbents: Evidence from the Anticancer Drug Market

Author

Listed:
  • M. Lourdes Sosa

    (Strategic and International Management Group, London Business School, London NW1 4SA, United Kingdom)

Abstract

This paper examines the proposition that during competence-destroying technological changes, incumbents are incompetent in researching in house a radically new technology. They only retain market leadership if their undestroyed, proprietary complementary assets compensate for their research incompetence. In contrast to prior research, I propose that there is not one but two sets of capabilities necessary to execute research and development (R& D), sets that differ in their market specificity: a technology-specific set (i.e., technological platforms that are non-market specific) and an application-specific set (i.e., knowledge of the application that is therefore market specific). Although all markets require both sets of capabilities to execute R& D, prior research has analyzed cases where the application was not as complex, and therefore application-specific capabilities did not represent strategic factors. Because at the start of a technological discontinuity application-specific capabilities are undestroyed and have accrued only to incumbents, when complex enough, these capabilities can represent a source of competitive advantage for these firms, even in the face of competition from diversifying entrants reusing previously acquired technological platforms. I find evidence consistent with my proposition based on data on outcomes from drug discovery (as estimated through clinical endpoints in phase I trials) for firms competing in the anticancer drug market, one of the most complex markets within pharmaceuticals, as the market transitions into the biotechnology revolution. The proposition in this paper implies that although technological platforms can help firms move across markets, application-specific R& D capabilities can help firms retain leadership within a market across technological discontinuities.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Lourdes Sosa, 2009. "Application-Specific R& D Capabilities and the Advantage of Incumbents: Evidence from the Anticancer Drug Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1409-1422, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:8:p:1409-1422
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1027
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1027?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. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Pierre Azoulay, 2004. "Capturing Knowledge within and across Firm Boundaries: Evidence from Clinical Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1591-1612, December.
    3. Z. John Lu & William S. Comanor, 1998. "Strategic Pricing Of New Pharmaceuticals," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 108-118, February.
    4. Stuart, Graham & Higgins, Matthew, 2007. "The Impact of Patenting on New Product Introductions in the Pharmaceutical Industry," MPRA Paper 4574, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Richard P. Rumelt, 1982. "Diversification strategy and profitability," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(4), pages 359-369, October.
    6. Ilan Guedj & David Scharfstein, 2004. "Organizational Scope and Investment: Evidence from the Drug Development Strategies and Performance of Biopharmaceutical Firms," NBER Working Papers 10933, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201, September.
    8. Montgomery, Cynthia A. & Hariharan, S., 1991. "Diversified expansion by large established firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 71-89, January.
    9. Frank T. Rothaermel, 2001. "Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 687-699, June.
    10. Sidney G. Winter, 2003. "Understanding dynamic capabilities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(10), pages 991-995, October.
    11. Kathleen Reavis Conner, 1988. "Strategies for product cannibalism," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 9-26, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Mary Tripsas, 1997. "Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 119-142, July.
    14. Methe, David & Swaminathan, Anand & Mitchell, Will, 1996. "The Underemphasized Role of Established Firms as the," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(4), pages 1181-1203.
    15. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    16. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    17. Cooper, Arnold C. & Schendel, Dan, 1976. "Strategic responses to technological threats," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 61-69, February.
    18. Sigelman, Lee & Zeng, Langche, 1999. "Analyzing Censored and Sample-Selected Data with Tobit and Heckit Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 167-182, December.
    19. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    20. Constance E. Helfat, 1997. "Know‐how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: the case of r&d," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 339-360, May.
    21. Brian S. Silverman, 1999. "Technological Resources and the Direction of Corporate Diversification: Toward an Integration of the Resource-Based View and Transaction Cost Economics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1109-1124, August.
    22. Steven Klepper & Kenneth L. Simons, 2000. "Dominance by birthright: entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the U.S. television receiver industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 997-1016, October.
    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. Vikas A. Aggarwal & Brian Wu, 2015. "Organizational Constraints to Adaptation: Intrafirm Asymmetry in the Locus of Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 218-238, February.
    2. Nathan R. Furr & Daniel C. Snow, 2015. "Intergenerational Hybrids: Spillbacks, Spillforwards, and Adapting to Technology Discontinuities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 475-493, April.
    3. Cohen, Susan K. & Munshi, Natasha V., 2017. "Innovation search dynamics in new domains: An exploratory study of academic founders' search for funding in the biotechnology industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 130-143.
    4. Shinjinee Chattopadhyay & Janet Bercovitz, 2020. "When one door closes, another door opens … for some: Evidence from the post‐TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 988-1022, June.
    5. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    6. Minyoung Kim & Curba Morris Lampert & Raja Roy, 2020. "Regionalization of R&D activities: (Dis)economies of interdependence and inventive performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(7), pages 1054-1075, September.
    7. Montoya-Blandón, Santiago & Jacho-Chávez, David T., 2020. "Semiparametric quasi maximum likelihood estimation of the fractional response model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    8. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    9. 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.
    10. M. Lourdes Sosa, 2011. "From Old Competence Destruction to New Competence Access: Evidence from the Comparison of Two Discontinuities in Anticancer Drug Discovery," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1500-1516, December.
    11. Yang, Chia-Hsuan & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2016. "Gains from others’ losses: Technology trajectories and the global division of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 724-745.
    12. JP Eggers & Michal Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2011. "Performance implications of core and complementary pre-entry experience: The role of consumer heterogeneity in mobile telephony," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-11-03 (R2), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 29 May 2012.
    13. Lampert, Curba Morris & Kim, Minyoung, 2019. "Going far to go further: Offshoring, exploration, and R&D performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 376-386.
    14. Guido Bortoluzzi & Saif Maqbool, 2016. "Le dodici fonti della capacit? innovativa tra letteratura accademica e pratica manageriale," ECONOMIA E SOCIET? REGIONALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(3), pages 48-67.
    15. Russell J. Funk & Jason Owen-Smith, 2017. "A Dynamic Network Measure of Technological Change," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 791-817, March.
    16. Chih-Hung Peng & Dezhi Yin & Han Zhang, 2020. "More than Words in Medical Question-and-Answer Sites: A Content-Context Congruence Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 913-928, September.
    17. Mahka Moeen & Will Mitchell, 2020. "How do pre‐entrants to the industry incubation stage choose between alliances and acquisitions for technical capabilities and specialized complementary assets?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1450-1489, August.
    18. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. J. P. Eggers & Michał Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2020. "Experience, Consumers, and Fit: Disentangling Performance Implications of Preentry Technological and Market Experience in 2G Mobile Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 245-265, March.
    20. Brian Wu & Zhixi Wan & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2014. "Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9), pages 1257-1278, September.
    21. Martzoukos, Spiros H. & Zacharias, Eleftherios, 2013. "Real option games with R&D and learning spillovers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 236-249.
    22. J. Cameron Verhaal & Stanislav D. Dobrev & Lyda Bigelow, 2017. "When incremental is imperative: tactical innovation in the in-vitro fertilization industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(4), pages 709-726.

    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. 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.
    2. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    3. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    4. Andrew A. King & Christopher L. Tucci, 2002. "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 171-186, February.
    5. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    6. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    7. Sharma, Sunil, 2015. "Relevance of Resource Based View Themes for Capability Evolution," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-30, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    8. Gianluigi Giustiziero & Aseem Kaul & Brian Wu, 2019. "The Dynamics of Learning and Competition in Schumpeterian Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 668-693, July.
    9. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    10. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Alessio Cozzolino & Gianmario Verona, 2024. "Decision tree for adaptation after radical changes: linking dynamic capabilities, ambidexterity, and strategic alliances," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(3), pages 745-769, September.
    13. Corinne A. Coen & Catherine A. Maritan, 2011. "Investing in Capabilities: The Dynamics of Resource Allocation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 99-117, February.
    14. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    15. Dwibedy, Punyashlok, 2022. "Informal competition and product innovation decisions of new ventures and incumbents across developing and transitioning countries," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    16. Malik, Omar R., 2008. "Adapting to market liberalization: The role of dynamic capabilities, initial resource conditions, and strategic path choices in determining evolutionary fitness of Less Developed Country (LDC) firms," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 217-231, September.
    17. Kotabe, Masaaki & Jiang, Crystal Xiangwen & Murray, Janet Y., 2011. "Managerial ties, knowledge acquisition, realized absorptive capacity and new product market performance of emerging multinational companies: A case of China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 166-176, April.
    18. Rakesh B. Sambharya & Jooh Lee, 2014. "Renewing Dynamic Capabilities Globally: An Empirical Study of the World’s Largest MNCs," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 137-169, April.
    19. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Jason Li-Ying & Yuandi Wang & Lutao Ning, 2016. "How do dynamic capabilities transform external technologies into firms’ renewed technological resources? – A mediation model," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1009-1036, 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:inm:ormnsc:v:55:y:2009:i:8:p:1409-1422. 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.