Author
Abstract
We explore the implications of a real and common alternative to attempting the transformation required to embrace a new, dominant, technology--the choice to maintain focus on the old technology. In considering this choice, we distinguish between "racing" strategies, which attempt to fight off the rise of the new technology by extending the performance of the old technology, and "retreat" strategies, which attempt to accommodate the rise of the new technology by repositioning the old technology in the demand environment. Underlying our arguments is the observation that the emergence of a new technology does more than just create a substitute threat--it can also reveal significant underlying heterogeneity in the old technology's broader demand environment. This heterogeneity is a source of opportunities that can support a new position for the old technology, in either the current market or a new one. Using this lens, we explore the decision to stay with the old technology as a rational, proactive choice rather than as a mark of managerial and organizational failure. We then consider the distinctive challenges and organizational dynamics that arise in technology retreats, and their implications for the ways in which managers and scholars should approach questions regarding the management of capabilities, lifecycles, and ecosystems. Copyright 2010 The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Associazione ICC. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.
Suggested Citation
Ron Adner & Daniel Snow, 2010.
"Old technology responses to new technology threats: demand heterogeneity and technology retreats,"
Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(5), pages 1655-1675, October.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:indcch:v:19:y:2010:i:5:p:1655-1675
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:oup:indcch:v:19:y:2010:i:5:p:1655-1675. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.