IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v27y2006i1p41-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal response to a next generation new product introduction: to imitate or to leapfrog?

Author

Listed:
  • D. Sudharshan

    (Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky, 255F Business and Economics Bldg., Lexington, KY 40506-0034, USA)

  • Ben Shaw-Ching Liu

    (College of Business Administration, Butler University, 4600 Sunset Ave. Indianapolis, IN 46208, USA)

  • Brian T. Ratchford

    (Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, 3467 Van Mulching Hall, College Park, MD 20742, USA)

Abstract

In this paper, we study the choice of technology levels and timing of the introduction of new technologies in a market in which customer sophistication increases over time. Faced with the introduction of a new generation product, a firm can either imitate or leapfrog it. If the new product is introduced optimally, we show that the optimal response is to imitate it. This is because the technology leader's best strategy is to set a technology level that makes imitation the best response. We also derive decision rules for the timing of introduction of new technologies. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Sudharshan & Ben Shaw-Ching Liu & Brian T. Ratchford, 2006. "Optimal response to a next generation new product introduction: to imitate or to leapfrog?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 41-62.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:27:y:2006:i:1:p:41-62
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.1247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/mde.1247
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.1247?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. John A. Norton & Frank M. Bass, 1987. "A Diffusion Theory Model of Adoption and Substitution for Successive Generations of High-Technology Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(9), pages 1069-1086, September.
    2. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    3. Pankaj Ghemawat, 1991. "Market Incumbency and Technological Inertia," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 161-171.
    4. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    5. Leslie Olin Morgan & Ruskin M. Morgan & William L. Moore, 2001. "Quality and Time-to-Market Trade-offs when There Are Multiple Product Generations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 89-104, June.
    6. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    7. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2000. "Market Entry Strategy Under Firm Heterogeneity and Asymmetric Payoffs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 313-327, November.
    2. Liao, Shuangqing & Seifert, Ralf W., 2015. "On the optimal frequency of multiple generation product introductions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 805-814.
    3. Hernández-Mireles, C. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2010. "The Launch Timing of New and Dominant Multigeneration Technologies," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-022-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    4. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    5. Ilan Lobel & Jigar Patel & Gustavo Vulcano & Jiawei Zhang, 2016. "Optimizing Product Launches in the Presence of Strategic Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1778-1799, June.
    6. Wang, Wenyuan & Wang, Yue & Mo, Daniel & Tseng, Mitchell M., 2017. "Managing component reuse in remanufacturing under product diffusion dynamics," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(PB), pages 551-560.
    7. Druehl, Cheryl T. & Schmidt, Glen M. & Souza, Gilvan C., 2009. "The optimal pace of product updates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 621-633, January.
    8. Chen, Yuwen & Carrillo, Janice E., 2011. "Single firm product diffusion model for single-function and fusion products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 232-245, October.
    9. Cambier, Adrien & Chardy, Matthieu & Figueiredo, Rosa & Ouorou, Adam & Poss, Michael, 2022. "Optimizing subscriber migrations for a telecommunication operator in uncertain context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 308-321.
    10. Shigeno, Hidenori & Matsuzaki, Taisuke & Ueki, Yasushi & Tsuji, Masatsugu, 2023. "The Effect of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the Innovation Process of Small and Medium-sized Regional Firms," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 278018, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Sohn, So Young & Lim, Michael, 2008. "The effect of forecasting and information sharing in SCM for multi-generation products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 276-287, April.
    12. Peres, Renana & Muller, Eitan & Mahajan, Vijay, 2010. "Innovation diffusion and new product growth models: A critical review and research directions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 91-106.
    13. Bruno Cassiman & Masako Ueda, 2006. "Optimal Project Rejection and New Firm Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 262-275, February.
    14. Kim, Namwoon & Srivastava, Rajendra K., 2007. "Modeling cross-price effects on inter-category dynamics: The case of three computing platforms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 290-301, June.
    15. Kivi, Antero & Smura, Timo & Töyli, Juuso, 2012. "Technology product evolution and the diffusion of new product features," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 107-126.
    16. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    17. Markus Reisinger & Jens Schmidt & Nils Stieglitz, 2021. "How Complementors Benefit from Taking Competition to the System Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5106-5123, August.
    18. Bruno D. Badia, 2019. "Patent Licensing and Technological Catch-Up in a Heterogeneous Duopoly," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(2), pages 287-300, September.
    19. Abhik Roy & Jagmohan Raju, 2011. "The influence of demand factors on dynamic competitive pricing strategy: An empirical study," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 259-281, September.
    20. Barrie R. Nault & Mark B. Vandenbosch, 2000. "Research Report: Disruptive Technologies—Explaining Entry in Next Generation Information Technology Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 304-319, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:27:y:2006:i:1:p:41-62. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.