IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1805.06339.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Data-Driven Investment Decision-Making: Applying Moore's Law and S-Curves to Business Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher L. Benson
  • Christopher L. Magee

Abstract

This paper introduces a method for linking technological improvement rates (i.e. Moore's Law) and technology adoption curves (i.e. S-Curves). There has been considerable research surrounding Moore's Law and the generalized versions applied to the time dependence of performance for other technologies. The prior work has culminated with methodology for quantitative estimation of technological improvement rates for nearly any technology. This paper examines the implications of such regular time dependence for performance upon the timing of key events in the technological adoption process. We propose a simple crossover point in performance which is based upon the technological improvement rates and current level differences for target and replacement technologies. The timing for the cross-over is hypothesized as corresponding to the first 'knee'? in the technology adoption "S-curve" and signals when the market for a given technology will start to be rewarding for innovators. This is also when potential entrants are likely to intensely experiment with product-market fit and when the competition to achieve a dominant design begins. This conceptual framework is then back-tested by examining two technological changes brought about by the internet, namely music and video transmission. The uncertainty analysis around the cases highlight opportunities for organizations to reduce future technological uncertainty. Overall, the results from the case studies support the reliability and utility of the conceptual framework in strategic business decision-making with the caveat that while technical uncertainty is reduced, it is not eliminated.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher L. Benson & Christopher L. Magee, 2018. "Data-Driven Investment Decision-Making: Applying Moore's Law and S-Curves to Business Strategies," Papers 1805.06339, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1805.06339
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.06339
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Murray A. Young, 1989. "Research notes and communications sources of competitive data for the management strategist," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 285-293, May.
    2. Geroski, P. A., 2000. "Models of technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 603-625, April.
    3. Christopher L Benson & Christopher L Magee, 2015. "Quantitative Determination of Technological Improvement from Patent Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Christopher L. Benson & Christopher L. Magee, 2016. "Using Enhanced Patent Data for Future-Oriented Technology Analysis," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Tugrul U. Daim & Denise Chiavetta & Alan L. Porter & Ozcan Saritas (ed.), Anticipating Future Innovation Pathways Through Large Data Analysis, chapter 0, pages 119-131, Springer.
    5. Richard A. Bettis & Michael A. Hitt, 1995. "The new competitive landscape," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 7-19.
    6. Farzin, Y. H. & Huisman, K. J. M. & Kort, P. M., 1998. "Optimal timing of technology adoption," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 779-799, May.
    7. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    8. Raja Roy & MB Sarkar, 2016. "Knowledge, firm boundaries, and innovation: Mitigating the incumbent's curse during radical technological change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 835-854, May.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2004. "Innovation and Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 10212, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Magee, C.L. & Basnet, S. & Funk, J.L. & Benson, C.L., 2016. "Quantitative empirical trends in technical performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 237-246.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    12. Nordhaus, William D., 2007. "Two Centuries of Productivity Growth in Computing," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 128-159, March.
    13. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2016. "Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Re-examining technology S-curves," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 625-648, April.
    14. William D. Nordhaus, 1996. "Do Real-Output and Real-Wage Measures Capture Reality? The History of Lighting Suggests Not," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 27-70, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Vikas A. Aggarwal & Hart E. Posen & Maciej Workiewicz, 2017. "Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1212-1231, June.
    16. JongRoul Woo & Christopher L. Magee, 2017. "Exploring the relationship between technological improvement and innovation diffusion: An empirical test," Papers 1704.03597, arXiv.org, revised May 2018.
    17. Tianxu Chen & Lihong Qian & Vadake Narayanan, 2017. "Battle on the Wrong Field? Entrant Type, Dominant Designs, and Technology Exit," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(13), pages 2579-2598, December.
    18. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    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. Triulzi, Giorgio & Alstott, Jeff & Magee, Christopher L., 2020. "Estimating technology performance improvement rates by mining patent data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    3. Matthias Niggli & Christian Rutzer, 2023. "Digital technologies, technological improvement rates, and innovations “Made in Switzerland”," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 159(1), pages 1-31, December.
    4. Feng, Sida & Magee, Christopher L., 2020. "Technological development of key domains in electric vehicles: Improvement rates, technology trajectories and key assignees," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    5. Lafond, François & Bailey, Aimee Gotway & Bakker, Jan David & Rebois, Dylan & Zadourian, Rubina & McSharry, Patrick & Farmer, J. Doyne, 2018. "How well do experience curves predict technological progress? A method for making distributional forecasts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 104-117.
    6. Rahul Kapoor & Thomas Klueter, 2021. "Unbundling and Managing Uncertainty Surrounding Emerging Technologies," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 62-74, March.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni & Grazzi, Marco & Mathew, Nanditha, 2017. "The cost-quantity relations and the diverse patterns of “learning by doing”: Evidence from India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1873-1886.
    8. JongRoul Woo & Christopher L. Magee, 2017. "Exploring the relationship between technological improvement and innovation diffusion: An empirical test," Papers 1704.03597, arXiv.org, revised May 2018.
    9. Joost Rietveld & J. P. Eggers, 2018. "Demand Heterogeneity in Platform Markets: Implications for Complementors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 304-322, April.
    10. Coccia, Mario, 2019. "The theory of technological parasitism for the measurement of the evolution of technology and technological forecasting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 289-304.
    11. Anuraag Singh & Giorgio Triulzi & Christopher L. Magee, 2020. "Technological improvement rate estimates for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Papers 2004.13919, arXiv.org.
    12. Charles Lincoln Kenji Yamamura & Harmi Takiya & Cláudia Aparecida Soares Machado & José Carlos Curvelo Santana & José Alberto Quintanilha & Fernando Tobal Berssaneti, 2022. "Electric Cars in Brazil: An Analysis of Core Green Technologies and the Transition Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    14. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.
    15. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2009. "Using neural network to analyze the influence of the patent performance upon the market value of the US pharmaceutical companies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 637-655, September.
    16. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    17. Slowak, André P., 2009. "Market fields structure & dynamics in industrial automation," FZID Discussion Papers 02-2009, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    18. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2010. "The nonlinear nature of the relationships between the patent traits and corporate performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 201-210, January.
    19. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    20. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:1805.06339. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.