DO PRODUCT ARCHITECTURES AFFECT INNOVATION PRODUCTIVITY IN COMPLEX PRODUCT ECOSYSTEMS?

被引:17
作者
Ethiraj, Sendil K. [1 ]
Posen, Hart E. [1 ]
机构
[1] London Business Sch, London NW1 4SA, England
来源
COLLABORATION AND COMPETITION IN BUSINESS ECOSYSTEMS | 2013年 / 30卷
关键词
Production architectures; innovation; productivity; product ecosystems; RESEARCH-AND-DEVELOPMENT; PATENT CITATIONS; KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS; TECHNOLOGICAL-CHANGE; VALUE CREATION; DESIGN; PERFORMANCE; MODULARITY; SYSTEM; DETERMINANTS;
D O I
10.1108/S0742-3322(2013)0000030008
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In this paper, we seek to understand how changes in product architecture affect the innovation performance of firms in a complex product ecosystem. The canonical view in the literature is that changes in the technological dependencies between components, which define a product's architecture, undermine the innovation efforts of incumbent firms because their product development efforts are built around existing architectures. We extend this prevailing view in arguing that component dependencies and changes in them affect firm innovation efforts via two principal mechanisms. First, component dependencies expand or constrain the choice set of firm component innovation efforts. From the perspective of any one component in a complex product (which we label the focal component), an increase in the flow of design information to the focal component from other (non-focal) components simultaneously increases the constraint on focal component firms in their choice of profitable R&D projects while decreasing the constraint on non-focal component firms. Second, asymmetries in component dependencies can confer disproportionate influence on some component firms in setting and dictating the trajectory of progress in the overall system. Increases in such asymmetric influence allow component firms to expand their innovation output. Using historical patenting data in the personal computer ecosystem, we develop fine-grained measures of interdependence between component technologies and changes in them over time. We find strong support for the empirical implications of our theory.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 166
页数:40
相关论文
共 91 条
[1]  
ABERNATHY WJ, 1978, TECHNOL REV, V80, P40
[2]   VALUE CREATION IN INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS: HOW THE STRUCTURE OF TECHNOLOGICAL INTERDEPENDENCE AFFECTS FIRM PERFORMANCE IN NEW TECHNOLOGY GENERATIONS [J].
Adner, Ron ;
Kapoor, Rahul .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2010, 31 (03) :306-333
[3]   Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study [J].
Ahuja, G ;
Katila, R .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2001, 22 (03) :197-220
[4]   Moving Beyond Schumpeter: Management Research on the Determinants of Technological Innovation [J].
Ahuja, Gautam ;
Lampert, Curba Morris ;
Tandon, Vivek .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT ANNALS, 2008, 2 :1-98
[5]   Applicant and examiner citations in US patents: An overview and analysis [J].
Alcacer, Juan ;
Gittelman, Michelle ;
Sampat, Bhaven .
RESEARCH POLICY, 2009, 38 (02) :415-427
[6]  
Alexander C., 1964, Notes on the Synthesis of Form
[7]   Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks [J].
Almeida, P ;
Kogut, B .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1999, 45 (07) :905-917
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Regression Analysis of Count Data
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1998, Microsoft secrets: how the world's most powerful software company creates technology, shapes markets, and manages people
[10]  
[Anonymous], 1998, SYSTEMS ENG J INT CO, DOI DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6858(1998)1:23.0.CO