We notice that you are using Internet Explorer to view our website. Please note that we currently do not support that browser for accessing certain features. To improve your browsing experience, please use either Firefox or Chrome.
Tuesday, October 27
Mahka MoeenUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Prior literature on industry evolution suggests that technological breakthroughs spur firm entry and innovation in new industries. However, firms may enter and innovate in a new industry due to shocks in an established industry, and a particular innovation may originate in the existing industry rather than constitute a novel technological advancement. Only resources with sufficiently low adjustment costs are redeployed. Empirically, I exploit the 2014 oil price shock and show that the oil and gas industry know-how and technologies were transferred to the offshore wind energy industry through human resource, supply chain and physical capital redeployment. This research contributes to literatures on industry evolution and technological change and has implications for the energy transition.
Zooming In or Zooming Out: Entrants’ Product Usage Breadth in the Nascent Drone Industry
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Mahka Moeen,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Faced with demand uncertainty in a nascent industry, entrants need to strategically consider which customer segments to serve, and what specialized product features can address customers’ preferences. While high product usage breadth implies addressing preferences of a wide range of customers, low product usage breadth indicates inclusion of market-specific features that are specialized to particular customers. We suggest that when entrants have experience in contexts that are potential users of a new product, their products are likely to exhibit low usage breadth. The relationship is moderated by whether they are startups or diversifying entrants. The empirical context is the U.S. commercial drone industry between 2014 and 2016.
A Microfoundations Perspective on Orchestration of Coopetitive Networks
University of Montpellier Anne-Sophie Fernandez,
University of Montpellier Olga Bruyaka,
West Virginia University
Multiple and complex interactions between competing organizations create a unique type of collaborative networks: coopetitive innovation networks. Surprisingly, little is known about their orchestration challenges and related orchestration capabilities. Therefore, we try to understand them through the prism of microfoundations perspective. We analyze interactions among structures, processes and individuals to explain the nature and evolution of orchestration capabilities over time and across two sequential innovation projects. These projects are self-orchestrated by a network composed of 12 key competitors in the European aeronautics industry and the European Commission to deliver more environmentally friendly aircrafts. Self-orchestration, simultaneous use of multiple orchestration practices (e.g., rotating leadership, consensual decision-making, etc.) and important role of individuals contributed to maintaining the balance between competition and collaboration in the coopetitive networks
Managing Complexity: Time Pacing of Product Innovation in the Global Mobile Application Industry
University of South Carolina Scott Turner,
University of South Carolina Sali Li,
University of South Carolina
Time pacing is an important, yet understudied, area of inquiry for strategy scholars interested in fast-changing settings. To date, we know little about the drivers of adopting time pacing. Integrating research on time pacing and complexity, we propose that organizations rely on time pacing to organize innovation introductions. Further, we theorize how different forms of complexity challenges condition organizations’ use of time pacing. We find that innovation introductions exhibit a regular temporal pattern, i.e., consistent time intervals. Moreover, different forms of complexity expose organizations to distinct challenges, such that product and action complexity facilitate, and market complexity inhibits the use of time pacing. This study offers important contributions for current understanding of innovation management, time pacing, and complexity.