Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry

The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions positions established firms (incumbents) as defenders of existing technologies at the “regime level.” By contrast, it positions new entrants at the niche level, as promoters of new technologies. This paper challenges the positioning of firms as actors on either regime or niche levels. Based on a comparative analysis of technology strategies in the heavy vehicle industry, the paper shows that established firms are active at both levels, developing several technology alternatives simultaneously. This means that incumbents’ technology strategies determine important parts of the required niche–regime interactions. The paper also shows how incumbents may pursue contrasting technology strategies. While some adopt a dualistic approach, keeping regime and niche level activities technologically and commercially separate, others develop integrated strategies where niche activities are leveraged to impact upon the regime level. The cases studied illustrate how the success of such integrated strategies depends on the emergence of bridging policies. Bridging policies are relevant both for linking early niche markets to broader regime-level markets, and for supporting further technological advancements of niche markets.

[1]  Rob Raven,et al.  What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability , 2012 .

[2]  Nigel P. Brandon,et al.  Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system , 2010 .

[3]  Jerald Hage,et al.  Profiles of leaders, followers, and laggards in programmable automation adoption , 1996 .

[4]  M. Hekkert,et al.  How competitive forces sustain electric vehicle development , 2014 .

[5]  J. Schumpeter Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , 1943 .

[6]  Fredrik Tell,et al.  Do technology strategies matter? A comparison of two electrical engineering corporations, 1988–1998 , 2009, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[7]  Giovanni Filatrella,et al.  ON TECHNOLOGY COMPETITION: A FORMAL ANALYSIS OF THE ‘SAILING-SHIP EFFECT’ , 2008 .

[8]  Björn Andersson,et al.  Monitoring and assessing technology choice: the case of solar cells , 2000 .

[9]  U. Jørgensen Mapping and navigating transitions—The multi-level perspective compared with arenas of development , 2012 .

[10]  Jonas Söderlund,et al.  Knowledge Integration and Innovation : Critical Challenges Facing International Technology-Based Firms , 2011 .

[11]  Juliana Hsuan Mikkola,et al.  Modularity, component outsourcing, and inter‐firm learning , 2003 .

[12]  Howard Thomas,et al.  Planning for dominance: a strategic perspective on the emergence of a dominant design , 1995 .

[13]  Arie Rip,et al.  Introduction of New Technology; Making Use of Recent Insights from Sociology and Economics of Technology , 1995 .

[14]  K. Clark,et al.  Creating project plans to focus product development. , 1992, Harvard business review.

[15]  M. Tushman,et al.  The ambidextrous organization. , 2004, Harvard business review.

[16]  M. Ivimey Annual report , 1958, IRE Transactions on Engineering Writing and Speech.

[17]  Robert G. Cooper,et al.  How new product strategies impact on performance , 1984 .

[18]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Technology integration: Managing technological evolution in a complex environment , 1995 .

[19]  P. Wells,et al.  Transition failure: Understanding continuity in the automotive industry , 2012 .

[20]  Thomas Magnusson,et al.  Entering an era of ferment – radical vs incrementalist strategies in automotive power train development , 2011, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[21]  Johan Schot,et al.  Strategies for shifting technological systems : the case of the automobile system , 1994 .

[22]  T. Magnusson,et al.  Strategic niche management from a business perspective : taking cleaner vehicle technologies from prototype to series production , 2014 .

[23]  Kees Maat,et al.  Technological diversity of emerging eco-innovations: a case study of the automobile industry , 2012 .

[24]  F. Geels Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective , 2005 .

[25]  Akira Takeishi,et al.  Special Issue: Knowledge, Knowing, and Organizations: Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[26]  Markus C. Becker,et al.  The Limits of Design and Engineering Outsourcing: Performance Integration and the Unfulfilled Promises of Modularity , 2010 .

[27]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  Dynamics in socio-technical systems : typology of change processes and contrasting case studies , 2007 .

[28]  Clayton M. Christensen The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail , 2013 .

[29]  Richard Hydell,et al.  The Productivity Dilemma: Roadblock to Innovation in the Automobile Industry. By William J. Abernathy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978. Pp. 265. $16.00 , 1979 .

[30]  R. Cowan Nuclear Power Reactors: A Study in Technological Lock-in , 1990, The Journal of Economic History.

[31]  Adrian Smith,et al.  The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions , 2005 .

[32]  R. Cowan,et al.  Sprayed to Death: Path Dependence, Lock-in and Pest Control Strategies , 1996 .

[33]  Luís M. B. Cabral Technology uncertainty, sunk costs, and industry shakeout , 2012 .

[34]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change , 1990 .

[35]  Robert W. Veryzer Discontinuous innovation and the new product development process , 1998 .

[36]  F. Geels Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study , 2002 .

[37]  J. Gerring,et al.  Case Selection for Case‐Study Analysis: Qualitative and Quantitative Techniques , 2008 .

[38]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Knowledge Specialization, Organizational Coupling, and the Boundaries of the Firm: Why Do Firms Know More than They Make? , 2001 .

[39]  J. Schot,et al.  Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation : the approach of strategic niche management , 1998 .

[40]  P. Wells,et al.  Socio-technical inertia: Understanding the barriers to electric vehicles , 2013 .

[41]  Anders Folkesson,et al.  Towards sustainable urban transportation: test, demonstration and development of fuel cell and hybrid-electric buses , 2008 .

[42]  B. Truffer,et al.  Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects , 2012 .

[43]  Christian Berggren,et al.  Global Dreams — Local Teams: Rhetoric And Realities Of Transnational Innovation , 2004 .

[44]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Forcing technological change: A case of automobile emissions control technology development in the US , 2010 .

[45]  F. Geels,et al.  Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways , 2007 .

[46]  Henk Jan de Vries,et al.  Dominant design or multiple designs: The Flash Memory Card case , 2007, 2007 5th International Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology.

[47]  F. Olleros Emerging Industries and the Burnout of Pioneers , 1986 .

[48]  Björn A. Sandén,et al.  A framework for analysis of multi-mode interaction among technologies with examples from the history of alternative transport fuels in Sweden , 2011 .

[49]  Thomas Magnusson,et al.  Creative Accumulation: Integrating New and Established Technologies in Periods of Discontinuous Change , 2011 .

[50]  Johan Schot,et al.  Experimenting for Sustainable Transport: The Approach of Strategic Niche Management , 2002 .

[51]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy , 2008, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[52]  Fernando F. Suarez Battles for Technological Dominance: An Integrative Framework , 2004 .

[53]  P. Menanteau,et al.  Competing technologies and the diffusion of innovations: the emergence of energy-efficient lamps in the residential sector , 2000 .

[54]  Markus C. Becker,et al.  Organizing new product development: knowledge hollowing-out and knowledge integration. The FIAT Auto case , 2003 .

[55]  Geoffrey A. Moore,et al.  Crossing the Chasm , 1991 .

[56]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  Product Sequencing: Co-Evolution of Knowledge, Capabilities and Products , 2000 .

[57]  Bernhard Truffer,et al.  The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory , 2014 .

[58]  Adrian Smith,et al.  Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges , 2010 .

[59]  F. Geels From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory , 2004 .

[60]  Lino Guzzella,et al.  Vehicle Propulsion Systems: Introduction to Modeling and Optimization , 2005 .

[61]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  Exploiting the dynamic links between competitive and technology strategies , 1999 .

[62]  George Westerman,et al.  Disruption, disintegration and the dissipation of differentiability , 2002 .

[63]  W. Arthur,et al.  INCREASING RETURNS AND LOCK-IN BY HISTORICAL EVENTS , 1989 .

[64]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[65]  Lars Overgaard,et al.  Scania hybrid concept : with robust technology into the future , 2007 .

[66]  Thomas Magnusson,et al.  Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation? , 2013 .

[67]  Adrian Smith,et al.  Translating Sustainabilities between Green Niches and Socio-Technical Regimes , 2007, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[68]  Masaru Yarime,et al.  The emergence of hybrid-electric cars: Innovation path creation through co- evolution of supply and demand , 2010 .