Successive changes in leadership in the worldwide mobile phone industry: The role of windows of opportunity and firms’ competitive action

We take a historical perspective to gain insight into the determinants of changes in industrial leadership in the global mobile phone industry from the beginning of the 1980s to 2012. The theoretical foundation of our analysis is (a) the concept of ‘windows of opportunity’ proposed by industry evolution studies, i.e. changes in the technological, regulatory and consumer demand environment offering latecomers the opportunity to overtake leading rivals, and (b) the concept of ‘action aggressiveness’ proposed by the competitive dynamics literature, i.e. the extent to which a firm forcefully takes a large number and a wide variety of actions to outperform its competitors. We show that the potential for leadership changes is greater for firms that are able to undertake ‘aggressive’ competitive actions at the time when ‘significant’ windows of opportunity are open. In particular, we analyze the determinants of two leadership changes: (1) in the second half of the 1990s, when the US giant Motorola lost its number one position, dethroned by its Finnish competitor Nokia; and (2) in the first half of the 2010s, when Samsung of South Korea caught up with Nokia.

[1]  Jefrey L Funk.  Competition between regional standards and the success and failure of firms in the world-wide mobile communication market , 1998 .

[2]  F. Malerba.  Sectoral systems of innovation and production , 2002 .

[3]  Geert Duysters,et al.  Collaborative Strategies in the Event of Technological Discontinuities: The Case of Nokia in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry , 2003 .

[4]  K. Clark,et al.  Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction☆ , 1993 .

[5]  C. Giachetti,et al.  Product Technology Imitation Over the Product Diffusion Cycle: Which Companies and Product Innovations do Competitors Imitate More Quickly? , 2016 .

[6]  Richard A. D'Aveni,et al.  Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering , 1994 .

[7]  Dan Steinbock,et al.  The Nokia Revolution : The Story of an Extraordinary Company That Transformed an Industry , 2001 .

[8]  Keun Lee,et al.  Technological Regimes, Catching-Up and Leapfrogging: Findings from the Korean Industries , 2001 .

[9]  Jeffrey L. Funk,et al.  Global Competition Between and Within Standards , 2002 .

[10]  Walter J. Ferrier,et al.  Strategic Aggressiveness, Variation, and Surprise: How the Sequential Pattern of Competitive Rivalry Influences Stock Market Returns * , 2002 .

[11]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[12]  Luc Soete,et al.  Catching up in technology: entry barriers and windows of opportunity , 1988 .

[13]  S. Ramani,et al.  Explaining divergence in catching-up in pharma between India and Brazil using the NSI framework , 2012 .

[14]  Franco Malerba,et al.  Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership:Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems ☆ , 2017 .

[15]  D. Teece.  Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation☆ , 1996 .

[16]  Walter J. Ferrier.  Navigating the Competitive Landscape: The Drivers and Consequences of Competitive Aggressiveness , 2001 .

[17]  Stephan Billinger,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: Designing the Boundaries of the Firm: From "Make, Buy, or Ally" to the Dynamic Benefits of Vertical Architecture , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[18]  Walter J. Ferrier,et al.  The Role of Competitive Action in Market Share Erosion and Industry Dethronement: A Study of Industry Leaders and Challengers , 1999 .

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

[20]  Jeffrey L. Funk,et al.  Market- and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication , 2001 .

[21]  L. Fuentelsaz,et al.  The evolution of mobile communications in Europe: The transition from the second to the third generation , 2008 .

[22]  Jeffrey L. Funk,et al.  Components, Systems and Technological Discontinuities: Lessons from the IT Sector , 2008 .

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

[24]  Whasun Jho,et al.  Global political economy of technology standardization: A case of the Korean mobile telecommunications market , 2007 .

[25]  Curtis M. Grimm,et al.  King of the hill: Dethroning the industry leader , 2001 .

[26]  Y. Doz,et al.  The Dynamics of Strategic Agility: Nokia's Rollercoaster Experience , 2008 .

[27]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[28]  Charles H. Fine.  Clockspeed: Winning Industry Control In The Age Of Temporary Advantage , 1998 .

[29]  Claudio Giachetti.  Competitive Dynamics in the Mobile Phone Industry , 2013 .

[30]  Dan Steinbock.  Wireless horizon: strategy and competition in the worldwide mobile marketplace / Dan Steinbock , 2002 .

[31]  Fernando F. Suarez,et al.  Dethroning an Established Platform , 2012 .

[32]  M. Jenkins.  Technological Discontinuities and Competitive Advantage: A Historical Perspective on Formula 1 Motor Racing 1950–2006 , 2010 .

[33]  Claudio Giachetti,et al.  Evolution of firms' product strategy over the life cycle of technology-based industries: A case study of the global mobile phone industry, 1980–2009 , 2010 .

[34]  Kyoo-Ho Park,et al.  Linking the technological regime to the technological catch-up: analyzing Korea and Taiwan using the US patent data , 2006 .

[35]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .