Optimal technology adoption when the arrival rate of new technologies changes

Our paper contributes to the literature of technology adoption. In most of these models it is assumed that the intensity rate of new arrivals is constant. We extend this approach by assuming that after the last technology jump the intensity of a new arrival can change. Right after the arrival of a new technology the intensity equals a specific value that switches if no new technology arrival has taken place within a certain period after the last technology arrival. We look at different scenarios, dependent on whether the firm is threatened by a drop in the arrival rate after a certain time period or expects the rate to rise. We analyze the effect of a mean preserving spread of the time between two consecutive arrivals on the optimal investment timing and show that larger variance can accelerate investment in case the arrival rate rises while it can decelerate investment in case the arrival rate drops. We find that firms often adopt a new technology a time lag after its introduction, which is a phenomenon frequently observed in practice. Regarding a firm’s technology releasing strategy we explain why additional uncertainty can stimulate customers’ buying behavior. The optimal adoption timing changes significantly, depending on whether the arrival rate is assumed to change or be constant over time. Adding uncertainty about the length of the time period after which the arrival intensity changes, we find that increasing uncertainty accelerates investment, a result that is opposite to the standard real options theory.

[1]  Yves Balcer,et al.  Technological expectations and adoption of improved technology , 1984 .

[2]  H. Dharma Kwon,et al.  Invest or Exit? Optimal Decisions in the Face of a Declining Profit Stream , 2009, Oper. Res..

[3]  Z. Griliches HYBRID CORN: AN EXPLORATION IN THE ECONOMIC OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE , 1957 .

[4]  Soo-Haeng Cho,et al.  The Adoption of Multiple Dependent Technologies , 2009, Oper. Res..

[5]  Mark H. A. Davis Piecewise‐Deterministic Markov Processes: A General Class of Non‐Diffusion Stochastic Models , 1984 .

[6]  K. Huisman Technology Investment: A Game Theoretic Real Options Approach , 2001 .

[7]  Carliss Y. Baldwin Optimal Sequential Investment When Capital is Not Readily Reversible , 1982 .

[8]  Liang Peng,et al.  Venture Capital and Sequential Investments , 2009 .

[9]  Luis H. R. Alvarez,et al.  Adoption of uncertain multi-stage technology projects: a real options approach , 2001 .

[10]  U. Doraszelski Innovations, improvements, and the optimal adoption of new technologies , 2004 .

[11]  Kevin Zhu,et al.  Strategic Decisions of New Technology Adoption Under Asymmetric Information: A Game Theoretic Model , 2003, Decis. Sci..

[12]  R. Pieters,et al.  Working Paper , 1994 .

[13]  James E. Smith,et al.  Technology Adoption with Uncertain Future Costs and Quality , 2012, Oper. Res..

[14]  Heidrun C. Hoppe The Timing of New Technology Adoption: Theoretical Models and Empirical Evidence , 2002 .

[15]  Peter M. Kort,et al.  Optimal timing of technology adoption , 1998 .

[16]  Valerie Tardif,et al.  OR Practice - Implementing Seasonal Logistics Tactics for Finished Goods Distribution at Deere & Company's C&CE Division , 2010, Oper. Res..

[17]  K. McCardle Information Acquisition and the Adoption of New Technology , 1985 .

[18]  Eduardo S. Schwartz,et al.  Investment Under Uncertainty. , 1994 .

[19]  Avinash Dixit,et al.  Choosing among alternative discrete investment projects under uncertainty , 1993 .