Battle for dominant design: A decision-making model

Abstract This paper synthesizes, analyses and organizes the factors that can be decisive in a battle for a dominant design. The result is the construction of a rational decision-making model, where the relevant factors are grouped into three blocks – market, technology, and complementary assets. First, the firm must decide on the strategic manoeuvres that it is going to deploy to be able to capture the market that it has created or invaded. Second, technologically, it must decide whether to compete with its design made public or private, open or closed. Finally, it must plan its access to complementary assets without which it would be impossible to exploit the new design in a mainstream market. The proposed model is integrative in character and practical in approach, and it helps in forming a strategy and decision-making in the usual design wars today. It is aimed to contribute to a literature in which the analysis of factors is usually done in a fragmented form, without the systematic approach that would facilitate rational and dynamic decision making.

[1]  M. Bergen,et al.  Agency Relationships in Marketing: A Review of the Implications and Applications of Agency and Related Theories , 1992 .

[2]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Coordination Through Committees and Markets , 1987 .

[3]  Geoffrey A. Moore.  Crossing the chasm : marketing and selling high-tech products to mainstream customers , 1999 .

[4]  Eppen Gd,et al.  Bundling--new products, new markets, low risk. , 1991 .

[5]  J. Islas,et al.  The Gas Turbine , 1999 .

[6]  I. Iakovidis,et al.  The road ahead. , 2004, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[7]  W. Arthur,et al.  Increasing returns and the new world of business. , 1996, Harvard business review.

[8]  W. Mitchell,et al.  Coalition Formation in Standard-Setting Alliances , 1995 .

[9]  D. B. Montgomery,et al.  First‐mover advantages , 1988 .

[10]  Gregory S. Carpenter,et al.  Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage , 1989 .

[11]  V S Kasi.  Intellectual Property Rights , 2018, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining. 2nd Ed..

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

[13]  P. David,et al.  The Economics Of Compatibility Standards: An Introduction To Recent Research 1 , 1990 .

[14]  Robert A. Peterson,et al.  First-Mover Advantage: A Synthesis, Conceptual Framework, and Research Propositions , 1992 .

[15]  C. Shapiro,et al.  Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities , 1986, Journal of Political Economy.

[16]  Johann Peter Murmann,et al.  Toward a Systematic Framework for Research on Dominant Designs, Technological Innovations, and Industrial Change , 2006 .

[17]  M. Cusumano,et al.  Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta , 1992, Business History Review.

[18]  Melissa A. Schilling.  Technological Lockout: An Integrative Model of the Economic and Strategic Factors Driving Technology Success and Failure , 1998 .

[19]  Philip Hans Franses,et al.  Indirect Network Effects in New Product Growth. , 2007 .

[20]  Shahid A. Zia,et al.  Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries & Competitors , 2013 .

[21]  Rudi Bekkers,et al.  Intellectual Property Rights, Strategic Technology Agreements and Market Structure, The Case of GSM , 2002 .

[22]  D. Teece.  Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy , 1993 .

[23]  Jeffrey T. Macher,et al.  Organizational Responses to Discontinuous Innovation: A Case Study Approach , 2004 .

[24]  C. F. Phillips.  Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance , 1971 .

[25]  J. Choi.  Do converters facilitate the transition to a new incompatible technology? A dynamic analysis of converters , 1996 .

[26]  R. Schmalensee.  Product Differentiation Advantages of Pioneering Brands , 1980 .

[27]  S. Klepper.  Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle , 1996 .

[28]  Ram C. Rao,et al.  Preempting an Alert Rival: Strategic Timing of the First Plant by Analysis of Sophisticated Rivalry , 1979 .

[29]  Aija Elina Leiponen,et al.  Competing Through Cooperation: The Organization of Standard Setting in Wireless Telecommunications , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[30]  Melissa A. Schilling.  Winning the standards race:: Building installed base and the availability of complementary goods , 1999 .

[31]  Thomas R. Eisenmann.  Internet companies' growth strategies: determinants of investment intensity and long‐term performance , 2006 .

[32]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation , 1985 .

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

[34]  M. Spence.  The Learning Curve and Competition , 1981 .

[35]  D. Jain,et al.  Modeling the Evolution of Markets with Indirect Network Externalities: An Application to Digital Television , 1999 .

[36]  Hal R. Varian,et al.  Information rules - a strategic guide to the network economy , 1999 .

[37]  C. Hill,et al.  Establishing a standard: Competitive strategy and technological standards in winner-take-all industries , 1997 .

[38]  Scott Gallagher,et al.  Innovation and competition in standard-based industries: a historical analysis of the US home video game market , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[39]  Nicholas S. Vonortas,et al.  Exclusivity in licensing alliances: using hostages to support technology commercialization , 2011 .

[40]  S. Stremersch,et al.  Indirect Network Effects in New Product Growth , 2007 .

[41]  S. Winter,et al.  Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development , 1987 .

[42]  Gerard J. Tellis,et al.  First to Market, First to Fail? Real Causes of Enduring Market Leadership , 2006 .

[43]  William S. Comanor,et al.  The Effect of Advertising on Competition: A Survey , 1979 .

[44]  Björn Remneland Wikhamn,et al.  Two Different Perspectives on Open Innovation – Libre Versus Control , 2013 .

[45]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  The birth of capabilities: market entry and the importance of pre-history , 2002 .

[46]  Judy K. Frels,et al.  Consumer switching costs: A typology, antecedents, and consequences , 2003 .

[47]  Raimar Richers.  The theory of economic development , 1961 .

[48]  Jonathan K. Frenzen,et al.  Structure, Cooperation, and the Flow of Market Information , 1993 .

[49]  G. D. Eppen,et al.  Bundling--new products, new markets, low risk. , 1991, Sloan management review.

[50]  G. Kaa,et al.  Platform control during battles for market dominance: The case of Apple versus IBM in the early personal computer industry , 2016 .

[51]  S. Oren,et al.  Optimal Dynamic Pricing For Expanding Networks , 1985 .

[52]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation , 1996 .

[53]  Koen Frenken,et al.  Toward a Systematic Framework for Research on Dominant Designs, Technological Innovations, and Industrial Change , 2005 .

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

[55]  Joseph Farrell,et al.  Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization , 1994 .

[56]  William J. Abernathy,et al.  Patterns of Industrial Innovation , 1978 .

[57]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Innovation, Competition, and Industry Structure , 1993 .

[58]  David C. Mowery,et al.  The commercialization of RISC: Strategies for the creation of dominant designs , 1994 .

[59]  Jeffrey T. Macher,et al.  ORGANISATIONAL RESPONSES TO DISCONTINUOUS INNOVATION: A CASE STUDY APPROACH , 2004 .

[60]  Tianxu Chen,et al.  Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges , 2012 .

[61]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[62]  James B. Wade.  Dynamics of organizational communities and technological bandwagons: An empirical investigation of community evolution in the microprocessor market , 1995 .

[63]  S. Wheelwright,et al.  The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution * , 2003 .

[64]  Constantinos C. Markides,et al.  Fast Second: How Smart Companies Bypass Radical Innovation to Enter and Dominate New Markets , 2005 .

[65]  Andrew S. Grove,et al.  Only the Paranoid Survive: How to Exploit the Crisis Points that Challenge Every Company and Career , 1996 .

[66]  Petra A. Nylund,et al.  Innovation and de facto standardization: The influence of dominant design on innovative performance, radical innovation, and process innovation ☆ , 2016 .

[67]  M. Haan,et al.  Vaporware as a Means of Entry Deterrence , 2003 .

[68]  S. Klepper.  Industry Life Cycles , 1997 .

[69]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[70]  Geerten van de Kaa,et al.  Factors for winning interface format battles: A review and synthesis of the literature , 2011 .

[71]  David M Levinson,et al.  First Mover Advantages , 2011 .

[72]  Saloner,et al.  Strategic Management , 2000, Metals and Energy Finance.

[73]  H. Leibenstein.  Bandwagon, Snob, and Veblen Effects in the Theory of Consumers' Demand , 1950 .

[74]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The Interaction of Design Hierarchies and market Concepts in Technological Evolution : Research Policy , 1985 .

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