The Role of Public and Private Protection in Disruptive Innovation: The Automotive Industry and the Emergence of Low‐Emission Vehicles

In the automotive industry, the need to move toward more sustainable trajectories of innovation has received much attention. Car manufacturers have started to develop lower emission alternatives for the internal combustion engine, particularly electric, hybrid, and fuel-cell vehicles. They face the challenge, however, of how to make a potentially disruptive, systemic, and societally embedded technology such as a low-emission vehicle attractive to mainstream customers. While literature has suggested that companies can empower the initial stages of disruptive innovation by creating protected spaces themselves and/or by taking advantage of such spaces created by public actors, the specific role of these different types of protection levers—private and/or public—has remained unclear. This article therefore investigates to what extent and how private and public protection levers affect firm-level strategies to increase the attractiveness of disruptive and systemic innovations to mainstream customers. This is explored empirically through a multiple case study of the emergence of low-emission vehicles within three car manufacturers—Daimler, General Motors, and Toyota—in the context of European, Japanese, and U.S. policies. The empirical analysis is conducted on a data set consisting of more than 9000 articles from two trade magazines, a car magazine and a financial newspaper for the period of 1997-2010. As main findings, the article identifies regulation, tax incentives, and public-private partnerships as the public protection levers that impose or stimulate "new" performance metrics such as fuel economy and vehicle emissions. It also finds that resource allocation, niche occupation, and collaboration-integration act as the main private protection levers. In addition, two protection levers emerge from the data that are rather prominent in this context: the use of regulation imposing large-scale commercialization of low-emission vehicles and dumping of products in the market below cost price. The article concludes with two different protection trajectories—a public protection trajectory and a private protection trajectory—which explain how car manufacturers leverage the various protection levers to deal with disruptive technology. The main implication of the two trajectories is that while the public protection trajectory stalled due to the systemic, socially embedded technological impediments of electric vehicles and fuel-cell vehicles, the private protection trajectory picked up the remains of the public protection trajectory and has gained momentum, continuing until today.

[1]  FOR THE LACK OF A BOILERPLATE : TIPS ON WRITING UP ( AND REVIEWING ) , 2009 .

[2]  M. Pratt From the Editors: For the Lack of a Boilerplate: Tips on Writing Up (and Reviewing) Qualitative Research , 2009 .

[3]  Allan Afuah,et al.  Dynamic Boundaries of the Firm: Are Firms Better Off Being Vertically Integrated in the Face of a Technological Change? , 2001 .

[4]  Vanessa Oltra,et al.  Variety of technological trajectories in low emission vehicles (LEVs) : a patent data analysis. , 2006 .

[5]  Kathryn Graziano The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail , 1998 .

[6]  Pinkse,et al.  Multinational enterprises and climate change : exploring institutional failures and , 2011 .

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

[8]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change , 2007 .

[9]  A. Langley Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data , 1999 .

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

[11]  Christine Nadel,et al.  Case Study Research Design And Methods , 2016 .

[12]  V. Govindarajan,et al.  The Usefulness of Measuring Disruptiveness of Innovations Ex Post in Making Ex Ante Predictions* , 2006 .

[13]  John M. T. Balmer,et al.  Managing Corporate Image and Corporate Reputation , 1998 .

[14]  R. Garud,et al.  Technological and Organizational Designs for Realizing Economies of Substitution , 1997 .

[15]  Max Åhman,et al.  Government policy and the development of electric vehicles in Japan , 2006 .

[16]  A. Kolk,et al.  Multinational enterprises and climate change: Exploring institutional failures and embeddedness , 2011, Journal of International Business Studies.

[17]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[18]  Sjoerd Bakker,et al.  Competition in a technological niche: the cars of the future , 2012, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[19]  David A. Nadler,et al.  Organizing for Innovation , 1986 .

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

[21]  D. Teece,et al.  Organizing for innovation: When is virtual virtuous? , 2002 .

[22]  Allan Afuah How much do your co-opetitors' capabilities matter in the face of technological change? , 2000 .

[23]  Carl F. Fey,et al.  Organizing for Innovation in Large Firms , 2000 .

[24]  Erwin Danneels Disruptive Technology Reconsidered: A Critique and Research Agenda , 2004 .

[25]  Dan Yu,et al.  A Reflective Review of Disruptive Innovation Theory , 2010 .

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

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

[28]  Richard Leifer,et al.  Commercializing discontinuous innovations: bridging the gap from discontinuous innovation project to operations , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

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

[30]  K. Rennings Redefining innovation -- eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics , 2000 .

[31]  D. Trunkey In search of solutions. , 2002, Journal of Trauma.

[32]  Remco Hoogma,et al.  Beyond national and technological styles of innovation diffusion: a dynamic perspective on cases from the energy and transport sectors , 1998 .

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

[34]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: four cases in the microcomputer industry , 1988 .

[35]  G. Kramer,et al.  A multi-level perspective on the introduction of hydrogen and battery-electric vehicles , 2010 .