Evolution of a Technology Standard Alliance Based on an Echo Model Developed through Complex Adaptive System Theory

The evolution of the technology standard alliance (TSA) is examined using complex adaptive system (CAS) theory. Taking TSA as a dynamic CAS, an echo model is constructed to depict the mechanism of its evolution, and a model is simulated on the NetLogo platform. The echo model includes a basic model, an extended model, and a three-layer echo model. The adhesive aggregation of agents is explained, and the three evolutionary stages of agents’ entry, migration, and exit are analyzed. Moreover, the adaptability of agents in TSA is quantified. The results of simulation show the evolution of the TSA in relation to the two aspects of agent adhesion aggregation and agent resource interaction, and they demonstrate the dynamic and complex hierarchical structure of the TSA system. It is proposed that greater matching ability, moderate behavior income, and lower behavior cost are more conducive to the evolution and development of TSA. Additionally, the echo model is reconstructed to expand the range of application of CAS theory.

[1]  Harbir Singh,et al.  Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital , 2000 .

[2]  Sarah Yvonne Cooper,et al.  The Influencing Factors of the Technology Standard Alliance Collaborative Innovation of Emerging Industry , 2019 .

[3]  Nicolas Jonard,et al.  Knowledge Dynamics in a Network Industry , 2004 .

[4]  John N. Warfield,et al.  Twenty laws of complexity: science applicable in organizations , 1999 .

[5]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Alliance Portfolio Configurations and Competitive Action Frequency , 2016 .

[6]  Francisco J. Acedo,et al.  The dimensions of alliance portfolio configuration: A mediation model , 2015, Journal of Management & Organization.

[7]  Yi Su,et al.  Simulation Analysis of Knowledge Transfer in a Knowledge Alliance Based on a Circular Surface Radiator Model , 2020, Complex..

[8]  Ravi Madhavan,et al.  Diversity in Alliance Portfolios and Performance Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis , 2017 .

[9]  David Obstfeld.  Social Networks, the Tertius Iungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation , 2005 .

[10]  Wang Daoping,et al.  The resource evolution of standard alliance by technology standardization , 2016 .

[11]  K. Frenken.  A complexity approach to innovation networks. The case of the aircraft industry (1909-1997) , 2000 .

[12]  Daniel A. Levinthal.  Adaptation on rugged landscapes , 1997 .

[13]  Su Yi,et al.  Application of threshold regression analysis to study the impact of regional technological innovation level on sustainable development , 2018, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

[14]  Sriram Narayanan,et al.  Vertical integration, innovation, and alliance portfolio size: Implications for firm performance , 2013 .

[15]  C. V. Beers,et al.  R&D Cooperation, Partner Diversity, and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Analysis† , 2014 .

[16]  T. Das,et al.  Between Trust and Control: Developing Confidence in Partner Cooperation in Alliances , 1998 .

[17]  G. Tassey.  Standardization in technology-based markets , 2000 .

[18]  Andrew C. Inkpen.  Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategic alliances , 1998 .

[19]  C. Phelps.  A Longitudinal Study of the Influence of Alliance Network Structure and Composition on Firm Exploratory Innovation , 2009 .

[20]  W. Qualls,et al.  Standardization Alliance Networks, Standard‐Setting Influence, and New Product Outcomes* , 2020 .

[21]  P CachonGérard,et al.  Complexity Theory and Organization Science , 1999 .

[22]  V. Chiesa,et al.  Standard-Setting Strategies in the Multimedia Sector , 2003, Digital Disruptive Innovation.

[23]  Gérard P. Cachon,et al.  Perspective: Complexity Theory and Organization Science , 1999, Organization Science.

[24]  Ali E. Akgün,et al.  Complex Adaptive System Mechanisms, Adaptive Management Practices, and Firm Product Innovativeness , 2014 .

[25]  Thomas Keil,et al.  De-facto standardization through alliances - lessons from Bluetooth , 2002 .

[26]  Jarunee Wonglimpiyarat,et al.  Standard competition: Is collaborative strategy necessary in shaping the smart card market? , 2005 .

[27]  Geert Duysters,et al.  Returns to alliance portfolio diversity : The relative effects of partner diversity on firm’s innovative performance and productivity , 2014 .

[28]  Preet S. Aulakh,et al.  The influence of complementarity, compatibility, and relationship capital on alliance performance , 2001 .

[29]  Geert Duysters,et al.  Do Firms Learn to Manage Alliance Portfolio Diversity? The Diversity‐Performance Relationship and the Moderating Effects of Experience and Capability , 2012 .

[30]  Ellen Christiaanse,et al.  A process-stakeholder analysis of B2B industry standardisation , 2007, J. Enterp. Inf. Manag..

[31]  K. Laverty,et al.  Managerial myopia or systemic short‐termism? , 2004 .

[32]  Dovev Lavie,et al.  Alliance Portfolio Internationalization and Firm Performance , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[33]  Bing-Sheng Teng,et al.  The Dynamics of Alliance Conditions in the Alliance Development Process , 2002 .

[34]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[35]  J. Aram,et al.  Networking and growth of young technology-intensive ventures in China☆ , 1995 .

[36]  Chikako Takanashi,et al.  Standard development by committees and communities: a comparative case study of IEEE1394 and USB , 2013, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[37]  Bing-Sheng Teng,et al.  Partner analysis and alliance performance , 2003 .

[38]  R. Gulati.  Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis , 1995 .

[39]  Luo Bin,et al.  Research on customer churn detainment in telecom based on rival counterat-tack and customer detainment value maximization , 2011 .

[40]  Noah E. Friedkin,et al.  A test of structural features of granovetter's strength of weak ties theory , 1980 .

[41]  Rodolphe Durand,et al.  Sell-off or shut-down? Alliance portfolio diversity and two types of high tech firms’ exit , 2012 .

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

[43]  Pierre Dussauge,et al.  Network resource stocks and flows: how do alliance portfolios affect the value of new alliance formations? , 2012 .

[44]  Lori Rosenkopf,et al.  DO TIES REALLY BIND? THE EFFECT OF KNOWLEDGE AND COMMERCIALIZATION NETWORKS ON OPPOSITION TO STANDARDS , 2014 .

[45]  Igor Prodan,et al.  Alliances, corporate technological entrepreneurship and firm performance: Testing a model on manufacturing firms , 2008 .

[46]  Michael D. Santoro,et al.  Alliance Portfolio Diversity and Firm Performance , 2010 .

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

[48]  H. P. P. Lötter.  The complexity of science , 1999 .

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

[50]  Geert Duysters,et al.  Determinants of Alliance Portfolio Complexity and Its Effect on Innovative Performance of Companies , 2011 .

[51]  Thomas A. Hemphill.  Technology standards-setting in the US wireless telecommunications industry: A study of three generations of digital standards development , 2009, Telematics Informatics.

[52]  Shukuan Zhao,et al.  Competition of technology standards in Industry 4.0: An innovation ecosystem perspective , 2020 .