A new perspective on the innovator's dilemma - exploring the role of entrepreneurial incentives

Abstract: Why do entrant firms sometimes gain the upper hand under conditions of discontinuous technological change? Previous research on this topic has either looked at the role of established competencies and/or firm incentives to invest in a new technology. In this paper we explore an alternative explanation. Drawing upon evidence from the ongoing transition from CCTV to digital, IP based video surveillance, we argue that entrant firms may be more prone to act entrepreneurially, i.e. more inclined to proactively create or transform markets and build ecosystems. As new technologies frequently require altered behaviour among customers and stakeholders, this capability is sometimes critical in order to succeed in a technological transition. Our contribution therefore lies in pointing out that not only may incentives to allocate R&D resources differ among entrants and incumbents, firms might also have different incentives to engage in entrepreneurial activities of creating or transforming markets.

[1]  S. Venkataraman,et al.  The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: An editor''s perspective , 1997 .

[2]  S. Sarasvathy.  Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency , 2001 .

[3]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  The Innovator's Prescription: A Disruptive Solution for Health Care , 2008 .

[4]  M. Ernkvist.  The double knot of technology and business-model innovation in the era of ferment of digital exchanges: The case of OM, a pioneer in electronic options exchanges , 2015 .

[5]  Mary Tripsas.  UNRAVELING THE PROCESS OF CREATIVE DESTRUCTION: COMPLEMENTARY ASSETS AND INCUMBENT SURVIVAL IN THE TYPESETTER INDUSTRY: UNRAVELING THE PROCESS OF CREATIVE DESTRUCTION , 1997 .

[6]  W. Scott.  'Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony', American Journal of Sociology, 83, pp. 340-63. , 2016 .

[7]  Jonny Holmström,et al.  Drifting technologies and multi-purpose networks: the case of the Swedish cashcard , 2001, Inf. Organ..

[8]  D. Schendel,et al.  Strategic responses to technological threats , 1976 .

[9]  David J. Smith,et al.  Technological discontinuities, outsiders and social capital: a case study from Formula 1 , 2012 .

[10]  Clayton M. Christensen.  The Innovator's Dilemma , 1997 .

[11]  Paul DiMaggio.  Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory , 1988 .

[12]  Maureen A. Scully.  Subverting Our Stories of Subversion , 2002 .

[13]  Jennifer F. Reinganum.  Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly: Reply , 1984 .

[14]  Birgitta Sandberg,et al.  Creating an international market for disruptive innovations , 2004 .

[15]  R. Grant.  The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation , 1991 .

[16]  Heather A. Haveman,et al.  Structuring a Theory of Moral Sentiments: Institutional and Organizational Coevolution in the Early Thrift Industry1 , 1997, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Technological Discontinuties, Organizational Capabilities, and Strategic Commitments , 1994, Industrial and Corporate Change.

[18]  Henrik Berglund.  OPPORTUNITIES AS EXISTING AND CREATED: A STUDY OF ENTREPRENEURS IN THE SWEDISH MOBILE INTERNET INDUSTRY , 2007 .

[19]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[20]  C. Prahalad,et al.  The Core Competence of the Corporation , 1990 .

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

[22]  W. Creed,et al.  Institutional Contradictions, Praxis, and Institutional Change: A Dialectical Perspective , 2002 .

[23]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  CUSTOMER POWER, STRATEGIC INVESTMENT, AND THE FAILURE OF LEADING FIRMS , 1996 .

[24]  F. Schiavone,et al.  Limits to the diffusion of innovation: A literature review and integrative model , 2010 .

[25]  Allan Afuah,et al.  The Hypercube of Innovation , 2011 .

[26]  Christopher L. Tucci,et al.  Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[27]  B. Loasby.  The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective , 1979 .

[28]  N. Fligstein,et al.  Social Skill and Institutional Theory , 1997 .

[29]  R. Greenwood,et al.  Theorizing Change: The Role of Professional Associations in the Transformation of Institutionalized Fields , 2002 .

[30]  Stuart A Read,et al.  Immortal firms in mortal markets? An entrepreneurial perspective on the “innovator's dilemma” , 2008 .

[31]  Paul J. McWhorter,et al.  Factors differentiating the commercialization of disruptive and sustaining technologies , 2002, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[32]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Constructing Markets and Shaping Boundaries: Entrepreneurial Power in Nascent Fields , 2009 .

[33]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Process Management and Technological Innovation: A Longitudinal Study of the Photography and Paint Industries , 2002 .

[34]  R. Greenwood,et al.  Institutional Entrepreneurship in Mature Fields: The Big Five Accounting Firms , 2006 .

[35]  S. Eisenstadt.  Cultural Orientations, Institutional Entrepreneurs, and Social Change: Comparative Analysis of Traditional Civilizations , 1980, American Journal of Sociology.

[36]  C. Markides.  Disruptive Innovation: In Need of Better Theory* , 2006 .

[37]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation: How Companies Can Seize Opportunities in the Face of Technological Change , 1994 .

[38]  Henrik Berglund,et al.  Business Model Innovation from an Open Systems Perspective: Structural challenges and managerial solutions. , 2013 .

[39]  Elisabeth S. Clemens and,et al.  POLITICS AND INSTITUTIONALISM: Explaining Durability and Change , 1999 .

[40]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Technology, Identity, and Inertia through the Lens of 'The Digital Photography Company' , 2008, Organ. Sci..

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

[42]  Christian Sandström,et al.  Facit and the Displacement of Mechanical Calculators , 2013, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing.

[43]  Edwin R. Otto.  Innovation: The Attacker's Advantage , 1986 .

[44]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave , 1995 .

[45]  W. Abernathy.  Innovation : Mapping the winds of creative destruction * , 2003 .

[46]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[47]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Thinking About Technology: Applying a Cognitive Lens to Technical Change , 2008 .

[48]  M. Assink.  Inhibitors of disruptive innovation capability: a conceptual model , 2006 .

[49]  A. Kumaraswamy,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA * , 2002 .

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

[51]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns , 2008 .

[52]  Christian Sandström,et al.  DISRUPTION AND SOCIAL MEDIA — ENTRANT FIRMS AS INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURS , 2014 .

[53]  W. Powell,et al.  Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. , 1996 .

[54]  Mats Magnusson,et al.  Symmetric Assumptions in the Theory of Disruptive Innovation: Theoretical and Managerial Implications , 2014 .

[55]  D. Leonard-Barton.  CORE CAPABILITIES AND CORE RIGIDITIES: A PARADOX IN MANAGING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1992 .

[56]  Royston Greenwood,et al.  New to the game and questioning the rules: The experiences and beliefs of founders who start imitative versus innovative firms , 2006 .

[57]  Christian Sandström,et al.  Analysing Uber in social media : disruptive technology or institutional disruption? , 2016 .

[58]  H. Stevenson,et al.  A Paradigm of Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Management * , 1990 .

[59]  Petter Holm.  The Dynamics of Institutionalization: Transformation Processes in Norwegian Fisheries , 1995 .

[60]  C. Hardy,et al.  Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions , 2002 .

[61]  Ibo van de Poel,et al.  On the Role of Outsiders in Technical Development , 2000 .

[62]  R. Rosenbloom.  Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: The Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era , 2000 .