Interdependency, Competition, and Industry Dynamics

Asystematic understanding of industry dynamics is critical to strategy research because individual firm performance dynamics both reflect and affect change at the industry level. Descriptive research on industry dynamics has identified a dominant pattern where prices fall, output rises, and the number of firms rises and then falls over time. Several models have been advanced to explain these patterns, with a particular focus on explaining why a shakeout in the number of firms occurs. In the most prominent models, shakeout is generated by rising realized heterogeneity among firms that either is assumed to be unrecognized but determined ex ante or is generated by stochastic innovation outcomes coupled with convex adjustment costs and scale advantages in innovation and learning. In this paper, we develop an alternative model where heterogeneity develops among firms over time (leading to a shakeout) because firms must make choices about highly interdependent productive activities where the ideal combinations cannot be easily deduced or imitated. By combining two established models (a Cournot model of competition with an NK model of interdependency in production activities), we are able to advance an alternative explanation for the observed patterns of industry behavior, including shakeout. We show that variation in the potential for interdependency in activities among industries is able to explain varying levels of shakeout as well as differing patterns of entry and exit among industries. Notably, the model generates several empirical predictions not apparent in past research and several that directly conflict with the results of prominent alternative models of industry dynamics. Specifically, we show that when the potential for interdependency within an industry is low, entry slows down and incumbent survival is all but assured, whereas in industries where the potential for interdependencies is high, shakeouts are severe and the rates of entry and exit remain high over longer time periods, with decreasing survival rates for incumbents.

[1]  Michael Gort,et al.  The Evolution of Markets and Entry, Exit and Survival of Firms , 1996 .

[2]  Michael Gort,et al.  Firm and Product Life Cycles and Firm Survival , 2002 .

[3]  Nicolaj Siggelkow.  Change in the Presence of Fit: the Rise, the Fall, and the Renaissance of Liz Claiborne , 2001 .

[4]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network , 1995 .

[5]  M. Osvath.  Imitation and innovation , 2009 .

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

[7]  Pankaj Ghemawat,et al.  Choice Structures , Business Strategy and Performance : A Generalized NK-Simulation Approach by , 2000 .

[8]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization , 1990 .

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

[10]  Raymond P. M. Chow,et al.  In Search of Complementarity , 2002 .

[11]  Casey Ichniowski,et al.  The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity , 1995 .

[12]  Weinberger,et al.  Local properties of Kauffman's N-k model: A tunably rugged energy landscape. , 1991, Physical review. A, Atomic, molecular, and optical physics.

[13]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

[14]  E. Johnsen.  Richard M. Cyert & James G. March, A Behavioral Theory of The Firm, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1963, 332 s. , 1964 .

[15]  Daniel L. Stein,et al.  Lectures In The Sciences Of Complexity , 1989 .

[16]  Timothy F. Bresnahan,et al.  Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets , 1991, Journal of Political Economy.

[17]  John Roberts,et al.  Uncertain Imitability : An Analysis of Interfirm Differences in Efficiency under Competition , 2007 .

[18]  James M. Utterback,et al.  A dynamic model of process and product innovation , 1975 .

[19]  S. Macstravic.  Marketing myopia. , 1998, The Healthcare Forum journal.

[20]  S. Oster,et al.  The diffusion of innovation among steel firms: the basic oxygen furnace , 1982 .

[21]  P. Zarembka.  Frontiers in econometrics , 1973 .

[22]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[23]  Jan W. Rivkin,et al.  Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[24]  S. Rassenti,et al.  Adaptation and Convergence of Behavior in Repeated Experimental Cournot Games , 2000 .

[25]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[26]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Towards A Synthesis , 2012 .

[27]  M. Bazerman,et al.  BLIND SPOTS IN INDUSTRY AND COMPETITOR ANALYSIS: IMPLICATIONS OF INTERFIRM (MIS)PERCEPTIONS FOR STRATEGIC DECISIONS , 1991 .

[28]  A. Lewin,et al.  Innovators and imitators: Organizational reference groups and adoption of organizational routines , 2005 .

[29]  M. Porter.  What is strategy , 2000 .

[30]  H. Demsetz.  Industry Structure, Market Rivalry, and Public Policy , 1973, The Journal of Law and Economics.

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

[32]  S. Klepper,et al.  Time Paths in the Diffusion of Product Innovations , 1982 .

[33]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[34]  S. Winter,et al.  The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited , 1982 .

[35]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage , 1989 .

[36]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply , 1989 .

[37]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[38]  Gabriel Szulanski.  The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness , 2000 .

[39]  Jan W. Rivkin.  Imitation of Complex Strategies , 2000 .

[40]  A. Pakes,et al.  Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work , 1995 .

[41]  H. Simon,et al.  Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. , 1959 .

[42]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[43]  R. Nelson.  On the Uneven Evolution of Human Know-How , 2003 .

[44]  M. Hannan.  Rethinking Age Dependence in Organizational Mortality: Logical Fromalizations1 , 1998, American Journal of Sociology.

[45]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories , 1993 .

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

[47]  Glenn R. Carroll,et al.  A sociological view on why firms differ , 1993 .

[48]  Nicolaj Siggelkow.  Evolution toward Fit , 2002 .

[49]  J. Barney,et al.  Organizational Culture: Can It Be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage? , 1986 .

[50]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[51]  Boyan Jovanovic.  Selection and the evolution of industry , 1981 .

[52]  R. Caves.  Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms , 1998 .

[53]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[54]  Daniel A. Levinthal.  Strategic Management and the Exploration of Diversity , 1995 .

[55]  Arie Y. Lewin,et al.  Interdependency, Competition, and the Distribution of Firm and Industry Profits , 2006, Manag. Sci..