IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v55y2018i7p1122-1165.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Do Incumbents Respond Heterogeneously to Disruptive Innovations? The Interplay of Domain Identity and Role Identity

Author

Listed:
  • Nadine Kammerlander
  • Andreas König
  • Melanie Richards

Abstract

We adopt a multifaceted view of organizational identity to contribute to research on organizational identity and incumbent adaptations to disruptive innovations. Based on a qualitative, multi‐case study on the responses of German publishing houses to the emergence of digitalization, we distill a novel and thus far disregarded facet of organizational identity: organizational role identity. We show how organizational role identity and organizational domain identity – the facet that has so far dominated research on identity and innovation – interactively determine how organizations interpret and respond to a disruptive innovation. In contrast to previous studies, we show that incumbents experience dysfunctional identity‐driven struggles when one of the two identity facets is challenged by the disruptive innovation while the other is enhanced. We also induce that domain and role identities can jointly determine how quickly incumbents react to a disruption, whether they adopt that disruption, and the innovativeness of their responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadine Kammerlander & Andreas König & Melanie Richards, 2018. "Why Do Incumbents Respond Heterogeneously to Disruptive Innovations? The Interplay of Domain Identity and Role Identity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1122-1165, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:55:y:2018:i:7:p:1122-1165
    DOI: 10.1111/joms.12345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12345
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joms.12345?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth J. Altman & Mary Tripsas, 2013. "Product to Platform Transitions: Organizational Identity Implications," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-045, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    2. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    3. Ron Adner & Daniel Snow, 2010. "Old technology responses to new technology threats: demand heterogeneity and technology retreats," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(5), pages 1655-1675, October.
    4. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    5. George P. Huber & Danial J. Power, 1985. "Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 171-180, April.
    6. Françoise Benhamou, 2015. "Fair use and fair competition for digitized cultural goods: the case of eBooks," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(2), pages 123-131, May.
    7. Erwin Danneels, 2007. "The process of technological competence leveraging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 511-533, May.
    8. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1993. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 108-108, April.
    9. Blake E. Ashforth & Kristie M. Rogers & Kevin G. Corley, 2011. "Identity in Organizations: Exploring Cross-Level Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1144-1156, October.
    10. Gerardo Patriotta, 2003. "Sensemaking on the Shop Floor: Narratives of Knowledge in Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 349-375, March.
    11. Sarah Kaplan, 2011. "Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 665-695, May.
    12. König, Andreas & Schulte, Martin & Enders, Albrecht, 2012. "Inertia in response to non-paradigmatic change: The case of meta-organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1325-1343.
    13. Sarah Kaplan & Fiona Murray & Rebecca Henderson, 2003. "Discontinuities and senior management: assessing the role of recognition in pharmaceutical firm response to biotechnology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(2), pages 203-233, April.
    14. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    15. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    16. Zannie Giraud Voss & Daniel M. Cable & Glenn B. Voss, 2006. "Organizational Identity and Firm Performance: What Happens When Leaders Disagree About “Who We Are?”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 741-755, December.
    17. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    18. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    19. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    20. Christine Coupland & Andrew D. Brown, 2004. "Constructing Organizational Identities on the Web: A Case Study of Royal Dutch/Shell," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1325-1347, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Soluk, Jonas & Kammerlander, Nadine & Darwin, Solomon, 2021. "Digital entrepreneurship in developing countries: The role of institutional voids," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    2. Jacques Bughin & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2024. "Strategic Renewal and Corporate Return of Digital Transformation," Working Papers TIMES² 2024-071, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Owen, Richard & Pansera, Mario & Macnaghten, Phil & Randles, Sally, 2021. "Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    4. Jacques Bughin & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2021. "The Entrepreneurial Returns to Incumbents’ Digital Transformation," Working Papers TIMES² 2021-048, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. Christopher Kurzhals & Lorenz Graf‐Vlachy & Andreas König, 2020. "Strategic leadership and technological innovation: A comprehensive review and research agenda," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 437-464, November.
    6. Marianne Kuhlmann & Catharina R. Bening & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2023. "How incumbents realize disruptive circular innovation ‐ Overcoming the innovator's dilemma for a circular economy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 1106-1121, March.
    7. Szewczyk, Justin & Kurzhals, Christopher & Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz & Kammerlander, Nadine & König, Andreas, 2022. "The family innovator’s dilemma revisited: Examining the association between family influence and incumbents’ adoption of discontinuous technologies," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    8. Dimitrios Georgakakis & Mads E. Wedell-Wedellsborg & Tommaso Vallone & Peder Greve, 2023. "Strategic leaders in multinational enterprises: A role-specific microfoundational view and research agenda," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(3), pages 514-537, April.
    9. Julia K. de Groote & Werner Conrad & Andreas Hack, 2021. "How can family businesses survive disruptive industry changes? Insights from the traditional mail order industry," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(8), pages 2239-2273, November.
    10. Mike W. Peng & Joyce C. Wang & Nishant Kathuria & Jia Shen & Miranda J. Welbourne Eleazar, 2023. "Toward an institution-based paradigm," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 353-382, June.
    11. Sean T. Hsu & Susan K. Cohen, 2022. "Overcoming the Incumbent Dilemma: The Dual Roles of Multimarket Contact During Disruption," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 319-348, March.
    12. Antonio, Jerome L. & Kanbach, Dominik K., 2023. "Contextual factors of disruptive innovation: A systematic review and framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    13. Brinkerink, Jasper & Rondi, Emanuela & Benedetti, Carlotta & Arzubiaga, Unai, 2020. "Family business or business family? Organizational identity elasticity and strategic responses to disruptive innovation," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4).
    14. Rodriguez Serna, Lil & Nakandala, Dilupa & Bowyer, Dorothea, 2022. "Stakeholder identification and prioritization: The attribute of dependency," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 444-455.
    15. Kristina Stoiber & Kurt Matzler & Julia Hautz, 2023. "Ambidextrous structures paving the way for disruptive business models: a conceptual framework," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1439-1485, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. König, Andreas & Schulte, Martin & Enders, Albrecht, 2012. "Inertia in response to non-paradigmatic change: The case of meta-organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1325-1343.
    2. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.
    3. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    4. Sarkar, Soumodip & Osiyevskyy, Oleksiy & Clegg, Stewart R., 2018. "Incumbent capability enhancement in response to radical innovations," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 353-365.
    5. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2020. "Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    6. Koichi Nakagawa & Yoichi Matsumoto, 2015. "Issue selection flexibility and strategic rigidity: Lessons from Sharp's crisis," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 15-24, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    7. Nathan R. Furr & Daniel C. Snow, 2015. "Intergenerational Hybrids: Spillbacks, Spillforwards, and Adapting to Technology Discontinuities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 475-493, April.
    8. Callen Anthony & Andrew J. Nelson & Mary Tripsas, 2016. "“Who Are You?…I Really Wanna Know”: Product Meaning and Competitive Positioning in the Nascent Synthesizer Industry," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 163-183, September.
    9. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    10. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    11. Michael G. Jacobides & John Paul MacDuffie & C. Jennifer Tae, 2016. "Agency, structure, and the dominance of OEMs: Change and stability in the automotive sector," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1942-1967, September.
    12. Verena Hossnofsky & Sebastian Junge, 2019. "Does the market reward digitalization efforts? Evidence from securities analysts’ investment recommendations," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(8), pages 965-994, December.
    13. Jean-Philippe Vergne & Colette Depeyre, 2015. "How do firms adapt? A fuzzy-set analysis of the role of cognition and capabilities in U.S. defense firms’ responses to 9/11," Post-Print hal-01274005, HAL.
    14. Sarah Kaplan & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2013. "Temporal Work in Strategy Making," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 965-995, August.
    15. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.
    16. Arun Kumaraswamy & Raghu Garud & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2018. "Perspectives on Disruptive Innovations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1025-1042, November.
    17. Russo, Angeloantonio & Vurro, Clodia & Nag, Rajiv, 2019. "To have or to be? The interplay between knowledge structure and market identity in knowledge-based alliance formation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 571-583.
    18. Lisa Balzarin & Francesco Zirpoli, 2022. "Facing technological change: addressing competence shift in a routines and identity perspective," Working Papers 03, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    19. Christopher Kurzhals & Lorenz Graf‐Vlachy & Andreas König, 2020. "Strategic leadership and technological innovation: A comprehensive review and research agenda," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 437-464, November.
    20. Rebecca Henderson, 2021. "Innovation in the 21st Century: Architectural Change, Purpose, and the Challenges of Our Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5479-5488, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:55:y:2018:i:7:p:1122-1165. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.