Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges

Contents:

Author Info

  • Narayanan, V.K.
  • Chen, Tianxu
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    In this paper, we organize the fragmented management literature on technology standards according to a meta-theoretical scheme originally proposed by Astley and Van de Ven. We review over 89 relevant papers in influential journals in management, marketing and management-related disciplines. We observe that cumulative research streams on this topic have stayed within a single central perspective, that the development of research across the four central perspectives has been uneven, and that works incorporating multiple central perspectives have been few. We argue for complex models that take into account the two boundary conditions—technological complexity and institutional environment—that have been implicit in the extant literature. We also argue for theoretically grounded works in the collective action and strategic choice views, but the greatest opportunity lies in integrative works that will take us one step closer to a comprehensive view of technology standards.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004873331200039X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Research Policy.

    Volume (Year): 41 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 8 ()
    Pages: 1375-1406

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:8:p:1375-1406

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol

    Related research

    Keywords: Standards; Dominant designs; Platforms; Network externalities; Competition for standards;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Clark, Kim B., 1985. "The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 235-251, October.
    2. repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:3:p:645-667 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Joseph Farrell and Garth Saloner., 1989. "Converters, Compatibility, and the Control of Interfaces," Economics Working Papers 89-130, University of California at Berkeley.
    4. Mazzoleni, Roberto, 1997. "Learning and path-dependence in the diffusion of innovations: comparative evidence on numerically controlled machine tools," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 405-428, December.
    5. Funk, Jeffrey L., 2003. "Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1325-1341, September.
    6. Tassey, Gregory, 2000. "Standardization in technology-based markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 587-602, April.
    7. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2004. "Two-sided competition of proprietary vs. open source technology platforms and the implications for the software industry," Working Papers 04-30, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    8. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Silvia Giannangeli & Cristina Rossi, 2006. "Entry Strategies Under Competing Standards: Hybrid Business Models in the Open Source Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1085-1098, July.
    9. Windrum, Paul, 2004. "Leveraging technological externalities in complex technologies: Microsoft's exploitation of standards in the browser wars," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 385-394, April.
    10. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-83, June.
    11. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages S207-S220, December.
    12. Bekkers, Rudi & Duysters, Geert & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1141-1161, September.
    13. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Pankaj Ghemawat, 2006. "Dynamic Mixed Duopoly: A Model Motivated by Linux vs. Windows," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1072-1084, July.
    14. van den Ende, Jan & Kemp, Rene, 1999. "Technological transformations in history: how the computer regime grew out of existing computing regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 833-851, November.
    15. Stremersch, S. & Tellis, G.J. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Binken, J.L.G., 2007. "Indirect Network Effects in New Product Growth," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-019-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus Uni.
    16. P. Murmann & K. Frenken, 2002. "Toward a Systematic Framework for Research on Dominant Designs, Technological Innovations, and Industrial Change," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2002-12, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Evolutionary Economics Group.
    17. Neil Gandal, 1994. "Hedonic Price Indexes for Spreadsheets and an Empirical Test for Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 160-170, Spring.
    18. Rochet, Jean-Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," IDEI Working Papers 152, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    19. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    20. Erik Brynjolfsson & Chris F. Kemerer, 1996. "Network Externalities in Microcomputer Software: An Econometric Analysis of the Spreadsheet Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1627-1647, December.
    21. Christoph H. Loch & Bernardo A. Huberman, 1999. "A Punctuated-Equilibrium Model of Technology Diffusion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(2), pages 160-177, February.
    22. Takahashi, Takuma & Namiki, Fujio, 2003. "Three attempts at "de-Wintelization": Japan's TRON project, the US government's suits against Wintel, and the entry of Java and Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1589-1606, October.
    23. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    24. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    25. Klepper, Steven & Simons, Kenneth L, 1997. "Technological Extinctions of Industrial Firms: An Inquiry into Their Nature and Causes," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 379-460, March.
    26. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    27. Liebowitz, S J & Margolis, Stephen E, 1995. "Path Dependence, Lock-in, and History," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 205-26, April.
    28. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    29. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    30. S. J. Liebowitz & Stephen E. Margolis, 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, Spring.
    31. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-40, June.
    32. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    33. Soh, Pek-Hooi & Roberts, Edward B., 2003. "Networks of innovators: a longitudinal perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1569-1588, October.
    34. Dosi, Giovanni, 1982. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 147-162, June.
    35. Jinhong Xie & Marvin Sirbu, 1995. "Price Competition and Compatibility in the Presence of Positive Demand Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 909-926, May.
    36. Baruch Fischhoff, 1984. "Setting Standards: A Systematic Approach to Managing Public Health and Safety Risks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(7), pages 823-843, July.
    37. Theoharakis, Vasilis & Vakratsas, Demetrios & Wong, Veronica, 2007. "Market-level information and the diffusion of competing technologies: An exploratory analysis of the LAN industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 742-757, June.
    38. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    39. Cottrell, Tom, 1994. "Fragmented standards and the development of Japan's microcomputer software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 143-174, March.
    40. Robert Axelrod & Will Mitchell & Robert E. Thomas & D. Scott Bennett & Erhard Bruderer, 1995. "Coalition Formation in Standard-Setting Alliances," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(9), pages 1493-1508, September.
    41. Sreekumar R. Bhaskaran & Stephen M. Gilbert, 2005. "Selling and Leasing Strategies for Durable Goods with Complementary Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(8), pages 1278-1290, August.
    42. Baldwin, Carliss & Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric, 2006. "How user innovations become commercial products: A theoretical investigation and case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1291-1313, November.
    43. Funk, Jeffrey L. & Methe, David T., 2001. "Market- and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 589-610, April.
    44. Kogut, Bruce & Walker, Gordon & Kim, Dong-Jae, 1995. "Cooperation and entry induction as an extension of technological rivalry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 77-95, January.
    45. Hagedoorn, John & Carayannis, Elias & Alexander, Jeffrey, 2001. "Strange bedfellows in the personal computer industry: technology alliances between IBM and Apple," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 837-849, May.
    46. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1992. "Product Introduction with Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 55-83, March.
    47. Chris Forman, 2005. "The Corporate Digital Divide: Determinants of Internet Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 641-654, April.
    48. Blind, Knut & Thumm, Nikolaus, 2004. "Interrelation between patenting and standardisation strategies: empirical evidence and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1583-1598, December.
    49. Lee, Keun & Lim, Chaisung, 2001. "Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: findings from the Korean industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 459-483, March.
    50. Zahra, Shaker A. & Bogner, William C., 2000. "Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 135-173, March.
    51. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-31, March.
    52. David M. Waguespack & Lee Fleming, 2009. "Scanning the Commons? Evidence on the Benefits to Startups Participating in Open Standards Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 210-223, February.
    53. Eocman Lee & Jeho Lee & Jongseok Lee, 2006. "Reconsideration of the Winner-Take-All Hypothesis: Complex Networks and Local Bias," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(12), pages 1838-1848, December.
    54. Khazam, Jonathan & Mowery, David, 1994. "The commercialization of RISC: Strategies for the creation of dominant designs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 89-102, January.
    55. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    56. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    57. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    58. Andrew R. Weiss & Philip H. Birnbaum, 1989. "Technological Infrastructure and the Implementation of Technological Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 1014-1026, August.
    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 in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Peterman, Andrew & Kourula, Arno & Levitt, Raymond, 2014. "Balancing act: Government roles in an energy conservation network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1067-1082.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:8:p:1375-1406. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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