IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v42y2013i6p1210-1224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?

Author

Listed:
  • Bergek, Anna
  • Berggren, Christian
  • Magnusson, Thomas
  • Hobday, Michael

Abstract

The creative destruction of existing industries as a consequence of discontinuous technological change is a central theme in the literature on industrial innovation and technological development. Established competence-based and market-based explanations of this phenomenon argue that incumbents are seriously challenged only by ‘competence-destroying’ or ‘disruptive’ innovations, which make their existing knowledge base or business models obsolete and leave them vulnerable to attacks from new entrants. This paper challenges these arguments. With detailed empirical analyses of the automotive and gas turbine industries, we demonstrate that these explanations overestimate the ability of new entrants to destroy and disrupt established industries and underestimate the capacity of incumbents to perceive the potential of new technologies and integrate them with existing capabilities. Moreover, we show how intense competition in the wake of technological discontinuities, driven entirely by incumbents, may instead result in late industry shakeouts. We develop and extend the notion of ‘creative accumulation’ as a way of conceptualizing the innovating capacity of the incumbents that appear to master such turbulence. Specifically, we argue that creative accumulation requires firms to handle a triple challenge of simultaneously (a) fine-tuning and evolving existing technologies at a rapid pace, (b) acquiring and developing new technologies and resources and (c) integrating novel and existing knowledge into superior products and solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:42:y:2013:i:6:p:1210-1224
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733313000486
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.009?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cefis, Elena & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2001. "The persistence of innovative activities: A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1139-1158, August.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Greene, Nathanael & Hammerschlag, Roel, 2000. "Small and Clean Is Beautiful: Exploring the Emissions of Distributed Generation and Pollution Prevention Policies," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 50-60, June.
    4. Bakker, Sjoerd, 2010. "The car industry and the blow-out of the hydrogen hype," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6540-6544, November.
    5. Yao, Mingfa & Liu, Haifeng & Feng, Xuan, 2011. "The development of low-carbon vehicles in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5457-5464, September.
    6. Jacobides, Michael G. & Knudsen, Thorbjorn & Augier, Mie, 2006. "Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1200-1221, October.
    7. Hubert Gatignon & Michael L. Tushman & Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, 2002. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1103-1122, September.
    8. Andrew A. King & Christopher L. Tucci, 2002. "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 171-186, February.
    9. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, 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 562-583, June.
    11. Franck Aggeri & Maria Elmquist & Hans Pohl, 2009. "Managing learning in the automotive industry - the innovation race for electric vehicles," Post-Print hal-00468338, HAL.
    12. Weiss, Martin & Patel, Martin K. & Junginger, Martin & Perujo, Adolfo & Bonnel, Pierre & van Grootveld, Geert, 2012. "On the electrification of road transport - Learning rates and price forecasts for hybrid-electric and battery-electric vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 374-393.
    13. Franck Aggeri & Maria Elmquist & Hans Pohl, 2009. "Managing learning in the automotive industry – the innovation race for electric vehicles," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 123-147.
    14. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    15. Jeffrey Funk, 2009. "The co-evolution of technology and methods of standard setting: the case of the mobile phone industry," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 73-93, February.
    16. Thomas Magnusson & Fredrik Tell & Jim Watson, 2005. "From CoPS to mass production? Capabilities and innovation in power generation equipment manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(1), pages 1-26, February.
    17. Constance E. Helfat & Marvin B. Lieberman, 2002. "The birth of capabilities: market entry and the importance of pre-history," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 725-760, August.
    18. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    19. Michael Tushman & Wendy K. Smith & Robert Chapman Wood & George Westerman & Charles O'Reilly, 2010. "Organizational designs and innovation streams," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(5), pages 1331-1366, October.
    20. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    21. Romano Dyerson & Alan Pilkington, 2004. "Expecting The Unexpected: Disruptive Technological Change Processes And The Electric Vehicle," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(02), pages 165-183.
    22. Schumpeter, Joseph A., 1947. "The Creative Response in Economic History," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 149-159, November.
    23. Maine, Elicia & Garnsey, Elizabeth, 2006. "Commercializing generic technology: The case of advanced materials ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 375-393, April.
    24. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    25. Geels, Frank W., 2006. "The hygienic transition from cesspools to sewer systems (1840-1930): The dynamics of regime transformation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1069-1082, September.
    26. 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.
    27. Jeffrey Funk, 2010. "Complexity, Critical Mass and Industry Formation: A Comparison of Selected Industries," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 511-530.
    28. Gilbert, Brett Anitra, 2012. "Creative destruction: Identifying its geographic origins," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 734-742.
    29. Hua Wang & Chris Kimble, 2012. "Business Model Innovation and the Development of the Electric Vehicle Industry in China," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Giuseppe Calabrese (ed.), The Greening of the Automotive Industry, chapter 13, pages 240-253, Palgrave Macmillan.
    30. Anna Bergek & Fredrik Tell & Christian Berggren & Jim Watson, 2008. "Technological capabilities and late shakeouts: industrial dynamics in the advanced gas turbine industry, 1987-2002," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(2), pages 335-392, April.
    31. Hopkins, Michael M. & Martin, Paul A. & Nightingale, Paul & Kraft, Alison & Mahdi, Surya, 2007. "The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 566-589, May.
    32. Jeffrey T. Macher & Barak D. Richman, 2004. "Organisational Responses To Discontinuous Innovation: A Case Study Approach," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 87-114.
    33. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    34. Cooper, Arnold C. & Schendel, Dan, 1976. "Strategic responses to technological threats," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 61-69, February.
    35. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 451-478, May.
    36. Stephen S. Cohen & Alberto Di Minin & Yasuyuki Motoyama & Christopher Palmberg, 2009. "The Persistence of Home Bias for Important R&D in Wireless Telecom and Automobiles," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 26(1‐2), pages 55-76, January.
    37. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    38. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1972. "Factors affecting the diffusion of technology," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 3-33.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    2. 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.
    3. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Epicoco, Marianna, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 427-441.
    6. Lee, Gwendolyn K., 2009. "Understanding the timing of 'fast-second' entry and the relevance of capabilities in invention vs. commercialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 86-95, February.
    7. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    8. Onufrey, Ksenia & Bergek, Anna, 2021. "Transformation in a mature industry: The role of business and innovation strategies," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    9. Marie-Claude BELIS-BERGOUIGNAN, 2009. "An evolutionist analysis of sectoral dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-18, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    10. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    11. Aversa, Paolo & Guillotin, Olivier, 2018. "Firm technological responses to regulatory changes: A longitudinal study in the Le Mans Prototype racing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1655-1673.
    12. Sminia, Harry & Ates, Aylin & Paton, Steve & Smith, Marisa, 2019. "High value manufacturing: Capability, appropriation, and governance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 516-528.
    13. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    14. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    15. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    16. Barry L. Bayus & Rajshree Agarwal, 2007. "The Role of Pre-Entry Experience, Entry Timing, and Product Technology Strategies in Explaining Firm Survival," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1887-1902, December.
    17. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    18. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    19. 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 207-220, December.
    20. Constance E. Helfat & Miguel A. Campo-Rembado, 2016. "Integrative Capabilities, Vertical Integration, and Innovation Over Successive Technology Lifecycles," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 249-264, April.

    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:eee:respol:v:42:y:2013:i:6:p:1210-1224. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.