IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v44y2015i2p328-339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When less can be more – Setting technology levels in complementary goods markets

Author

Listed:
  • Claussen, Jörg
  • Essling, Christian
  • Kretschmer, Tobias

Abstract

Higher technological quality often translates directly into higher consumer utility. However, many new products require a complementary product to operate. In such markets, releasing a technologically sophisticated product involves a trade-off as it excludes consumers whose complementary products no longer function with the core product. Firms therefore have to balance product quality against market size. Technological change brings a dynamic perspective to this trade-off as it renders existing technology obsolete but also increases performance of the complementary products, therefore increasing market potential. We study these mechanisms in the empirical context of computer games. In line with our expectations, we find an inverted U-shaped relationship between closeness to the technological frontier and sales revenues as well as differential effects of technological change depending on initial technological quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Claussen, Jörg & Essling, Christian & Kretschmer, Tobias, 2015. "When less can be more – Setting technology levels in complementary goods markets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 328-339.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:2:p:328-339
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733314001802
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.005?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. Claussen, Jörg & Falck, Oliver & Grohsjean, Thorsten, 2012. "The strength of direct ties: Evidence from the electronic game industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 223-230.
    2. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2007. "Innovation and Dominant Design in Mobile Telephony," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 305-324.
    3. Matthew T. Clements & Hiroshi Ohashi, 2005. "Indirect Network Effects And The Product Cycle: Video Games In The U.S., 1994–2002," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 515-542, December.
    4. Uwe Cantner & Jens J. Krüger & René Söllner, 2012. "Product quality, product price, and share dynamics in the German compact car market," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1085-1115, October.
    5. Violina P. Rindova & Antoaneta P. Petkova, 2007. "When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 217-232, April.
    6. Kathy A. Paulson Gjerde & Susan A. Slotnick & Matthew J. Sobel, 2002. "New Product Innovation with Multiple Features and Technology Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(10), pages 1268-1284, October.
    7. Shantanu Bhattacharya & V. Krishnan & Vijay Mahajan, 1998. "Managing New Product Definition in Highly Dynamic Environments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-2), pages 50-64, November.
    8. Leonardo Iacovone & Gustavo A. Crespi, 2010. "Catching up with the technological frontier:Micro-level evidence on growth and convergence," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(6), pages 2073-2096, December.
    9. Giada Di Stefano & Alfonso Gambardella & Gianmario Verona, 2012. "Technology Push and Demand Pull Perspectives in Innovation Studies: Current Findings and Future Research Directions," Post-Print hal-00696607, HAL.
    10. Alan MacCormack & Roberto Verganti & Marco Iansiti, 2001. "Developing Products on "Internet Time": The Anatomy of a Flexible Development Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 133-150, January.
    11. Cucculelli, Marco & Ermini, Barbara, 2012. "New product introduction and product tenure: What effects on firm growth?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 808-821.
    12. Fabrizio, Kira R. & Hawn, Olga, 2013. "Enabling diffusion: How complementary inputs moderate the response to environmental policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1099-1111.
    13. Corts, Kenneth S. & Lederman, Mara, 2009. "Software exclusivity and the scope of indirect network effects in the U.S. home video game market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 121-136, March.
    14. Klenner, Philipp & Hüsig, Stefan & Dowling, Michael, 2013. "Ex-ante evaluation of disruptive susceptibility in established value networks—When are markets ready for disruptive innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 914-927.
    15. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2010. "Demand and innovation in services: The case of mobile communications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 945-955, September.
    16. Claussen, Jörg & Grohsjean, Thorsten & Luger, Johannes & Probst, Gilbert, 2014. "Talent management and career development: What it takes to get promoted," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 236-244.
    17. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    18. 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.
    19. Venkatesh Shankar & Barry L. Bayus, 2003. "Network effects and competition: an empirical analysis of the home video game industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 375-384, April.
    20. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    21. 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.
    22. Krüger, Jens & Cantner, Uwe & Söllner, R., 2012. "Product Quality, Product Price, and Share Dynamics in the German Car Market," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 63650, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    23. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    24. Haskel, Jonathan & Bartelsman, Eric J & Martin, Ralf, 2008. "Distance to Which Frontier? Evidence on Productivity Convergence from International Firm-level Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 7032, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    2. Butollo, Florian & Gereffi, Gary & Yang, Chun & Krzywdzinski, Martin, 2022. "Digital transformation and value chains: Introduction," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 22(4), pages 585-594.
    3. Xuelin Chen & Dongmei Zhou & Ziying Zhan & Ruoyu Lu, 2023. "When Do You Enter? Entrepreneurial Firms’ Entry Timing and Product Performance in the Digital Platform Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Hakan Ozalp & Carmelo Cennamo & Annabelle Gawer, 2018. "Disruption in Platform‐Based Ecosystems," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1203-1241, November.
    5. Dushnitsky, Gary & Yu, Lei, 2022. "Why do incumbents fund startups? A study of the antecedents of corporate venture capital in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    6. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    7. Tobias Kretschmer & Jörg Claussen, 2016. "Generational Transitions in Platform Markets—The Role of Backward Compatibility," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 90-104, June.
    8. Saeed Khanagha & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Sotirios Paroutis & Luciano Oviedo, 2022. "Mutualism and the dynamics of new platform creation: A study of Cisco and fog computing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 476-506, March.
    9. Gary Dushnitsky & Evila Piva & Cristina Rossi‐Lamastra, 2022. "Investigating the mix of strategic choices and performance of transaction platforms: Evidence from the crowdfunding setting," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 563-598, March.
    10. Tobias Kretschmer & Aija Leiponen & Melissa Schilling & Gurneeta Vasudeva, 2022. "Platform ecosystems as meta‐organizations: Implications for platform strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 405-424, March.

    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. Peters, Frank, 2018. "The business of video games is a multi-player game : Essays on governance choices and performance in a two-sided market in the cultural industries," Other publications TiSEM 886b3148-4bbb-4ea4-b666-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Clayton M. Christensen & Rory McDonald & Elizabeth J. Altman & Jonathan E. Palmer, 2018. "Disruptive Innovation: An Intellectual History and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1043-1078, November.
    3. Kevin J. Boudreau & Lars B. Jeppesen, 2015. "Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1761-1777, December.
    4. Claussen, Jörg & Kretschmer, Tobias & Spengler, Thomas, 2010. "Market leadership through technology – Backward compatibility in the U.S. Handheld Video Game Industry," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 12716, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    5. Garcia-Swartz, Daniel D. & Garcia-Vicente, Florencia, 2015. "Network effects on the iPhone platform: An empirical examination," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 877-895.
    6. Giovanni Dosi & Emanuele Pugliese & Pietro Santoleri, 2017. "Growth and survival of the `fitter'? Evidence from US new-born firms," LEM Papers Series 2017/06, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Marchand, André & Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten, 2013. "Value Creation in the Video Game Industry: Industry Economics, Consumer Benefits, and Research Opportunities," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 141-157.
    8. Pierre Barbaroux & Victor Santos Paulino, 2022. "Why do motives matter? A demand-based view of the dynamics of a complex products and systems (CoPS) industry," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1175-1204, September.
    9. Joost Rietveld & Melissa A. Schilling & Cristiano Bellavitis, 2019. "Platform Strategy: Managing Ecosystem Value Through Selective Promotion of Complements," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1232-1251, November.
    10. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    11. Huotari, Pontus & Järvi, Kati & Kortelainen, Samuli & Huhtamäki, Jukka, 2017. "Winner does not take all: Selective attention and local bias in platform-based markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 313-326.
    12. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    13. Steiner, Michael & Wiegand, Nico & Eggert, Andreas & Backhaus, Klaus, 2016. "Platform adoption in system markets: The roles of preference heterogeneity and consumer expectations," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 276-296.
    14. Peter T. Gianiodis & Matthias Thürer, 2018. "The Impact Of Government Intervention On Technological Regimes: The Sourcing Of Financial Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Kalcheva, Ivalina & McLemore, Ping & Pant, Shagun, 2018. "Innovation: The interplay between demand-side shock and supply-side environment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 440-461.
    16. Joost Rietveld & J. P. Eggers, 2018. "Demand Heterogeneity in Platform Markets: Implications for Complementors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 304-322, April.
    17. 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 University Rotterdam.
    18. Tang Wang & Vikas A. Aggarwal & Brian Wu, 2020. "Capability interactions and adaptation to demand‐side change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1595-1627, September.
    19. Christoph P. Kiefer & Pablo Del Río González & Javier Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2019. "Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 155-172, January.
    20. Borowiecki, Karol J. & Bakhshi, Hasan, 2018. "Did you really take a hit? Understanding how video games playing affects individuals," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 313-326.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technological frontier; Technological change; Computer games industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    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:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:2:p:328-339. 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.