IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v47y2001i5p611-628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Ron Adner

    (INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

  • Daniel Levinthal

    (Wharton Business School, 2000 Steinberg-Dietrich Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104)

Abstract

The evolution of technology has been a central issue in the strategy and organizations literature. However, the focus of much of this work has been on what is essentially the "supply side" of technical change---the evolution of firm capabilities. We present a demand-based view of technology evolution that is focused on the interaction between technology development and the demand environment in which the technology is ultimately evaluated. We develop a formal computer simulation model that explicitly considers the influence of heterogeneity in market demand---the presence of consumers with different needs and requirements---on firms' innovation choices. The model is used to examine the dynamics of product and process innovation (Utterback and Abernathy 1975). The analysis reveals that demand heterogeneity offers an alternative to supply-side explanations of the technology life cycle. Further, by considering the implications of decreasing marginal utility from performance improvements, the model highlights the role of "technologically satisfied" consumers in shaping innovation incentives, and suggests a rationale for a new stage in the technology life cycle characterized by increasing performance at a stable price. The stage has not yet been treated formally in the literature, but is widely observed, most prominently in digital and information-based technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:5:p:611-628
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.47.5.611.10482
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.5.611.10482
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.47.5.611.10482?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. Henderson, Rebecca, 1995. "Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 631-643, July.
    2. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    3. Mowery, David & Rosenberg, Nathan, 1993. "The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-108, April.
    4. Robert Meyer & Eric J. Johnson, 1995. "Empirical Generalizations in the Modeling of Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages 180-189.
    5. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    6. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    7. 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.
    8. de Bresson, C & Townsend, J, 1981. "Multivariate models for innovation--Looking at the Abernathy-Utterback model with other data," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 429-436.
    9. 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.
    10. Sahal, Devendra, 1985. "Technological guideposts and innovation avenues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 61-82, April.
    11. Wesley M. Cohen & Daniel A. Levinthal, 1994. "Fortune Favors the Prepared Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 227-251, February.
    12. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    13. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    14. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    15. Malerba, Franco, et al, 1999. "'History-Friendly' Models of Industry Evolution: The Computer Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(1), pages 3-40, March.
    16. Gort, Michael & Klepper, Steven, 1982. "Time Paths in the Diffusion of Product Innovations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(367), pages 630-653, September.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Lalit Manral, 2015. "The demand-side dynamics of entrant heterogeneity," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 401-445, April.
    6. Frenken, Koen & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "Scaling trajectories in civil aircraft (1913-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 331-348, March.
    7. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    8. Jackie Krafft, 2004. "Shakeout in industrial dynamics: new developments, new puzzles," Chapters, in: John Foster & Werner Hölzl (ed.), Applied Evolutionary Economics and Complex Systems, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. 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.
    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. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Paola Giuri, 2003. "Increasing Returns and Network Structure in the Evolutionary Dynamics of Industries," Chapters, in: Pier Paolo Saviotti (ed.), Applied Evolutionary Economics, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Marlene O’Sullivan, 2020. "Industrial life cycle: relevance of national markets in the development of new industries for energy technologies – the case of wind energy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1063-1107, September.
    13. Frenken, Koen & Silverberg, Gerald & Valente, Marco, 2008. "A percolation model of the product lifecycle," MERIT Working Papers 2008-073, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    14. Safarzyńska, Karolina & Frenken, Koen & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2012. "Evolutionary theorizing and modeling of sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1011-1024.
    15. Alfred Haid & Markus Thomas Münter, 1999. "Neuere Entwicklungen in der industrieökonomischen Forschung und die aktuelle Berichterstattung über die technologische Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 188, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    16. Tavassoli, Sam, 2015. "Innovation determinants over industry life cycle," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 18-32.
    17. 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.
    18. Frenken, Koen, 2006. "A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 288-305, September.
    19. Franco Malerba & Richard Nelson & Luigi Orsenigo & Sidney Winter, 2007. "Demand, innovation, and the dynamics of market structure: The role of experimental users and diverse preferences," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 371-399, August.
    20. Bos, Jaap W.B. & Economidou, Claire & Sanders, Mark W.J.L., 2013. "Innovation over the industry life-cycle: Evidence from EU manufacturing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 78-91.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:47:y:2001:i:5:p:611-628. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.