IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v48y2002i2p171-186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew A. King

    (New York University Stern School of Business, Kaufman Management Center, 8-71, 44 West 4th Street, New York, New York 10012)

  • Christopher L. Tucci

    (New York University Stern School of Business, Kaufman Management Center, 8-71, 44 West 4th Street, New York, New York 10012)

Abstract

Increasingly, technological innovation creates markets for new products and services. To survive, firms must respond to these new markets. How do firms develop the capabilities necessary to succeed in such changing conditions? Some suggest that experience with previous entry builds such capabilities. Others suggest that capabilities arise from experience producing and selling to existing markets. The role of managers is also debated. Some argue that experience with existing markets causes managers to miss entry opportunities. Others argue that managers enter new markets when their firm possesses the experience needed to compete effectively. In this paper, we explore these issues by investigating entry patterns in the disk-drive industry. We investigate the effect of experience in existing markets and experience with previous market entry. We find that experience in previous markets increased the probability that a firm would enter a new market. We show that this experience had greater value if the firm entered the new market. We infer that managers chose to enter these markets to obtain this increase in value.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:48:y:2002:i:2:p:171-186
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.48.2.171.253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.2.171.253
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.48.2.171.253?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. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1995. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 93-109.
    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. Chesbrough, Henry W, 1999. "The Organizational Impact of Technological Change: A Comparative Theory of National Institutional Factors," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(3), pages 447-485, September.
    4. 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..
    5. Mary Lambkin, 1988. "Order of entry and performance in new markets," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 127-140, June.
    6. Richard N. Langlois & Nicolai J. Foss, 1999. "Capabilities and Governance: The Rebirth of Production in the Theory of Economic Organization," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 201-218, May.
    7. Josh Lerner, 1997. "An Empirical Exploration of a Technology Race," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 228-247, Summer.
    8. Argote, L. & Epple, D., 1990. "Learning Curves In Manufacturing," GSIA Working Papers 89-90-02, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    9. Joel A. C. Baum & Paul Ingram, 1998. "Survival-Enhancing Learning in the Manhattan Hotel Industry, 1898--1980," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(7), pages 996-1016, July.
    10. Raghu Garud & Praveen R. Nayyar, 1994. "Transformative capacity: Continual structuring by intertemporal technology transfer," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 365-385, June.
    11. Sidney G. Winter, 2000. "The Satisficing Principle in Capability Learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 981-996, October.
    12. Mary Tripsas, 1997. "Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 119-142, July.
    13. Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2000. "Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: The Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1083-1103, October.
    14. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    15. Michael L. Tushman & Lori Rosenkopf, 1996. "Executive Succession, Strategic Reorientation and Performance Growth: A Longitudinal Study in the U.S. Cement Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(7), pages 939-953, July.
    16. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    17. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    18. Helfat, C.E. & Raubitschek, R.S., 2000. "Product Sequencing: Co-Evolution of Knowledge, Capabilities and Products," Papers 00-1, U.S. Department of Justice - Antitrust Division.
    19. Marco Iansiti, 2000. "How the Incumbent Can Win: Managing Technological Transitions in the Semiconductor Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 169-185, February.
    20. Cooper, Arnold C. & Schendel, Dan, 1976. "Strategic responses to technological threats," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 61-69, February.
    21. 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.
    22. Martin, Xavier & Mitchell, Will, 1998. "The influence of local search and performance heuristics on new design introduction in a new product market," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 753-771, April.
    23. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, 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. Sull, Donald N., 1999. "The Dynamics of Standing Still: Firestone Tire & Rubber and the Radial Revolution," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 73(3), pages 430-464, October.
    26. Constance E. Helfat, 1997. "Know‐how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: the case of r&d," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 339-360, May.
    27. Linda Argote & Sara L. Beckman & Dennis Epple, 1990. "The Persistence and Transfer of Learning in Industrial Settings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 140-154, February.
    28. Steven Klepper & Kenneth L. Simons, 2000. "Dominance by birthright: entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the U.S. television receiver industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 997-1016, October.
    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. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    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. Gino Cattani, 2005. "Preadaptation, Firm Heterogeneity, and Technological Performance: A Study on the Evolution of Fiber Optics, 1970–1995," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 563-580, December.
    4. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Sharma, Sunil, 2015. "Relevance of Resource Based View Themes for Capability Evolution," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-30, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    7. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael, 2007. "Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma," Research Papers 1963, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. Hakan Ozalp & J.P. Eggers & Franco Malerba, 2023. "Hitting reset: Industry evolution, generational technology cycles, and the dynamic value of firm experience," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5), pages 1292-1327, May.
    9. Pettus, Michael L. & Kor, Yasemin Y. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2007. "A Theory of Change in Turbulent Environments: The Sequencing of Dynamic Capabilities Following Industry Deregulation," Working Papers 07-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    10. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2022. "Navigating the New Normal: Which firms have adapted better to the COVID-19 disruption?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    13. Branzei, Oana & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2006. "Strategic pathways to product innovation capabilities in SMEs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 75-105, January.
    14. Dixit, M. R. & Karna, Amit & Sharma, Sunil, 2008. "A Unified Theory of Capability Building: Need and Response," IIMA Working Papers WP2008-01-10, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    15. Petra Andries & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2014. "Small firm innovation performance and employee involvement," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 21-38, June.
    16. Giovanni Gavetti, 2005. "Cognition and Hierarchy: Rethinking the Microfoundations of Capabilities’ Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 599-617, December.
    17. M. Lourdes Sosa, 2009. "Application-Specific R& D Capabilities and the Advantage of Incumbents: Evidence from the Anticancer Drug Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1409-1422, August.
    18. Corinne A. Coen & Catherine A. Maritan, 2011. "Investing in Capabilities: The Dynamics of Resource Allocation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 99-117, February.
    19. Jaideep Anand & Raffaele Oriani & Roberto S. Vassolo, 2010. "Alliance Activity as a Dynamic Capability in the Face of a Discontinuous Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1213-1232, December.
    20. Björn Michaelis & Shalini Rogbeer & Lars Schweizer & Zafer Özleblebici, 2021. "Clarifying the boundary conditions of value creation within dynamic capabilities framework: a grafting approach," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1797-1820, August.

    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:48:y:2002:i:2:p:171-186. 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.