IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orstsc/v2y2017i1p64-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Coevolution of Organizational Knowledge and Market Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth G. Pontikes

    (University of Chicago Booth School of Business, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

  • William P. Barnett

    (Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, California 94305)

Abstract

A coevolutionary perspective on knowledge strategy is developed, where variant positions in knowledge space are predicted to result in differential advantages in product space. In particular, advantages to being both consistent and specialized in knowledge space are predicted to generate advantages in product space. Results in support of this prediction are found in an analysis of the history of the computer industry. The theory and findings have implications for both technology strategy and for researchers interested in introducing choice to evolutionary models of organizations. In particular, the findings imply that exploration in knowledge space inhibits exploration in product space.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth G. Pontikes & William P. Barnett, 2017. "The Coevolution of Organizational Knowledge and Market Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 64-82, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orstsc:v:2:y:2017:i:1:p:64-82
    DOI: 10.1287/stsc.2017.0026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2017.0026
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/stsc.2017.0026?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. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    3. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    4. Arie Y. Lewin & Henk W. Volberda, 1999. "Prolegomena on Coevolution: A Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(5), pages 519-534, October.
    5. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines: a review of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(4), pages 643-678, August.
    6. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    7. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(3), pages 433-452, September.
    9. Rabik Ar Chatterjee & Jehoshua Eliashberg, 1990. "The Innovation Diffusion Process in a Heterogeneous Population: A Micromodeling Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(9), pages 1057-1079, September.
    10. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    11. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    12. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    13. Daniel Levinthal & Jennifer Myatt, 1994. "Co‐Evolution of Capabilities and Industry: The Evolution of Mutual Fund Processing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 45-62, December.
    14. Gautam Ahuja & Curba Morris Lampert, 2001. "Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 521-543, June.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    18. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    19. Manuel Trajtenberg & Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 215-218, May.
    20. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines : a review of the literature," Post-Print hal-00279010, HAL.
    21. Pertti H. Lounamaa & James G. March, 1987. "Adaptive Coordination of a Learning Team," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 107-123, January.
    22. Frans A. J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda & Michiel de Boer, 1999. "Coevolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(5), pages 551-568, October.
    23. 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.
    24. Olga M. Khessina & Glenn R. Carroll, 2008. "Product Demography of De Novo and De Alio Firms in the Optical Disk Drive Industry, 1983--1999," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 25-38, February.
    25. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    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. Vikas A. Aggarwal & David H. Hsu & Andy Wu, 2020. "Organizing Knowledge Production Teams Within Firms for Innovation," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Shafique, Muhammad & Hagedoorn, John, 2022. "Look at U: Technological scope of the acquirer, technological complementarity with the target, and post-acquisition R&D output," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Andrew D. Henderson & Melissa E. Graebner, 2020. "Entering a Golden Age of Sustained Superiority: Entrepreneurial Creation or Discovery?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1432-1451, November.
    4. Michael A. Hitt & David G. Sirmon & Yuan Li & Abby Ghobadian & Jean-Luc Arregle & Kai Xu, 2021. "Institutions, industries and entrepreneurial versus advantage-based strategies: how complex, nested environments affect strategic choice," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(1), pages 147-188, March.
    5. Lee, Hyunmin, 2023. "Strategic similarity in the co-evolution of technological and business diversification for firm growth: Evidence from smart-manufacturing related firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).

    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. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    2. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    3. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Samina Karim & Aseem Kaul, 2015. "Structural Recombination and Innovation: Unlocking Intraorganizational Knowledge Synergy Through Structural Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 439-455, April.
    5. Rajat Khanna & Isin Guler, 2022. "Degree assortativity in collaboration networks and invention performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1402-1430, July.
    6. Nathan R. Furr, 2019. "Product Adaptation During New Industry Emergence: The Role of Start-Up Team Preentry Experience," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 1076-1096, September.
    7. Sung‐Choon Kang & Scott A. Snell, 2009. "Intellectual Capital Architectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 65-92, January.
    8. Wu, Jianfeng & Shanley, Mark T., 2009. "Knowledge stock, exploration, and innovation: Research on the United States electromedical device industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 474-483, April.
    9. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Combining Networks, Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity to Explain Commercialization of Innovations: A Theoretical Model from Review and Extension," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(4), pages 2-25, December.
    11. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    12. Chung-Jen Chen & Bou-Wen Lin & Jun-You Lin & Yung-Chang Hsiao, 2020. "Learning-from-parents: exploitative knowledge acquisition and the innovation performance of joint venture," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 228-258, February.
    13. Forés, Beatriz & Camisón, César, 2016. "Does incremental and radical innovation performance depend on different types of knowledge accumulation capabilities and organizational size?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 831-848.
    14. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    15. Hur, Wonchang & Oh, Junbyoung, 2021. "A man is known by the company he keeps?: A structural relationship between backward citation and forward citation of patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    16. Geraldine A. Wu, 2012. "The Effect of Going Public on Innovative Productivity and Exploratory Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 928-950, August.
    17. Wadhwa, Anu & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2016. "Corporate venture capital portfolios and firm innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-112.
    18. Yang, Hongyan & Steensma, H. Kevin, 2014. "When do firms rely on their knowledge spillover recipients for guidance in exploring unfamiliar knowledge?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1496-1507.
    19. Frank T. Rothaermel & Andrew M. Hess, 2007. "Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual-, Firm-, and Network-Level Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 898-921, December.
    20. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    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:orstsc:v:2:y:2017:i:1:p:64-82. 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.