IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v29y2008i5p407-423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The innovator's non-dilemma: the case of next-generation lithography

Author

Listed:
  • Melissa M. Appleyard

    (School of Business Administration, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA)

  • Clara Y. Wang

    (Ithaca, NY, USA)

  • J. Alexander Liddle

    (Molecular Foundry, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA)

  • John Carruthers

    (Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA)

Abstract

Previous studies have analyzed how incumbents may falter when they focus too narrowly on satisfying the needs of current customers at the expense of pursuing innovations that will ensure future market leadership. This paper examines this 'dilemma' faced by incumbents and considers cases where incumbents do spearhead innovation on the technology frontier thus enabling future product generations. In particular, we examine the case of the semiconductor industry confronting a technological discontinuity in the production of chips. In anticipation of a discontinuity in the lithography production module, leading firms in the semiconductor industry have initiated next-generation lithography (NGL) projects. These projects have exhibited an unprecedented level of horizontal and vertical cooperation. Our research analyzes how such cooperative research and development (R&D) programs allow incumbent innovators to mitigate four areas of uncertainty-leadership, preemption, performance, and industry adoption. We adapt a Hotelling location model to demonstrate the tension between mitigating these uncertainties through interfirm cooperation and the possibility of increased downstream competition. Such tensions have influenced cooperation within and across the R&D consortia pursuing NGL led by IBM, Intel, and Bell Labs. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Melissa M. Appleyard & Clara Y. Wang & J. Alexander Liddle & John Carruthers, 2008. "The innovator's non-dilemma: the case of next-generation lithography," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(5), pages 407-423.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:29:y:2008:i:5:p:407-423
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.1404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/mde.1404
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.1404?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. Amir, Rabah, 2000. "Modelling imperfectly appropriable R&D via spillovers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 1013-1032, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-1320, December.
    4. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    5. Linden Greg & Mowery David C. & Ham Ziedonis Rosemarie, 2000. "National Technology Policy in Global Markets: Developing Next-Generation Lithography in the Semiconductor Industry," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    7. Linden, Greg & Mowery, David C. & Ham Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 2000. "National Technology Policy in Global Markets: Developing Next-Generation Lithography in the Semiconductor Industry," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 93-113, August.
    8. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    9. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    10. 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.
    11. Kamien, Morton I & Muller, Eitan & Zang, Israel, 1992. "Research Joint Ventures and R&D Cartels," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1293-1306, December.
    12. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    13. Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908, Elsevier.
    14. Michael L. Katz, 1986. "An Analysis of Cooperative Research and Development," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(4), pages 527-543, Winter.
    15. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. Chen, Yinghui, 2021. "Does political turnover stifle or stimulate corporate innovation?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1126-1145.
    2. Ron Sanchez & Joseph T. Mahoney, 2013. "Modularity and economic organization: concepts, theory, observations, and predictions," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Möllering, Guido & Müller-Seitz, Gordon, 2018. "Direction, not destination: Institutional work practices in the face of field-level uncertainty," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 28-37.
    4. Junwei Ma & Jianhua Wang & Philip Szmedra, 2019. "Sustainable Competitive Position of Mobile Communication Companies: Comprehensive Perspectives of Insiders and Outsiders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, April.
    5. Lange, Knut & Müller-Seitz, Gordon & Sydow, Jörg & Windeler, Arnold, 2013. "Financing innovations in uncertain networks—Filling in roadmap gaps in the semiconductor industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 647-661.

    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. De Bondt, Raymond, 1997. "Spillovers and innovative activities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Cellini, Roberto & Lambertini, Luca, 2009. "Dynamic R&D with spillovers: Competition vs cooperation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 568-582, March.
    3. Yannis Caloghirou & Stavros Ioannides & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2003. "Research Joint Ventures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(4), pages 541-570, September.
    4. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J. Peter, 2007. "Absorptive capacity, R&D spillovers, and public policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 1089-1108, October.
    5. Amir, Rabah & Evstigneev, Igor & Wooders, John, 2003. "Noncooperative versus cooperative R&D with endogenous spillover rates," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 183-207, February.
    6. Isabelle Brocas, 2003. "Les enjeux de la réglementation de la recherche et développement," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 113(1), pages 125-148.
    7. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    8. Amir, Rabah, 2000. "Modelling imperfectly appropriable R&D via spillovers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 1013-1032, October.
    9. Hagedoorn, John & Link, Albert N. & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2000. "Research partnerships1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 567-586, April.
    10. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    11. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
    12. Ángel L. López & Xavier Vives, 2019. "Overlapping Ownership, R&D Spillovers, and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 2394-2437.
    13. Amoroso, S., 2013. "Heterogeneity of innovative, collaborative, and productive firm-level processes," Other publications TiSEM f5784a49-7053-401d-855d-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Amir, Rabah & Wooders, John, 2000. "One-Way Spillovers, Endogenous Innovator/Imitator Roles, and Research Joint Ventures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 1-25, April.
    15. Antonio Tesoriere, 2015. "Competing R&D joint ventures in Cournot oligopoly with spillovers," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 231-256, July.
    16. Ufuk Akcigit & William Kerr, 2015. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovation, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-020, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 25 Mar 2015.
    17. Ghosh, Arghya & Morita, Hodaka, 2012. "Competitor collaboration and product distinctiveness," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 137-152.
    18. Michelle S. Goeree & Jeroen Hinloopen, 2008. "Cooperation in the Classroom: Experimenting with R&D Cooperatives," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 357-373, September.
    19. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2001. "A simple game-theoretical framework for studying R&D expenditures and R&D cooperation," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-22, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.

    More about this item

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:29:y:2008:i:5:p:407-423. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.