IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esm/wpaper/esmt-11-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Performance implications of core and complementary pre-entry experience: The role of consumer heterogeneity in mobile telephony

Author

Listed:
  • JP Eggers

    (NYU Stern School of Business)

  • Michal Grajek

    (ESMT European School of Management and Technology)

  • Tobias Kretschmer

    (LMU Munich)

Abstract

We study how two distinct types of pre-entry experience – core technological experience and market-based complementary experience – affect post-entry performance in a new industry. We focus on the fit between capabilities generated through pre-entry experience and the preferences of heterogeneous consumer segments. Specifically, we suggest that firms with pre-entry experience in the focal technology will attract more valuable consumers, but as these consumers typically make adoption decisions early the firm must enter early to benefit. Conversely, firms with pre-entry experience in the focal market will attract a larger share of less valuable consumers regardless of entry timing. Our empirical analysis of the global 2G mobile telecommunications industry supports our theory and provides important insights for research on experience and entry dynamics in high-technology industries.

Suggested Citation

  • JP Eggers & Michal Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2011. "Performance implications of core and complementary pre-entry experience: The role of consumer heterogeneity in mobile telephony," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-11-03 (R2), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 29 May 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://static.esmt.org/publications/workingpapers/ESMT-11-03_R2.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, 2012
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Atul Nerkar & Peter W. Roberts, 2004. "Technological and product‐market experience and the success of new product introductions in the pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 779-799, August.
    2. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Patrick Rey & Jean Tirole, 1998. "Network Competition: I. Overview and Nondiscriminatory Pricing," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 1-37, Spring.
    3. 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..
    4. Christos Genakos & Tommaso Valletti, 2011. "Testing The “Waterbed” Effect In Mobile Telephony," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(6), pages 1114-1142, December.
    5. Barry L. Bayus & Rajshree Agarwal, 2007. "The Role of Pre-Entry Experience, Entry Timing, and Product Technology Strategies in Explaining Firm Survival," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1887-1902, December.
    6. Noam, Eli M & Singhal, Anjali, 1996. "Supra-national regulation for supra-national telecommunications carriers?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 769-787, December.
    7. Ritu Agarwal & Jayesh Prasad, 1998. "A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 204-215, June.
    8. Slater, Stanley F. & Narver, John C., 2000. "The Positive Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability: A Balanced Replication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 69-73, April.
    9. Grajek, Michal & Kretschmer, Tobias, 2009. "Usage and diffusion of cellular telephony, 1998-2004," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 238-249, March.
    10. Ashish Arora & Marco Ceccagnoli, 2006. "Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 293-308, February.
    11. Glen L. Urban & Theresa Carter & Steven Gaskin & Zofia Mucha, 1986. "Market Share Rewards to Pioneering Brands: An Empirical Analysis and Strategic Implications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 645-659, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Pieter A. VanderWerf & John F. Mahon, 1997. "Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Research Methods on Findings of First-Mover Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(11), pages 1510-1519, November.
    14. 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.
    15. Rothaermel, Frank T., 2001. "Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: an empirical study of industry and firm effects in the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1235-1251, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Cabral, Luis M. B. & Salant, David J. & Woroch, Glenn A., 1999. "Monopoly pricing with network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 199-214, February.
    18. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Entry, Standards and Competition: Firm Strategies and the Diffusion of Mobile Telephony," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 26(1), pages 89-113, November.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. John M. de Figueiredo & Brian S. Silverman, 2007. "Churn, Baby, Churn: Strategic Dynamics Among Dominant and Fringe Firms in a Segmented Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 632-650, April.
    22. Christina L. Brown & James M. Lattin, 1994. "Investigating the Relationship Between Time in Market and Pioneering Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(10), pages 1361-1369, October.
    23. 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.
    24. Shirley Taylor & Peter A. Todd, 1995. "Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 144-176, June.
    25. Tobias Kretschmer, 2008. "Splintering And Inertia In Network Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 685-706, December.
    26. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Entry, Standards and Competition: Firm Strategies and the Diffusion of Mobile Telephony," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 26(1), pages 89-113, November.
    27. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    28. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    29. J.P. Eggers, 2012. "All experience is not created equal: learning, adapting, and focusing in product portfolio management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 315-335, March.
    30. April M. Franco & MB Sarkar & Rajshree Agarwal & Raj Echambadi, 2009. "Swift and Smart: The Moderating Effects of Technological Capabilities on the Market Pioneering-Firm Survival Relationship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(11), pages 1842-1860, November.
    31. Muck, Johannes & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2012. "First mover advantages in mobile telecommunications: Evidence from OECD countries," DICE Discussion Papers 71, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    32. 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 & Michał Grajek & Tobias Kretschmer, 2020. "Experience, Consumers, and Fit: Disentangling Performance Implications of Preentry Technological and Market Experience in 2G Mobile Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 245-265, March.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Li, Xu, 2023. "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120131, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. 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.
    6. Brian Wu & Zhixi Wan & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2014. "Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9), pages 1257-1278, September.
    7. Mahka Moeen, 2017. "Entry into Nascent Industries: Disentangling a Firm's Capability Portfolio at the Time of Investment Versus Market Entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(10), pages 1986-2004, October.
    8. Grajek, Michał & Kretschmer, Tobias, 2012. "Identifying critical mass in the global cellular telephony market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 496-507.
    9. 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.
    10. Camerani, Roberto & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Fontana, Roberto, 2020. "It's never too late (to enter)… till it is! Firms’ entry and exit in the digital audio player industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    11. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2016. "Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Re-examining technology S-curves," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 625-648, April.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla, 2016. "The Moderating Role of Submarket Dynamics on the Product Customization–Firm Survival Relationship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 1049-1064, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Barry L. Bayus & Rajshree Agarwal, 2007. "The Role of Pre-Entry Experience, Entry Timing, and Product Technology Strategies in Explaining Firm Survival," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1887-1902, December.
    17. Massimo Colombo & Liliana Doganova & Evila Piva & Diego D’Adda & Philippe Mustar, 2015. "Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 696-722, August.
    18. Lalit Manral, 2015. "The demand-side dynamics of entrant heterogeneity," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 401-445, April.
    19. Bei, Xiaoshu, 2019. "Trademarks, specialized complementary assets, and the external sourcing of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    pre-entry experience; mobile telecommunications; consumer segments; complementary assets; core technical knowledge;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-03. 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: ESMT Faculty Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/emstbde.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.