IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vnm/wpdman/153.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Cabigiosu

    (Dept. of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venice)

Abstract

We know that dominant designs affect firmsÕ competitive advantage and firms need guidelines to predict which type of dominant design is more likely to emerge. But while theories about dominant design identify the forces that in general predict the emergence of dominant designs, we still lack studies that specifically address the issue of when modular architectures become dominant. This is a relevant research question because scholars have shown that the rise of modular architectures can greatly affect industry dynamics and firmsÕ competitive advantage. This study creates a bridge between dominant design and modularity literature and develops a framework that identifies the forces and industry characteristics that help predicting the emergence of a modular dominant design. Interestingly enough, while modularity literature argues that firms develop modular products to reduce product complexity, this contribute suggests that modular architectures become dominant when technology is well known and with a moderated level of complexity, thus somehow limiting the power of modularity. Also the study identifies the conditions under which multiple stakeholders contemporarily select a modular architecture and emphasizes the role of firms producing core components.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
  • Handle: RePEc:vnm:wpdman:153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://virgo.unive.it/wpideas/storage/2018wp05.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2018
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prencipe, Andrea, 2000. "Breadth and depth of technological capabilities in CoPS: the case of the aircraft engine control system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 895-911, August.
    2. 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..
    3. Joan Crespo & Raphaël Suire & Jérôme Vicente, 2016. "Network structural properties for cluster long-run dynamics: evidence from collaborative R&D networks in the European mobile phone industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 261-282.
    4. Andrew Davies, 1997. "The Life Cycle of a Complex Product System," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(03), pages 229-256.
    5. Jacobides, Michael G. & Knudsen, Thorbjorn & Augier, Mie, 2006. "Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1200-1221, October.
    6. Richard N. Langlois, 2002. "Modularity in Technology and Organization," Chapters, in: Nicolai J. Foss & Peter G. Klein (ed.), Entrepreneurship and the Firm, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    8. Prencipe, Andrea, 1997. "Technological competencies and product's evolutionary dynamics a case study from the aero-engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1261-1276, January.
    9. Funk, Jeffrey L., 2003. "Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1325-1341, September.
    10. Glenn Hoetker & Anand Swaminathan & Will Mitchell, 2007. "Modularity and the Impact of Buyer-Supplier Relationships on the Survival of Suppliers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 178-191, February.
    11. Lau Antonio, K.W. & Yam, Richard C.M. & Tang, Esther, 2007. "The impacts of product modularity on competitive capabilities and performance: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 1-20, January.
    12. 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.
    13. Nicholas S. Argyres, 1999. "The Impact of Information Technology on Coordination: Evidence from the B-2 “Stealth” Bomber," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 162-180, April.
    14. Thomas Magnusson & Fredrik Tell & Jim Watson, 2005. "From CoPS to mass production? Capabilities and innovation in power generation equipment manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(1), pages 1-26, February.
    15. Afuah, Allan N. & Bahram, Nik, 1995. "The hypercube of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 51-76, January.
    16. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Keyvan Vakili, 2016. "Collaborative Promotion of Technology Standards and the Impact on Innovation, Industry Structure, and Organizational Capabilities: Evidence from Modern Patent Pools," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 1504-1524, December.
    19. Linda F. Tegarden & Donald E. Hatfield & Ann E. Echols, 1999. "Doomed from the start: what is the value of selecting a future dominant design?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(6), pages 495-518, June.
    20. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow, 2010. "Innovation, Modularity, and Vertical Deintegration: Evidence from the Early U.S. Auto Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 842-853, August.
    21. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal & Rishi R. Roy, 2008. "The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 939-955, May.
    22. Anja Schulze & John Paul MacDuffie & Florian A. Täube, 2015. "Introduction: knowledge generation and innovation diffusion in the global automotive industry—change and stability during turbulent times," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(3), pages 603-611.
    23. Brusoni, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2001. "Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(1), pages 179-205, March.
    24. Michael G. Jacobides & John Paul MacDuffie & C. Jennifer Tae, 2016. "Agency, structure, and the dominance of OEMs: Change and stability in the automotive sector," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1942-1967, September.
    25. Akira Takeishi & Takahiro Fujimoto, 2001. "Modularization in the Auto Industry: Interlinked Multiple Hierarchies of Product, Production, and Supplier Systems," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-107, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    26. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    27. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow & Jack A. Nickerson, 2015. "Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 216-234, February.
    28. Peter Galvin & Andre Morkel, 2001. "Modularity On Industry Structure: The Case Of The World The Effect Of Product Bicycle Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 31-47.
    29. Clayton M. Christensen & Matt Verlinden & George Westerman, 2002. "Disruption, disintegration and the dissipation of differentiability," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(5), pages 955-993, November.
    30. Takeishi, Akira & 武石, 彰 & Fujimoto, Takahiro & 藤本, 隆宏, 2001. "Modularization in the Auto Industry: Interlinked Multiple Hierarchies of Product, Production, and Supplier Systems," IIR Working Paper 01-02, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    31. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, December.
    32. Langlois, Richard N. & Robertson, Paul L., 1992. "Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 297-313, August.
    33. Anna Bergek & Fredrik Tell & Christian Berggren & Jim Watson, 2008. "Technological capabilities and late shakeouts: industrial dynamics in the advanced gas turbine industry, 1987-2002," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(2), pages 335-392, April.
    34. Sebastian K. Fixson & Young Ro & Jeffrey K. Liker, 2005. "Modularisation and outsourcing: who drives whom? A study of generational sequences in the US automotive cockpit industry," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(2), pages 166-183.
    35. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    36. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?," Working Papers 02-0130, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    37. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    38. Akira Takeishi & Takahiro Fujimoto & Seunghwan Ku, 2001. ""Modularization in the Automobile Industry: Interlinked Hierarchies of Product, Production and Procurement"(in Japanese)," CIRJE J-Series CIRJE-J-41, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    39. Shibata, Tomoatsu & Yano, Masaharu & Kodama, Fumio, 2005. "Empirical analysis of evolution of product architecture: Fanuc numerical controllers from 1962 to 1997," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 13-31, February.
    40. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    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. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    2. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    3. Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
    4. Hua Wang, 2008. "Innovation in product architecture—A study of the Chinese automobile industry," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 509-535, September.
    5. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    6. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    7. Luo, Jianxi & Triulzi, Giorgio, 2018. "Cyclic dependence, vertical integration, and innovation: The case of Japanese electronics sector in the 1990s," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 46-55.
    8. Vincent Frigant & Damien Talbot, 2003. "Convergence et diversité du passage à la production modulaire dans l'aéronautique et l'automobile en Europe," Post-Print hal-00246171, HAL.
    9. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    10. Dewen Yao, 2013. "Understanding Industrial Innovation and Upgrade from Modularization’s Perspective," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(6), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Kwak, Kiho & Kim, Namil, 2022. "Industrial Leadership Changes without Technological Discontinuity: Modularization, Institution-Led Market Discontinuity, and Market Development Strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    12. Andreas Reinstaller, 2011. "The Modularity of Technology and Organisations. Implications for the Theory of the Firm," WIFO Working Papers 398, WIFO.
    13. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.
    14. Andreas Reinstaller, 2012. "Modularity and its Implications for the Theory of the Firm," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. 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.
    16. Gebauer, Judith & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2013. "Joining Supply and Demand Conditions of IT Enabled Change: Toward an Economic Theory of Inter-firm Modulation," Working Papers 13-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    17. Simge Tuna & Stefano Brusoni & Anja Schulze, 2019. "Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 977-1009.
    18. Vincent Frigant & Damien Talbot, 2005. "Technological Determinism and Modularity: Lessons from a Comparison between Aircraft and Auto Industries in Europe," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 337-355.
    19. 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.
    20. Stefano Brusoni & Keith Pavitt, 2003. "Problem solving and the co-ordination of innovative activities," SPRU Working Paper Series 93, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dominant design; product modularity; product architecture; standards;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:vnm:wpdman:153. 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: Marco LiCalzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mdvenit.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.