IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v35y2017i2p187-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From technology race to technology marathon: A behavioral explanation of technology advancement

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, I. Kim
  • Qian, Lihong
  • Lehrer, Mark

Abstract

In industries characterized by continual progress from lower to higher generations of technology, firms seek to solidify their competitive position by deploying technologies more advanced than their current ones. This study attempts to provide behavioral explanations for the degree of technology advancement pursued by a firm. Using data from the flat panel display industry, we find that the extent of a firm's technology advancement is largely determined by how far it falls below the industry average. Our findings complement prior research on technology races by suggesting that firms in the thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT-LCD) industry largely attempt to run a “marathon” rather than a sprint: the degree of technology advancement is mainly guided by a desire not to fall behind the pack as opposed to trying to move ahead of the pack in order to win the race. By the same token, firms exceeding the industry average in their technology reveal little motivation even to maintain their lead, much less extend it.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, I. Kim & Qian, Lihong & Lehrer, Mark, 2017. "From technology race to technology marathon: A behavioral explanation of technology advancement," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 187-197.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:35:y:2017:i:2:p:187-197
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2017.01.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237317300063
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2017.01.006?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John A. Norton & Frank M. Bass, 1987. "A Diffusion Theory Model of Adoption and Substitution for Successive Generations of High-Technology Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(9), pages 1069-1086, September.
    2. Barrie R. Nault & Mark B. Vandenbosch, 1996. "Eating Your Own Lunch: Protection Through Preemption," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 342-358, June.
    3. Forbes, Naushad & Wield, David, 2000. "Managing R&D in technology-followers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1095-1109, December.
    4. Lee, Jeongsik & Kim, Byung-Cheol & Lim, Young-Mo, 2011. "Dynamic competition in technological investments: An empirical examination of the LCD panel industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 718-728.
    5. Taylor, Margaret & Taylor, Andrew, 2012. "The technology life cycle: Conceptualization and managerial implications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 541-553.
    6. I. Kim Wang & Hsiao‐shan Yang & Douglas J. Miller, 2015. "Collaboration in the Shadow of the Technology Frontier: Evidence from the Flat Panel Display Industry," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(7), pages 456-469, October.
    7. Bohlin, Anders & Gruber, Harald & Koutroumpis, Pantelis, 2010. "Diffusion of new technology generations in mobile communications," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 51-60, March.
    8. Tan, Justin, 2003. "Curvilinear Relationship Between Organizational Slack and Firm Performance:: Evidence from Chinese State Enterprises," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 740-749, December.
    9. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    10. Raj Echambadi & James D. Hess, 2007. "Mean-Centering Does Not Alleviate Collinearity Problems in Moderated Multiple Regression Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 438-445, 05-06.
    11. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.
    12. Khanna, Tarun, 1995. "Racing behavior technological evolution in the high-end computer industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 933-958, November.
    13. 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.
    14. Starbuck, William H., 2013. "James Gardner March: Founder of organization theory, decision theorist, and advocate of sensible foolishness," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 88-92.
    15. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    16. Laurence Capron & Will Mitchell, 2009. "Selection Capability: How Capability Gaps and Internal Social Frictions Affect Internal and External Strategic Renewal," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 294-312, April.
    17. Rahul Kapoor & Ron Adner, 2012. "What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1227-1248, October.
    18. Hu, Mei-Chih, 2012. "Technological innovation capabilities in the thin film transistor-liquid crystal display industries of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 541-555.
    19. Wu, Liang-Chuan & Li, Shu-Hsing & Ong, Chorng-Shyong & Pan, Chungteh, 2012. "Options in technology investment games: The real world TFT-LCD industry case," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(7), pages 1241-1253.
    20. Linda Argote & Henrich R. Greve, 2007. "A Behavioral Theory of the Firm ---40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 337-349, June.
    21. Nohria, Nitin & Gulati, Ranjay, 1997. "What is the optimum amount of organizational slack? : A study of the relationship between slack and innovation in multinational firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 603-611, December.
    22. Massini, Silvia & Lewin, Arie Y. & Greve, Henrich R., 2005. "Innovators and imitators: Organizational reference groups and adoption of organizational routines," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1550-1569, December.
    23. Robert M. Wiseman & Philip Bromiley, 1996. "Toward a Model of Risk in Declining Organizations: An Empirical Examination of Risk, Performance and Decline," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 524-543, October.
    24. Walter J. Ferrier & Cormac Mac Fhionnlaoich & Ken G. Smith & Curtis M. Grimm, 2002. "The impact of performance distress on aggressive competitive behavior: a reconciliation of conflicting views," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 301-316.
    25. Wei‐Ru Chen & Kent D. Miller, 2007. "Situational and institutional determinants of firms' R&D search intensity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 369-381, April.
    26. Michael J. Leiblein & Tammy L. Madsen, 2009. "Unbundling competitive heterogeneity: incentive structures and capability influences on technological innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 711-735, July.
    27. Josh Lerner, 1997. "An Empirical Exploration of a Technology Race," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 228-247, Summer.
    28. Elie Ofek & Miklos Sarvary, 2003. "R&D, Marketing, and the Success of Next-Generation Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 355-370, July.
    29. Gnyawali, Devi R. & Park, Byung-Jin (Robert), 2011. "Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 650-663, June.
    30. Fiegenbaum, Avi, 1990. "Prospect theory and the risk-return association : An empirical examination in 85 industries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 187-203, October.
    31. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 451-478, May.
    32. Wei-Ru Chen, 2008. "Determinants of Firms' Backward- and Forward-Looking R&D Search Behavior," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 609-622, August.
    33. Aghion, Philippe & Harris, Christopher & Vickers, John, 1997. "Competition and growth with step-by-step innovation: An example," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 771-782, April.
    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. Chan‐Yuan Wong & Christopher J. Russell, 2024. "A search dilemma for market niches: Korea and Taiwan in a time of US‐China high‐tech decoupling," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(2), pages 475-486, May.

    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. Wang, I. Kim & Seidle, Russell, 2017. "The degree of technological innovation: A demand heterogeneity perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 166-177.
    2. Kim Wang, 2017. "Technology Deployment By Late Movers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(04), pages 1-25, May.
    3. Ronald Goettler & Brett Gordon, 2014. "Competition and product innovation in dynamic oligopoly," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-42, March.
    4. Walrave, Bob & Gilsing, Victor A., 2023. "Game of skill or game of luck? Distant search in response to performance feedback," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    5. Deb, Palash & David, Parthiban & O'Brien, Jonathan P. & Duru, Augustine, 2019. "Attainment discrepancy and investment: Effects on firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 186-196.
    6. Lee, Jeongsik & Kim, Byung-Cheol & Lim, Young-Mo, 2011. "Dynamic competition in technological investments: An empirical examination of the LCD panel industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 718-728.
    7. Mariadoss, Babu John & Johnson, Jean L. & Martin, Kelly D., 2014. "Strategic intent and performance: The role of resource allocation decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2393-2402.
    8. Cheng, Lulu & Xie, En & Fang, Junyi & Mei, Nan, 2022. "Performance feedback and firms’ relative strategic emphasis: The moderating effects of board independence and media coverage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 218-231.
    9. Fontana, Roberto & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2016. "Technological leadership and persistence in product innovation in the Local Area Network industry 1990–1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1604-1619.
    10. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    11. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    12. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    13. Elizabeth Boyle & Zur Shapira, 2012. "The Liability of Leading: Battling Aspiration and Survival Goals in the Jeopardy! Tournament of Champions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1100-1113, August.
    14. Verver, Hugo & van Zelst, Marino & Lucas, Gerardus Johannes Maria & Meeus, Marius, 2019. "Understanding Heterogeneity in the Performance Feedback – Organizational Responsiveness Relationship: A Meta-Analysis," OSF Preprints hq4uw, Center for Open Science.
    15. Apa, Roberta & De Noni, Ivan & Orsi, Luigi & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2018. "Knowledge space oddity: How to increase the intensity and relevance of the technological progress of European regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1700-1712.
    16. Lv, David Diwei & Chen, Weihong & Zhu, Hang & Lan, Hailin, 2019. "How does inconsistent negative performance feedback affect the R&D investments of firms? A study of publicly listed firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 151-162.
    17. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    18. Yu, Jiang & Liu, Rui & Chen, Feng, 2020. "Linking institutional environment with technological change: The rise of China's flat panel display industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    19. Alessandri, Todd M. & Pattit, Jason M., 2014. "Drivers of R&D investment: The interaction of behavioral theory and managerial incentives," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 151-158.
    20. Balagopal Vissa & Henrich R. Greve & Wei-Ru Chen, 2010. "Business Group Affiliation and Firm Search Behavior in India: Responsiveness and Focus of Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 696-712, June.

    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:eee:eurman:v:35:y:2017:i:2:p:187-197. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    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.