IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v69y2016i5p1898-1903.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A dynamic framework for competitor identification: A neglecting role of dominant design

Author

Listed:
  • Peng, Yu-Shu
  • Liang, I-Chung

Abstract

This study develops a general framework of competitor identification by using the similarities of capabilities and markets between the focal firm and its competitors, and particularly the influences of the emergence of a dominant design to delineate the competitive dynamics of interfirm rivalry. A case study of the smartphone industry confirms the predictive validity of the present framework. This study contributes to the advancement and clarification on the research of competitor analysis as well as dominant design on several fronts: (1) explaining why the development process of a dominant design is a critical factor in identifying potential competitive threats; (2) clarifying the conditions which cause firms to initiate high-risk attacks; (3) explaining motives for competitive threats from the market and the value chain as well; (4) deepening the understanding of the mechanisms by which a dominant design influences the competitive behaviors of incumbents and suppliers.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng, Yu-Shu & Liang, I-Chung, 2016. "A dynamic framework for competitor identification: A neglecting role of dominant design," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1898-1903.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:5:p:1898-1903
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.076
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296315004993
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.076?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. 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..
    2. Edward F. Sherry & David J. Teece, 2008. "Royalties, evolving patent rights, and the value of innovation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 8, pages 151-163, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Adam M. Brandenburger & Harborne W. Stuart, 1996. "Value‐based Business Strategy," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 5-24, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Deepak Somaya, 2003. "Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 17-38, 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. Brem, Alexander & Nylund, Petra & Viardot, Eric, 2020. "The impact of the 2008 financial crisis on innovation: A dominant design perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 360-369.
    2. Sarangi, Subrat & Chakraborty, Abhishek & Triantis, Konstantinos P., 2021. "Multimarket competition effects on product line decisions – A multi-objective decision model in fast moving consumer goods industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 388-398.
    3. Jin, Tuofu & Eapen, Alex, 2022. "‘Delayed Forbearance’: Multipoint contact and mutual forbearance in inaugural and subsequent competitive actions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 938-953.
    4. Mainali, Brijesh & Mahapatra, Krushna & Pardalis, Georgios, 2021. "Strategies for deep renovation market of detached houses," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. Hsieh, Kai-Yu & Hyun, Eunjung (E.J.), 2018. "Matching response to competitors' moves under asymmetric market strength," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 202-212.
    6. Guoen Xia & Zenghui Yu & Xuwu Peng, 2023. "How Does Enterprise Digital Transformation Affect Total Factor Productivity? Based on the Information Intermediary Role of Analysts’ Attention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, 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. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    4. Karin Beukel & Minyuan Zhao, 2018. "IP litigation is local, but those who litigate are global," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 53-70, June.
    5. Brion, Sébastien & Mothe, Caroline & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "What impacts more on innovation : Organizational context or individual competences ?," MPRA Paper 10595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    7. Coeurderoy, Regis & Durand, Rodolphe, 2004. "Leveraging the advantage of early entry: proprietary technologies versus cost leadership," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(6), pages 583-590, June.
    8. Marshall S. Jiang & Jie Jiao & Zhouyu Lin & Jun Xia, 2021. "Learning through observation or through acquisition? Innovation performance as an outcome of internal and external knowledge combination," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 35-63, March.
    9. Bhandari, Krishna Raj & Rana, Sudhir & Paul, Justin & Salo, Jari, 2020. "Relative exploration and firm performance: Why resource-theory alone is not sufficient?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 363-377.
    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. Hallberg, Niklas L. & Brattström, Anna, 2019. "Concealing or revealing? Alternative paths to profiting from innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 165-174.
    12. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich & Ernst, Holger, 2007. "Developing reputation to overcome the imperfections in the markets for knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 37-55, February.
    13. Diestre, Luis & Lumineau, Fabrice & Durand, Rodolphe, 2023. "Litigate or let it go? Multi-market contact and IP infringement-litigation dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    14. Wang, Heli & Chen, Wei-Ru, 2010. "Is firm-specific innovation associated with greater value appropriation? The roles of environmental dynamism and technological diversity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 141-154, February.
    15. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    16. Helfat, Constance E. & Raubitschek, Ruth S., 2018. "Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1391-1399.
    17. Ali O. Jifri & Paul Drnevich & William Jackson & Ron Dulek, 2023. "Examining the Sustainability of Contributions of Competing Core Organizational Capabilities in Response to Systemic Economic Crises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, March.
    18. Nickerson, Jack A. & Yen, C. James & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2011. "Exploring the Problem-Finding and Problem-Solving Approach for Designing Organizations," Working Papers 11-0107, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    19. Matt Theeke & Hun Lee, 2017. "Multimarket Contact and Rivalry over Knowledge‐based Resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(12), pages 2508-2531, December.
    20. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.

    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:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:5:p:1898-1903. 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/locate/jbusres .

    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.