IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v49y2020i5s004873332030038x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication

Author

Listed:
  • Vecchiato, Riccardo

Abstract

We examine how analogical reasoning affects cognition and investment decisions in the face of technological change. Our research design is an in-depth, longitudinal case study of Nokia and its response to mobile Internet between the late 1990s and the mid-2010s. We show that Nokia diligently analyzed the competitive dynamics of other industries, such as the personal computer industry, that had already been affected by the same technological discontinuities and used the lessons from these industries to anticipate future competition outcomes in the mobile phone business. We also show that analogical reasoning helped Nokia's managers change the beliefs developed through their prior experiences. However, Nokia's managers became overconfident in their new beliefs, and this overconfidence constrained their cognitive processes of attention and interpretation, thereby increasing organizational inertia. This constraint was particularly evident in the new belief that the software operating system was the essential source of product differentiation. This belief directed key investment decisions for over a decade and contributed to the eventual decline of Nokia by leading the company to embrace Microsoft's Windows Phone rather than Google's Android.

Suggested Citation

  • Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2020. "Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:49:y:2020:i:5:s004873332030038x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004873332030038X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Richard A. Bettis & Alfonso Gambardella & Constance Helfat & Will Mitchell, 2015. "Qualitative empirical research in strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 637-639, May.
    3. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: the power of analogy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 691-712, August.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    5. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    6. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    7. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    8. Marvin B. Lieberman & David B. Montgomery, 1988. "First‐mover advantages," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(S1), pages 41-58, June.
    9. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    10. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy & Peter Karnøe, 2010. "Path Dependence or Path Creation?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 760-774, June.
    11. Thrane, Sof & Blaabjerg, Steen & Møller, Rasmus Hannemann, 2010. "Innovative path dependence: Making sense of product and service innovation in path dependent innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 932-944, September.
    12. Sucheta Nadkarni & Pamela S. Barr, 2008. "Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: an integrated view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1395-1427, December.
    13. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    14. Pamela S. Barr, 1998. "Adapting to Unfamiliar Environmental Events: A Look at the Evolution of Interpretation and Its Role in Strategic Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(6), pages 644-669, December.
    15. Bertrand Quélin & Charlotte Krychowski, 2010. "Real Options and Strategic Investment Decisions: Can They Be of Use to Scholars?," Post-Print hal-00528395, HAL.
    16. Gilboa,Itzhak & Schmeidler,David, 2001. "A Theory of Case-Based Decisions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521802345, Fall.
    17. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    18. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    19. Claus Rerup, 2009. "Attentional Triangulation: Learning from Unexpected Rare Crises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 876-893, October.
    20. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    21. C. K. Prahalad & Richard A. Bettis, 1986. "The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(6), pages 485-501, November.
    22. Giovanni Gavetti & Anoop Menon, 2016. "Evolution Cum Agency: Toward a Model of Strategic Foresight," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 207-233, September.
    23. Tomi Laamanen & Juha-Antti Lamberg & Eero Vaara, 2016. "Explanations of success and failure in management learning : What can we learn from Nokia's rise and fall," Post-Print hal-02276713, HAL.
    24. Tomi Laamanen & Juha-Antti Lamberg & Eero Vaara, 2016. "Explanations of success and failure in management learning : What can we learn from Nokia's rise and fall," Post-Print hal-02313295, HAL.
    25. Nightingale, Paul, 1998. "A cognitive model of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 689-709, November.
    26. Tomi Laamanen & Johan Wallin, 2009. "Cognitive Dynamics of Capability Development Paths," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 950-981, September.
    27. Clark G. Gilbert, 2006. "Change in the Presence of Residual Fit: Can Competing Frames Coexist?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 150-167, February.
    28. Henry Mintzberg, 1990. "The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 171-195, March.
    29. Michael Shayne Gary & Robert E. Wood & Tracey Pillinger, 2012. "Enhancing mental models, analogical transfer, and performance in strategic decision making," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1229-1246, November.
    30. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "The Evolution of Collective Strategy Frames in High- and Low-Velocity Industries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 688-710, August.
    31. Sarah Kaplan, 2011. "Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 665-695, May.
    32. Sarah Kaplan & Fiona Murray & Rebecca Henderson, 2003. "Discontinuities and senior management: assessing the role of recognition in pharmaceutical firm response to biotechnology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 203-233, April.
    33. 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.
    34. Charlotte Krychowski & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2010. "Real options and strategic investment decisions : can they be of use to scholars ?," Post-Print hal-00517195, HAL.
    35. Nightingale, Paul, 2004. "Technological capabilities, invisible infrastructure and the un-social construction of predictability: the overlooked fixed costs of useful research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1259-1284, November.
    36. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    37. Hoisl, Karin & Stelzer, Tobias & Biala, Stefanie, 2015. "Forecasting technological discontinuities in the ICT industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 522-532.
    38. Shardul Phadnis & Chris Caplice & Yossi Sheffi & Mahender Singh, 2015. "Effect of scenario planning on field experts' judgment of long-range investment decisions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(9), pages 1401-1411, September.
    39. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    40. Robert M. Grant, 2003. "Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: evidence from the oil majors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 491-517, June.
    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. Jean-Philippe Vergne & Colette Depeyre, 2015. "How do firms adapt? A fuzzy-set analysis of the role of cognition and capabilities in U.S. defense firms’ responses to 9/11," Post-Print hal-01274005, HAL.
    2. Christopher Kurzhals & Lorenz Graf‐Vlachy & Andreas König, 2020. "Strategic leadership and technological innovation: A comprehensive review and research agenda," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 437-464, November.
    3. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    4. Miles M Yang & Feifei Yang & Tingru Cui & Ying-Chu Cheng, 2019. "Analysing the dynamics of mental models using causal loop diagrams," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(3), pages 495-512, August.
    5. Rust, Roland T. & Moorman, Christine & van Beuningen, Jacqueline, 2016. "Quality mental model convergence and business performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 155-171.
    6. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2017. "Disruptive innovation, managerial cognition, and technology competition outcomes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 116-128.
    7. Saerom Lee & Felipe A. Csaszar, 2020. "Cognitive and Structural Antecedents of Innovation: A Large-Sample Study," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 71-97, June.
    8. Shinjinee Chattopadhyay & Janet Bercovitz, 2020. "When one door closes, another door opens … for some: Evidence from the post‐TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 988-1022, June.
    9. Markku V. J. Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2013. "Top Management’s Attention to Discontinuous Technological Change: Corporate Venture Capital as an Alert Mechanism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 926-947, June.
    10. Tomasz Obloj & Krzysztof Obloj & Michael G. Pratt, 2010. "Dominant Logic and Entrepreneurial Firms‘ Performance in a Transition Economy," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(1), pages 151-170, January.
    11. Natalya Vinokurova & Rahul Kapoor, 2020. "Converting inventions into innovations in large firms: How inventors at Xerox navigated the innovation process to commercialize their ideas," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2372-2399, December.
    12. Stefan Gröschl & Patricia Gabaldón & Tobias Hahn, 2019. "The Co-evolution of Leaders’ Cognitive Complexity and Corporate Sustainability: The Case of the CEO of Puma," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 741-762, March.
    13. Hoppmann, Joern & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2020. "Why matter matters: How technology characteristics shape the strategic framing of technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    14. Grimm, Veronika & Kretschmer, Sandra & Mehl, Simon, 2020. "Green innovations: The organizational setup of pilot projects and its influence on consumer perceptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    15. Wagner, Stefan & Goossen, Martin C., 2018. "Knowing me, knowing you: inventor mobility and the formation of technology-oriented alliances," IRTG 1792 Discussion Papers 2018-007, Humboldt University of Berlin, International Research Training Group 1792 "High Dimensional Nonstationary Time Series".
    16. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    17. Sheen S. Levine & Mark Bernard & Rosemarie Nagel, 2018. "Strategic intelligence: The cognitive capability to anticipate competitor behaviour," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 527-527, February.
    18. Daniel Engler & Gino Cattani & Joe Porac, 2020. "Studying the Incubation of a New Product Market Through Realized and Alternative Histories," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 160-192, September.
    19. Nadine Kammerlander & Andreas König & Melanie Richards, 2018. "Why Do Incumbents Respond Heterogeneously to Disruptive Innovations? The Interplay of Domain Identity and Role Identity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1122-1165, November.
    20. Hutzschenreuter, Thomas & Kleindienst, Ingo, 2013. "(How) Does discretion change over time? A contribution toward a dynamic view of managerial discretion," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 264-281.

    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:respol:v:49:y:2020:i:5:s004873332030038x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nithya Sathishkumar). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.