IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orstsc/v7y2022i1p1-9.html

When Does the Underdog Win?

Author

Listed:
  • Birger Wernerfelt

    (MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

Abstract

In several celebrated examples, incumbents with significant resources have been beaten, in their own core businesses, by young start-ups. We identify a general mechanism that explains how these entrants can succeed against seemingly impossible odds. Specifically, we argue that they circumvent the entry barriers by using new business models that do not depend on the hard-to-imitate resources protecting the incumbent. While the entrants are gaining experience with their business models, they develop their own hard-to-imitate resources, and these eventually allow them to expand into the incumbents’ core markets. We formalize the argument in a model, derive several comparative static predictions, and illustrate it with a number of examples. The mechanism does not work if the incumbents react immediately, but we will draw on the literature on corporate inertia to argue that three of the mechanism’s properties make it especially likely that incumbents will be slow to adopt new business models.

Suggested Citation

  • Birger Wernerfelt, 2022. "When Does the Underdog Win?," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orstsc:v:7:y:2022:i:1:p:1-9
    DOI: 10.1287/stsc.2021.0131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2021.0131
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/stsc.2021.0131?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
    ---><---

    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 R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 23-46, Spring.
    3. Birger Wernerfelt, 1984. "A resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 171-180, April.
    4. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    5. Arkes, Hal R. & Blumer, Catherine, 1985. "The psychology of sunk cost," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 124-140, February.
    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. Navjot Kaur & Balwinder Singh, 2024. "Dynamics of resource allocation–firm performance relationship: Panel autoregressive distributed lag approach," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 45(6), pages 3663-3676, September.
    2. David Paynter & Danny Samson, 2025. "Digital orchestration: Redefining economies of scale," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 50(4), pages 1414-1437, November.
    3. Timo Ehrig & Todd Zenger, 2024. "Competing with Theories: Using Awareness and Confidence to Secure Resources and Rents," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 416-432, December.

    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. Constance E. Helfat & Catherine A. Maritan, 2024. "Resource Allocation Capability and Routines in Multibusiness Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 1110-1130, May.
    2. Daniel A. Levinthal & Brian Wu, 2025. "Resource Redeployment and the Pursuit of the New Best Use: Economic Logic and Organizational Challenges," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 32-47, March.
    3. Ron Tidhar & Benjamin L. Hallen & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2025. "Measure Twice, Cut Once: Unit Profitability, Scalability, and the Exceptional Growth of New Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 88-120, January.
    4. Peter Grajzl & Stjepan Srhoj & Jaka Cepec & Barbara Mörec, 2024. "A by-product of big government: the attenuating role of public procurement for the effectiveness of grants-based entrepreneurship policy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 895-916, March.
    5. Dwibedy, Punyashlok, 2022. "Informal competition and product innovation decisions of new ventures and incumbents across developing and transitioning countries," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    6. David G. Sirmon & Michael A. Hitt, 2003. "Managing Resources: Linking Unique Resources, Management, and Wealth Creation in Family Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(4), pages 339-358, October.
    7. Jim Andersén, 2023. "Green resource orchestration: A critical appraisal of the use of resource orchestration in environmental management research, and a research agenda for future study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5506-5520, December.
    8. Goran Vlasic & Zoran Krupka & Kristijan Keleminic, 2025. "The Role of CEO Experience and Focus on Firm Performance," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 37(SI), pages 25-46.
    9. Jeremy Galbreath & Chia‐Yang Chang & Daniel Tisch, 2023. "The impact of a proactive environmental strategy on environmentally sustainable practices in service firms: The moderating effect of information use value," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5420-5434, December.
    10. Muhammad Aslam & Bilal Ahmad & Tuba Rasheed, 2025. "Navigating the Impact of Green Innovation, Technological Linkages, and Knowledge Management on Sustainable Performance of SMEs," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 593-618, September.
    11. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    12. Marion Neukam & Emmanuel Muller & Thierry Burger-Helmchen, 2025. "Mapping Theoretical Perspectives for Requisite Resilience," Post-Print hal-05296104, HAL.
    13. Kratochvil, Renate, 2025. "The process of framing innovation activities: How strategic leaders erode their ideas for radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    14. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    15. Budhaditya Gupta & Tarun Khanna, 2019. "A Recombination-Based Internationalization Model: Evidence from Narayana Health’s Journey from India to the Cayman Islands," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 405-425, March.
    16. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    17. Alberto Bertello & Paola Bernardi & Francesca Ricciardi, 2024. "Open innovation: status quo and quo vadis - an analysis of a research field," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 633-683, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Ding, Yang, 2021. "Antecedents and implications of legacy divestitures," Other publications TiSEM f4d5766f-6a5b-43a3-94df-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Philip Mundlos, 2025. "The impact of artificial intelligence on managerial attention allocation for discontinuous change: a conceptual framework," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 1-45, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:inm:orstsc:v:7:y:2022:i:1:p:1-9. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.