IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v31y2022i4p1056-1085..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholas Burton
  • Peter Galvin

Abstract

This paper explores the co-evolution of product and industry architecture by drawing on a longitudinal study of the UK personal pensions industry between 2005 and 2020. It provides qualitative evidence for the way in which institutional structures, particularly regulation, entwine with firm strategic choices to shape the contours of an industry value chain (IVC). We draw upon modularity theory and the literature on industry architecture to consider how strategic bottlenecks emerged and how value shifted between layers of the IVC. Furthermore, we examine the interplay between the agendas of the regulator and firm strategic responses to unpack how firms (product providers) responded by pursuing integrative innovation and less specialization to mitigate the effects of value migration to strategic bottlenecks. Our findings extend recent work on product and industry architecture, highlighting how markets evolve toward less modular product configurations and less industry specialization in response to these dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:31:y:2022:i:4:p:1056-1085.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtac009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1995. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 93-109.
    2. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    3. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    4. Nicholas S. Argyres & Todd R. Zenger, 2012. "Capabilities, Transaction Costs, and Firm Boundaries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1643-1657, December.
    5. Richard Tee, 2019. "Benefiting from modularity within and across firm boundaries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 1011-1028.
    6. 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.
    7. Habib, Tufail & Kristiansen, Jimmi Normann & Rana, Mohammad Bakhtiar & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Revisiting the role of modular innovation in technological radicalness and architectural change of products: The case of Tesla X and Roomba," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    8. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Michael G. Jacobides & C. Jennifer Tae, 2015. "Kingpins, Bottlenecks, and Value Dynamics Along a Sector," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 889-907, June.
    12. Farrell, Joseph & Weiser, Philip J., 2003. "Modularity, Vertical Integration, and Open Access Policies: Towards a Convergence of Antitrust and Regulation in the Internet Age," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4dh7q2dd, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    13. 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.
    14. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & David P. McIntyre & Arati Srinivasan, 2017. "Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 141-160, January.
    15. Michael G. Jacobides & Lorin M. Hitt, 2005. "Losing sight of the forest for the trees? Productive capabilities and gains from trade as drivers of vertical scope," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(13), pages 1209-1227, December.
    16. 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.
    17. MacCormack, Alan & Baldwin, Carliss & Rusnak, John, 2012. "Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1309-1324.
    18. James Banks & Carl Emmerson, 2000. "Public and private pension spending: principles, practice and the need for reform," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 1-63, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Anagnostopoulos, Ioannis, 2018. "Fintech and regtech: Impact on regulators and banks," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 7-25.
    21. Masucci, Monica & Brusoni, Stefano & Cennamo, Carmelo, 2020. "Removing bottlenecks in business ecosystems: The strategic role of outbound open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    22. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12281 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Andrew G. Haldane & Robert M. May, 2011. "Systemic risk in banking ecosystems," Nature, Nature, vol. 469(7330), pages 351-355, January.
    24. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    25. Michael G. Jacobides, 2008. "How Capability Differences, Transaction Costs, and Learning Curves Interact to Shape Vertical Scope," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 306-326, April.
    26. Frederic Jenny, 2021. "Competition law and digital ecosystems: Learning to walk before we run [Competition and innovation: an inverted-U relationship]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(5), pages 1143-1167.
    27. 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.
    28. 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.
    29. 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.
    30. León, Carlos & Berndsen, Ron J., 2014. "Rethinking financial stability: Challenges arising from financial networks’ modular scale-free architecture," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 241-256.
    31. 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.
    32. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Joachim Henkel, 2015. "Modularity and intellectual property protection," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(11), pages 1637-1655, November.
    33. Constance E. Helfat & Miguel A. Campo-Rembado, 2016. "Integrative Capabilities, Vertical Integration, and Innovation Over Successive Technology Lifecycles," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 249-264, April.
    34. 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.
    35. E. Brousseau & J-M- Glachant, 2011. "Regulators as Reflexive Governance Platforms," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 12(3), pages 194-210, September.
    36. Dieter Ernst, 2005. "Limits to Modularity: Reflections on Recent Developments in Chip Design," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 303-335.
    37. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    38. 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.
    39. 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.
    40. Carl Emmerson & Sarah Tanner, 2000. "A note on the tax treatment of private pensions and Individual Savings Accounts," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 65-74, March.
    41. Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2008. "Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(1), pages 155-195, February.
    42. Michael G. Jacobides & Sidney G. Winter, 2005. "The co‐evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: explaining the institutional structure of production," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 395-413, May.
    43. Michael Hobday & Andrew Davies & Andrea Prencipe, 2005. "Systems integration: a core capability of the modern corporation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(6), pages 1109-1143, December.
    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. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.

    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. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.
    2. 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.
    3. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    4. Meissner, Dirk & Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter & Sarpong, David & Bach, Norbert, 2021. "Understanding cross border innovation activities: The linkages between innovation modes, product architecture and firm boundaries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 762-769.
    5. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. 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.
    7. Michael G. Jacobides & Carmelo Cennamo & Annabelle Gawer, 2018. "Towards a theory of ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2255-2276, August.
    8. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    12. 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.
    13. Luo, Jianxi, 2018. "Architecture and evolvability of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 132-144.
    14. Masucci, Monica & Brusoni, Stefano & Cennamo, Carmelo, 2020. "Removing bottlenecks in business ecosystems: The strategic role of outbound open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    15. 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.
    16. Jiatao Li & Liang Chen & Jingtao Yi & Jiye Mao & Jianwen Liao, 2019. "Ecosystem-specific advantages in international digital commerce," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1448-1463, December.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Michael G. Jacobides & Sidney G. Winter, 2012. "Capabilities: Structure, Agency, and Evolution," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1365-1381, October.
    20. 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).

    More about this item

    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:oup:indcch:v:31:y:2022:i:4:p:1056-1085.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.