IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/ucbrie/qt8821d232.html

Industry Structure Dynamics and the Nature of Technology in The Hearing Instrument Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Lotz, Peter

Abstract

The hearing instruments (hearing aids) industry is typically described as a technologically vigorous area. And yet, in the past 25 years, the structure of the hearing instrument industry has remained surprisingly stable. The article investigates the connection between industry structure and the nature of technology and applies the results on the industry. It is shown that market structure in both the industry and the supplying industries exerts strong influence on the nature of technological development, and that the technology in turn is to a large degree blocking changes in industry structure, especially entry and vertical integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Lotz, Peter, 1998. "Industry Structure Dynamics and the Nature of Technology in The Hearing Instrument Industry," UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, Working Paper Series qt8821d232, UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, UC Berkeley.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:ucbrie:qt8821d232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/8821d232.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. E. Caves & M. E. Porter, 1977. "From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers: Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(2), pages 241-261.
    2. John M. De Figueiredo & David J. Teece, 2008. "Mitigating Procurement Hazards in the Context 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 16, pages 343-365, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Caves, Richard E & Porter, Michael E, 1978. "Market Structure, Oligopoly, and Stability of Market Shares," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 289-313, June.
    4. Michael Borrus & John Zysman, 1997. "Globalization With Borders," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 141-166.
    5. Beesley, M E & Hamilton, R T, 1984. "Small Firms' Seedbed Role and the Concept of Turbulence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 217-231, December.
    6. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    7. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    8. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    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. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    2. Colombelli, Alessandra & Krafft, Jackie & Vivarelli, Marco, 2016. "New Firms and Post-Entry Performance: The Role of Innovation," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201602, University of Turin.
    3. Li, Xu, 2024. "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120131, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Marco Vivarelli, 2016. "Entrepreneurship and Innovation: New Entries, Survival, Growth," GREDEG Working Papers 2016-04, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    5. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Marco Vivarelli, 2016. "To be born is not enough: the key role of innovative start-ups," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 277-291, August.
    6. Xu Li, 2024. "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 399-428, March.
    7. Angelo Castaldo & Laura Ferrari-Bravo, 2014. "Mergers in declining industries: puzzles from competition and industrial policies," Public Finance Research Papers 9, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    8. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp188 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Hałaj, Grzegorz & Żochowski, Dawid, 2006. "Strategic groups in Polish banking sector and financial stability," MPRA Paper 326, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. David Audretsch & Yvonne Prince & A. Thurik, 1999. "Do small firms compete with large firms?," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 27(2), pages 201-209, June.
    11. Angel Sevil & Alfonso Cruz & Tomas Reyes & Roberto Vassolo, 2022. "When Being Large Is Not an Advantage: How Innovation Impacts the Sustainability of Firm Performance in Natural Resource Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-20, December.
    12. Hubert Gatignon & Michael L. Tushman & Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, 2002. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1103-1122, September.
    13. Martin Cimiterra & Jackie Krafft & Lionel Nesta, 2021. "Blockchain as Schumpeter Mark 1 or Mark 2? An empirical analysis of blockchain job offers in France and Germany [Innovation: mapping the winds of creative destruction]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(6), pages 1388-1402.
    14. Gopalakrishnan, S. & Damanpour, F., 1997. "A review of innovation research in economics, sociology and technology management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 15-28, February.
    15. David Audretsch & Agustí Segarra & Mercedes Teruel, 2014. "Why don't all young firms invest in R&D?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 751-766, December.
    16. Bruckner, Eberhard, 2003. "Überlebenschancen neu gegründeter Firmen: Ein evolutionstheoretischer Zugang," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Civil Society and Transnational Networks SP IV 2003-105, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Prabal De & Priya Nagaraj, 2014. "Productivity and firm size in India," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 891-907, April.
    18. Marco Vivarelli, 2013. "Is entrepreneurship necessarily good? Microeconomic evidence from developed and developing countries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(6), pages 1453-1495, December.
    19. Theodore Papadogonas & Vassilis Droucopoulos, 2004. "Do Small Firms Breathe Heavily Down The Necks of Their Larger Brethren?," South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, Association of Economic Universities of South and Eastern Europe and the Black Sea Region, vol. 2(1), pages 59-65.
    20. Ayambila, Sylvester Nsobire, 2014. "The Determinants of Non-Farm Micro and Small Enterprise Employment and Financial Performance in Ghana," Miscellaneous Publications 358829, University of Ghana, Institute of Statistical Social & Economic Research (ISSER).
    21. Oscar Alfranca & Ruth Rama & Nicholas von Tunzelmann, 2002. "A patent analysis of global food and beverage firms: The persistence of innovation," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 349-368.

    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:cdl:ucbrie:qt8821d232. 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: eScholarship, California Digital Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/brbrkus.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.