IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/3732.html

Strategy Dynamics through a Demand-Based Lens: The Evolution of Market Boundaries, Resource Rents and Competitive Positions

Author

Listed:
  • Zemsky, Peter
  • Adner, Ron

Abstract

We develop a novel approach to the dynamics of business strategy that is grounded in an explicit treatment of consumer choice when technologies improve over time. We address the evolution of market boundaries, resource rents and competitive positions by adapting models of competition with differentiated products. Our model is consistent with the central strategy assertion that competitive interactions are governed by superior value creation and competitive advantage. More importantly, it shows how the interplay between improving technologies and consumers' valuation of the resulting performance improvements affects which market segments new technologies are able to enter, how the rents from different types of firm resources change over time, and whether or not markets are segmented according to the classic generic strategies of Cost Leadership and Differentiation. Our focus on consumer choice and value creation complements the traditional focus in the strategy literature on competition and value capture.

Suggested Citation

  • Zemsky, Peter & Adner, Ron, 2003. "Strategy Dynamics through a Demand-Based Lens: The Evolution of Market Boundaries, Resource Rents and Competitive Positions," CEPR Discussion Papers 3732, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:3732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP3732
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    4. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
    5. Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1987. "Product Differentiation and Industrial Structure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 131-146, 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. Zemsky, Peter & Adner, Ron, 2003. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 3994, Centre for Economic Policy Research.

    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. Zemsky, Peter & Adner, Ron, 2003. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," CEPR Discussion Papers 3994, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    2. repec:use:tkiwps:1818 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Rajshree Agarwal & Barry L. Bayus, 2002. "The Market Evolution and Sales Takeoff of Product Innovations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1024-1041, August.
    4. Lambertini, Luca & Mantovani, Andrea, 2009. "Process and product innovation by a multiproduct monopolist: A dynamic approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 508-518, July.
    5. Hervas-Oliver, Jose-Luis & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca & Boronat-Moll, Carles, 2012. "Process innovation objectives and management complementarities: patterns, drivers, co-adoption and performance effects," MERIT Working Papers 2012-051, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    7. Lalit Manral, 2015. "The demand-side dynamics of entrant heterogeneity," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 401-445, April.
    8. Luca Lambertini & Andrea Mantovani, 2010. "Process and product innovation: A differential game approach to product life cycle," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(2), pages 227-252, June.
    9. Gugler, Klaus, 2003. "Corporate governance, dividend payout policy, and the interrelation between dividends, R&D, and capital investment," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 1297-1321, July.
    10. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    11. Pascal Le Masson & Armand Hatchuel & Benoit Weil, 2010. "Modeling Novelty-Driven Industrial Dynamics with Design Functions: understanding the role of learning from the unknown," Post-Print hal-00696970, HAL.
    12. David P. Baron, 2020. "Vertical differentiation, product innovation, and dynamic competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 635-662, July.
    13. Chen, Xu & Luo, Zheng & Wang, Xiaojun, 2019. "Compete or cooperate: Intensity, dynamics, and optimal strategies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 76-86.
    14. 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.
    15. Wang, I. Kim & Seidle, Russell, 2017. "The degree of technological innovation: A demand heterogeneity perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 166-177.
    16. Winter, Sidney G., 2006. "The logic of appropriability: From Schumpeter to Arrow to Teece," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1100-1106, October.
    17. Pan, Xiaojun & Li, Shoude, 2016. "Dynamic optimal control of process–product innovation with learning by doing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 136-145.
    18. Lee, Gwendolyn K., 2009. "Understanding the timing of 'fast-second' entry and the relevance of capabilities in invention vs. commercialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 86-95, February.
    19. Xin (Shane) Wang & Yuying Xie & Harsharanjeet S. Jagpal & Sengun Yeniyurt, 2016. "Coordinating R&D, Product Positioning, and Pricing Strategy: A Duopoly Model," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(2), pages 104-114, June.
    20. Hackl, Franz & Kummer, Michael E. & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf & Zulehner, Christine, 2014. "Market structure and market performance in E-commerce," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 199-218.
    21. Prajogo, Daniel I., 2016. "The strategic fit between innovation strategies and business environment in delivering business performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P2), pages 241-249.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General

    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:cpr:ceprdp:3732. 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: CEPR (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cepr.org/ .

    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.