IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ratioi/0262.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adopting 3D Printing for manufacturing - The case of the hearing aid industry

Author

Listed:

Abstract

3D Printing technologies have received extensive attention in recent years, but empirical investigations of how this technology is used for manufacturing are still sparse. More knowledge is also needed regarding how 3D Printing will affect the competitive dynamics between firms. This article explores how 3D Printing has been adopted for manufacturing and discusses under what conditions it might have disruptive effects for established firms. Drawing upon data from the global hearing aid industry's adoption of 3D Printing during the period 1999-2007, this paper describes some of the benefits of using the technology, while also pointing out some of the challenges firms encounter in making this transition. The study shows that early adopters were exposed to more technological uncertainty related to choosing printers. All firms encountered operational challenges as 3D Printing required new skill sets, but the technology had little impact on the competitive dynamics of this industry. The paper also discusses how these findings apply to other industries where 3D Printing is currently emerging.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandström, Christian, 2015. "Adopting 3D Printing for manufacturing - The case of the hearing aid industry," Ratio Working Papers 262, The Ratio Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ratioi:0262
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.se/app/uploads/2015/12/cs_3dprinting_hearingaid_262.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Lotz, 1998. "The Pardox Of High R&D And Industry Stability: Technology And Structural Dynamics In The Global Hearing Instrument Industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 113-137.
    2. Afuah, Allan N. & Bahram, Nik, 1995. "The hypercube of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 51-76, January.
    3. Mary Tripsas, 1997. "Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 119-142, July.
    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. Sandström, Christian G., 2016. "The non-disruptive emergence of an ecosystem for 3D Printing — Insights from the hearing aid industry's transition 1989–2008," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 160-168.
    2. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    3. Afuah, Allan, 2004. "Does a focal firm's technology entry timing depend on the impact of the technology on co-opetitors?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1231-1246, October.
    4. Liang Chen & Pengxiang Zhang & Sali Li & Scott F. Turner, 2022. "Growing pains: The effect of generational product innovation on mobile games performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 792-821, April.
    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. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster & Hielke Buddelmeyer, 2008. "Innovation, Technological Conditions and New Firm Survival," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 84(267), pages 434-448, December.
    7. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    8. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    9. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    10. Nadia Loukil & Ouidad Yousfi, 2022. "Do CEO’s traits matter in innovation outcomes?," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 375-403, September.
    11. Cappetta, Rossella & Cillo, Paola & Ponti, Anna, 2006. "Convergent designs in fine fashion: An evolutionary model for stylistic innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1273-1290, November.
    12. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    13. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    14. Andrew A. King & Christopher L. Tucci, 2002. "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 171-186, February.
    15. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.
    16. Jin, Zhizhou & Zeng, Saixing & Chen, Hongquan & Shi, Jonathan Jingsheng, 2022. "Explaining the expansion performance in technological capability of participants in megaprojects: A configurational approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Markard, Jochen & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Analysis of complementarities: Framework and examples from the energy transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 63-75.
    19. Raja Roy & Susan K. Cohen, 2017. "Stock of downstream complementary assets as a catalyst for product innovation during technological change in the U.S. machine tool industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1253-1267, June.
    20. Bart Leten & Rene Belderbos & Bart Van Looy, 2016. "Entry and Technological Performance in New Technology Domains: Technological Opportunities, Technology Competition and Technological Relatedness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1257-1291, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Digital Fabrication; 3D Printing; Hearing aid industry; Disruptive Innovation; Technological Discontinuities.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:hhs:ratioi:0262. 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: Martin Korpi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ratiose.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.