Evolution of Standards and Innovation
We develop a framework to examine how a standard evolves when a standard consortium or firm (incumbent) innovates either to improve the standard or to strengthen the installed base, which increases switching costs. Both investments make it more difficult for another firm (entrant) to introduce a standard by investing in technology improvement. Our analysis shows that that incumbent’s strategy depends on whether the technology is in its infancy or has matured, and that entrants cannot supplant the existing standard. A standard consortium brings dynamic benefits by preventing replacement by an entrant. When the technology is in its infancy, the incumbent deters entry, but when the technology is mature, entry and the coexistence of two standards are tolerated. The dominance of a single standard, even for well-established technologies, suggests that incumbents have market power. Our results also suggest that having superior technology is not enough to enable entrants to supplant an existing standard.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2014|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 2-1 Naka, Kunitachi City, Tokyo 186-8603|
Web page: http://cis.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 2000.
"Customer Poaching and Brand Switching,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 634-657, Winter.
- Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1999. "Customer Poaching and Brand Switching," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1871, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Calem, Paul S. & Spulber, Daniel F., 1984. "Multiproduct two part tariffs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 105-115, June.
- Yongmin Chen, 1997. "Paying Customers to Switch," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 877-897, December.
- Aoki, Reiko & Small, John, 2010. "The Economics of Number Portability: Switching Costs and Two-Part Tariffs," PIE/CIS Discussion Paper 483, Center for Intergenerational Studies, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
- Haucap Justus, 2003. "Endogenous Switching Costs and Exclusive Systems Applications," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-7, March.
- Gans Joshua S & King Stephen Peter, 2001. "Regulating Endogenous Customer Switching Costs," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-31, May.
- Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1988.
"Dynamic Competition with Switching Costs,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt1h02g9q4, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Cabral, Luís & Salant, David, 2014.
"Evolving technologies and standards regulation,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 48-56.
- Caminal, Ramon & Matutes, Carmen, 1990. "Endogenous switching costs in a duopoly model," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 353-373, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hit:cisdps:619. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.