Competitor See, Competitor Do: Incumbent Entry in New Market Niches

References

• Adner R. When are technologies disruptive? A demand-based view of the emergence of competition. Strategic Management J. (2002) 23:667–688Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R., Zemsky P. Disruptive technologies and the emergence of competition. RAND J. Econom. (2005) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Bass F. A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Sci. (1969) 15:215–227Link, Google Scholar
• Bowman D., Gatignon H. Determinants of competitor response time to a new product introduction. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32(February):42–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt R. S. Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. Amer. J. Sociology (1987) 92(6):1287–1335Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandy R. K., Tellis G. J. Organizing for radical product innovation: The overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize. J. Marketing Res. (1998) 35(November):474–487Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandy R. K., Tellis G. J. The incumbent's curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. J. Marketing (2000) 64(July):1–17Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M.The Innovator's Dilemma (1997) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M., Oberdorf M. Meeting the challenge of disruptive change. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2000) 78(2):66–76Google Scholar
• Cox D. R., Oakes D.Analysis of Survival Data (1984) (Chapman and Hall, London, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Dekimpe M. G., Parker P. M., Sarvary M. Globalization: Modeling technology adoption timing across countries. Tech. Forecasting and Soc. Change (2000) 63:25–42Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dekimpe M. G., Van de Gucht L. M., Hanssens D. M., Powers K. I. Long-run abstinence after narcotics abuse: What are the odds? Management Sci. (1998) 44(11):1478–1492Link, Google Scholar
• Deleersnijder B., Geyskens I., Gielens K., Dekimpe M. G. How cannibalistic is the Internet channel? A study of the newspaper industry in the United Kingdom and The Netherlands. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (2002) 19:337–348Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert R. J., Lieberman M. Investment and coordination in oligopolistic industries. RAND J. Econom. (1987) 18(1):17–33Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golder P. N. Historical method in marketing research with new evidence on long-term market share stability. J. Marketing Res. (2000) 37(May):156–172Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gort M., Konokayama A. A model of diffusion in the production of an innovation. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1982) 72(5):1111–1120Google Scholar
• Greve H. R. Managerial cognition and the mimetic adoption of market positions: What you see is what you do. Strategic Management J. (1998) 19:967–988Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gruca T. S., Sudharshan S., Kumar K. R. Marketing mix response to entry in segmented markets. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (2001) 18:53–66Crossref, Google Scholar
• Han J. K., Kim N., Kim H. Entry barriers: A dull-, one-, or two-edged sword for incumbents? Unraveling the paradox from a contingency perspective. J. Marketing (2001) 65(1):1–14Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan M. T., Freeman J. The population ecology of organizations. Amer. J. Sociology (1977) 82(5):929–964Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haunschild P. R., Miner A. S. Modes of interorganizational imitation: The effects of outcome salience and uncertainty. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1997) 42:472–500Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haveman H. A. Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1993) 38:593–627Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hedstrom P. Contagious collectivities: On the spatial diffusion of Swedish trade unions, 1890–1940. Amer. J. Sociology (1994) 99(5):1157–1179Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helsen K., Schmittlein D. C. Analyzing duration times in marketing: Evidence for the effectiveness of hazard rate models. Marketing Sci. (1993) 11(4):395–414Link, Google Scholar
• Jain D. C., Vilcassim N. J. Investigating household purchase timing decisions: A conditional hazard function approach. Marketing Sci. (1991) 10(1):1–23Link, Google Scholar
• Kennedy R. E. Strategy fads and competitive convergence: An empirical test for herd behavior in prime-time television programming. J. Indust. Econom. (2002) L(1):57–84Crossref, Google Scholar
• King A., Tucci C. L. Incumbent entry into new market niches: The role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Sci. (2002) 48(2):171–186Link, Google Scholar
• Kraatz M. S. Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to environmental change. Acad. Management J. (1998) 41(6):621–643Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lambkin M., Day G. S. Evolutionary processes in competitive markets: Beyond the product life cycle. J. Marketing (1989) 53(July):4–20Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lilien G. L., Yoon E. The timing of competitive market entry: An exploratory study of new industrial products. Management Sci. (1990) 36(5):568–585Link, Google Scholar
• Mitchell W. Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbent's entry into emerging industrial subfields. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1989) 34:208–230Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell W. Dual clocks: Entry order influences on incumbent and newcomer market share and survival when specialized assets retain their value. Strategic Management J. (1991) 12:85–100Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moorthy K. S., Png I. P. L. Market segmentation, cannibalization, and the timing of new product introductions. Management Sci. (1992) 38(3):345–359Link, Google Scholar
• Narasimhan C., Zhang Z. J. Market entry strategy under firm heterogeneity and asymmetric payoffs. Marketing Sci. (2000) 19(4):313–327Link, Google Scholar
• Palley T. I. Safety in numbers: A model of managerial herd behavior. J. Econom. Behavior Organ. (1995) 28:443–450Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porac J. F., Thomas H. Taxonomic mental models in competitor definition. Acad. Management Rev. (1990) 15(2):224–240Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rogers E. M.Diffusion of Innovations (1983) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Sinha R. K., Chandrashekaran M. A split hazard model for analyzing the diffusion of innovations. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 24(February):116–127Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srinivasan R., Lilien G. L., Rangaswamy A. Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to e-business. J. Marketing (2002) 66(July):47–60Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strang D. Adding social structure to diffusion models: An event history framework. Sociological Methods Res. (1991) 19(3):324–353Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M. Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complimentary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(Summer):119–142Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Bulte C., Lilien G. Medical innovation revisited: Social contagion versus marketing effort. Amer. J. Sociology (2001) 106(5):1409–1435Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Bulte C., Lilien G. Two-stage partial observability models of innovation adoption. (2003) . Research paper, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
• Wedel M., Kamakura W. A., Desarbo W. S., Ter Hofstede F. Implications for asymmetry, nonproportionality, and heterogeneity in brand switching from piece-wise exponential mixture hazard models. J. Marketing Res. (1995) 32(November):457–462Crossref, Google Scholar