Experimental Choice and Disruptive Technologies
References
- (2021) Enabling entrepreneurial choice. Management Sci. 67(9):5510–5524.Link, Google Scholar
- (1962) Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Startups and upstarts: Disadvantageous information in R&D. J. Political Econom. 129(2):534–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2020) A/B testing with fat tails. J. Political Econom. 128(12):4614–000.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1953) Equivalent comparisons of experiments. Ann. Math. Statist. 24:265–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1995) Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Bus. Rev. January–February:1–12.Google Scholar
- (2011) Schumpeterian competition and diseconomies of scope: Illustrations from the histories of Microsoft and IBM. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 203–271.Google Scholar
- (2021) The novelty of innovation: Competition, disruption, and antitrust policy. Management Sci. 68(1):37–51.Google Scholar
- (2020) A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision making: Evidence from a randomized control trial. Management Sci. 66(2):564–586.Link, Google Scholar
- (2020) Biased sampling of early users and the direction of startup innovation. Working paper, Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
- (2019) Optimal dynamic allocation of attention. Amer. Econom. Rev. 109(8):2993–3029.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2019) Control versus execution: Endogenous appropriability and entrepreneurial strategy. Industrial Corporate Change 28(2):389–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2013) The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth (Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
- (1997) The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail (Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
- (2005) Optimal Statistical Decisions, vol. 82 (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
- (2016) The Disruption Dilemma (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) A theory of visionary disruption. Working Paper No. w30091, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- (2000) Incumbency and R&D incentives: Licensing the gale of creative destruction. J. Econom. Management Strategy 9(4):485–511.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2019) Foundations of entrepreneurial strategy. Strategic Management J. 40(5):736–756.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1982) Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. Amer. Econom. Rev. 72(3):514–526.Google Scholar
- (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2019) Research and the approval process: The organization of persuasion. Amer. Econom. Rev. 109(3):911–955.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2012) Netflixed: The Epic Battle for America’s Eyeballs (Penguin).Google Scholar
- (2014) Entrepreneurship as experimentation. J. Econom. Perspect. 28(3):25–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2018) Optimal and myopic information acquisition. Tordos E, ed. Proc. ACM Conf. on Econom. and Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 45–46.Google Scholar
- (2014) Dynamic commercialization strategies for disruptive technologies: Evidence from the speech recognition industry. Management Sci. 60(12):3103–3123.Link, Google Scholar
- (2020) Dynamic choice of information sources. California Institute of Technology Social Science Working Paper, ICEF Working Paper WP9/2019/05.Google Scholar
- (2014) Crossing the Chasm (Harper Business).Google Scholar
- (1982) The role of knowledge in R&D efficiency. Quart. J. Econom. 97(3):453–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2011) The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses (Currency).Google Scholar
- (2021) Strategic sample selection. Econometrica 89(2):911–953.Crossref, Google Scholar

