Preadaptation, Firm Heterogeneity, and Technological Performance: A Study on the Evolution of Fiber Optics, 1970–1995

References

• Abernathy W. J., Clark K. B. Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction. Res. Policy (1985) 14:3–22Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R., Levinthal D. A. The emergence of emerging technologies. California Management Rev. (2002) 45(1):50–66Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G., Lampert C. M. Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management J. (2001) 22:521–543Crossref, Google Scholar
• Albert M., Avery D., Narin F., McAllister P. Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Res. Policy (1991) 20(3):251–260Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alcacer J., Gittelman M. How do you know what you know? Patent examiners and generations of patent citations. (2004) . Working paper, NBER, Summer InstituteGoogle Scholar
• Alchian A. A. Uncertainty, evolution and economic theory. J. Political Econom. (1950) 58:211–238Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aldrich H.Organizations Evolving (2000) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• Allison P. D.Logistic Regression Using the SAS System: Theory and Application (1999) (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) Google Scholar
• Allison P. D., Waterman R., Stolzenberg R. Fixed-effects negative binomial regression models. Sociological Methodology 2002 (2002) (Basil Blackwell, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• Argote L., Beckman S. L., Epple D. The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial settings. Management Sci. (1990) 36:140–154Link, Google Scholar
• Barney J. B. Strategic Factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Sci. (1986) 32(10):1231–1241Link, Google Scholar
• Barney J. B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Management (1991) 17:99–120Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barney J. B., Garud R., Nayyar P. R., Shapira Z. B. On flipping coins and making technology decisions: Luck on an explanation of technological foresight and oversight. Technological Innovation Oversights and Foresights (1997) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) 13–19Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basalla G.The Evolution of Technology (1988) (Cambridge University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Baum J. A. C., Ingram P. Survival-enhancing learning in the Manhattan hotel industry, 1898–1980. Management Sci. (1998) 44(7):996–1016Link, Google Scholar
• Bierly P., Chakrabarti A. Generic knowledge strategies in the US pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17:123–135Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bock W. J. Pre-adaptation and multiple evolutionary pathways. Evolution (1959) 21(2):194–211Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman R. A. Fading memories: A process theory of strategic business exit in dynamic environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1994) 39(1):24–56Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll G. R., Bigelow L., Seidel M. D., Tsai L. The fates of de novo and de alio producers in the American automobile industry, 1885–1981. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17:117–138Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G. Essays on technological evolution. (2004) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Wharton School, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
• Christensen C. M., Suarez F. F., Utterback J. M. Strategies for survival in fast-changing industries. Management Sci. (1998) 44(12):S207–S220Link, Google Scholar
• Cockburn I. M., Henderson R. M., Stern S. Untangling the origins of competitive advantage. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21:1123–1145Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W. M., Klepper S. Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. Rev. Econom. Stat. (1996) 78:223–243Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W. M., Levinthal D. A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):128–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W. M., Levin R. C., Mowery D. C. Firm size and R&D intensity: A re-examination. J. Indust. Econom. (1987) 35:543–565Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeCarolis D. M., Deeds D. L. The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management J. (1999) 20:953–968Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denrell J. Random walks and sustained competitive advantage. Management Sci. (2004) 50(7):922–934Link, Google Scholar
• Dosi G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. Res. Policy (1982) 11:147–162Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L. Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Sci. (2001) 47(1):117–132Link, Google Scholar
• Fleming L., Sorenson O. Technology as a computer adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Res. Policy (2001) 30(7):1019–1039Crossref, Google Scholar
• Futuyma D. J.Evolutionary Biology (1998) (Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA) Google Scholar
• Garud R., Nayyar P. R. Transformative capacity: Continual structuring by inter-temporal technology transfer. Strategic Management J. (1994) 15(5):365–385Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garud R., Nayyar P. R., Shapira Z. B.Technological Innovation. Oversights and Foresights (1997) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gould S. J., Lewontin R. C. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc. Roy. Soc. London (1979) 205:581–598Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gould S. J., Vrba E. S. Exaptation—A missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology (1982) 8:4–15Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z. Market value, R&D and patents. Econom. Lett. (1981) 7:183–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. J. Econom. Literature (1990) 28:1661–1707Google Scholar
• Griliches Z., Pakes A., Hall B. H., Dasgupta P., Stoneman P. The value of patents as indicators of inventive activity. Economic Policy and Technological Performance (1987) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B. H., Barrell R., Mason G., O’Mahoney M. Innovation and market value. Productivity, Innovation and Economic Performance (2000) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Google Scholar
• Hall B. H., Ham-Ziedonis R. The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND J. Econom. (2001) 32(1):101–128Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B. H., Jaffe A. B., Trajtenberg M. The NBER patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. (2001) . NBER Working Paper Series No. 8498, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Ham-Ziedonis R. Don’t fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisitions strategies of firm. Management Sci. (2004) 50(6):804–820Link, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A., Sutton R. I. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1997) 42(6):716–749Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D., Narin F., Scherer F. M., Vopel K. Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Rev. Econom. Stat. (1999) 81(3):511–515Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hausman J., Hall B. H., Griliches Z. Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica (1984) 52(4):909–938Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hecht J.City of Light (1999a) (Oxford University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Hecht J.Understanding Fiber Optics (1999b) 3rd ed.(Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ) Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E. Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D. Management Sci. (1994) 40(12):1720–1747Link, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Lieberman M. The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Indust. Corporate Change (2002) 11(4):725–760Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R. M., Baum J. A. C., Dobbin F. “Luck,” “Leadership” and “Strategy.”. Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management (2000) (JAI Press Inc., Sanford, CT) 285–290Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R. M., Clark K. B. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):9–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R. M., Cockburn I. M. Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management J. (1994) 15:63–84Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R. M., Cockburn I. M. Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. (1996) 27(1):32–59Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill C. W., Rothaermel F. T. The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Acad. Management Rev. (2003) 28(2):257–274Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holbrook D., Cohen W. M., Hounshell D. A., Klepper S. The nature, sources, and consequences of firm differences in the early history of the semiconductor industry. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):1017–1041Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe A. B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents profits and market value. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1986) 76(5):984–1001Google Scholar
• Jaffe A. B., Trajtenberg M.Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy (2002) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaffe A. B., Trajtenberg M., Henderson R. M. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quart. J. Econom. (1993) 108(3):577–598Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kao K. C., Hockham G. A. Dielectric-fibre surface waveguides for optical frequencies. Proc. Institution Electrical Engrg. (IEE) (1966) 113:1151–1159Google Scholar
• Katila R., Ahuja G. Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. (2002) 45(6):1183–1194Crossref, Google Scholar
• King A. A., Tucci C. L. The role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Sci. (2002) 48(2):171–186Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S. The capabilities of new firms and the evolution of the US automobile industry. Indust. Corporate Change (2002) 11(4):645–665Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Simons K. L. Dominance by birthright: Entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the US television receiver industry. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21:997–1016Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonard-Barton D. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management J. (1992) 13:111–126Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levin R. C., Klevorick A. K., Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers Econom. Activity (1987) 3:783–833Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal D. A. The slow pace of rapid technological change: Gradualism and punctuation in technological change. Indust. Corporate Change (1998) 7(2):217–247Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal D. A., March J. G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14:95–113Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levitt B., March J. G. Organizational learning. Annual Rev. Soc. (1988) 14:319–340Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F., Orsenigo L. Technological entry, exit and survival: An empirical analysis of patent data. Res. Policy (1999) 28:643–660Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G.A Primer on Decision-Making: How Decisions Happen (1994) (The Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
• March J. G., Simon H. A.Organizations (1958) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Martin M., Mitchell W. The influence of local search and performance heuristics on new design introduction in a new product market. Res. Policy (1998) 26:753–771Crossref, Google Scholar
• Methe D., Swaminathan A., Mitchell W., Toyama R., Thomas H., O’Neal D. The underemphasized role of diversifying entrants and industry incumbents as the sources of major innovations. Strategic Discovery: Competing in New Arenas (1997) (Wiley, New York) 99–116Google Scholar
• Mitchell W. Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbents’ entry into emerging industrial subfields. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1989) 34:208–230Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mokyr J., Ziman J. Evolutionary phenomena in technological change. Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process (2000) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) 52–65Google Scholar
• Nagarajan A., Mitchell W. Evalutionary diffusion: Internal and external methods used to acquire encompassing, complementary, and incremental technological changes in the lithotripsy industry. Strategic Management J. (1998) 19:1063–1079Crossref, Google Scholar
• Narin F., Noma E., Perry R. Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Res. Policy (1987) 16(2–4):143–146Crossref, Google Scholar
• Narin F., Thomas P., Breitzman A., Berman B. Using patent indicators to predict stock portfolio performance. From Ideas to Assets: Investing Wisely in Intellectual Property (2001) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) 293–308Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management J. (1991) 12:61–74Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R., Winter S. G.An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (1982) (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Patel P., Pavitt K. The continuing, widespread (and neglected) importance of improvements in mechanical technologies. Res. Policy (1994) 23(5):533–545Crossref, Google Scholar
• Penrose E. T. Biological analogies in the theory of the firm. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1952) 42:804–819Google Scholar
• Peteraf M. The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14:179–191Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter M. E. Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management J. (1991) 12:95–117Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reeve H. K., Sherman P. W. Adaptation and the goals of evolutionary research. Quart. Rev. Biol. (1993) 68(1):1–32Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridley M.Evolution (1999) (Blackwell Science, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L., Nerkar A. Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and the impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management J. (2001) 22:287–306Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rumelt R. P., Lamb R. B. Toward a strategic theory of the firm. Competitive Strategic Management (1984) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Scherer F. M. Firm size, market structure, opportunity, and the output of patented innovations. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1965) 55:1097–1123Google Scholar
• Shane H., Klock M. The relation between patent citations and Tobin’s q in the semiconductor industry. Rev. Quant. Finance Accounting (1997) 9(2):131–146Crossref, Google Scholar
• Silverman B. S. Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Sci. (1999) 45(8):1109–1124Link, Google Scholar
• Sørensen J. B., Stuart T. E. Aging, obsolescence and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2000) 45:81–112Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stinchcombe A. L., March J. G. Social structure and organizations. Handbook of Organizations (1965) (Rand McNally, Chicago, IL) Google Scholar
• Stuart T. E., Podolny J. M. Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17:21–38Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece D. J., Pisano G., Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(7):509–533Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece D. J., Rumelt R., Dosi G., Winter S. G. Understanding corporate coherence: Theory and evidence. J. Econom. Behavior Organ. (1994) 23:1–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M. A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND J. Econom. (1990a) 21(1):172–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M.Economic Analysis of Product Innovation (1990b) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M., Henderson R. M., Jaffe A. B. University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Econom. Innovation New Technology (1997) 5(1):19–50Crossref, Google Scholar