Strategic Renewal of Organizations

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., Helfat C. E. Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management J. (2003) 24:1011–1025Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Bayus B. L. The market evolution and sales takeoff of product innovations. Management Sci. (2002) 48:1024–1041Link, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Audretsch D., Sarkar M. B. The process of creative construction: Knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. (2007) 1(2):263–286Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Ganco M., Ziedonis R. H. Reputations for toughness in IP enforcement: Effects on knowledge spillovers through employee mobility. Strategic Management J. (2009) . ForthcomingCrossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R., Echambadi R., Franco A., Sarkar M. B. Knowledge transfer through inheritance: Spinout generation, development and survival. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47:501–522Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aral S., Weill P. IT assets, organizational capabilities, and firm performance: How resource allocations and organizational differences explain performance variation. Organ. Sci. (2007) 18(5):763–780Link, Google Scholar
• Augier M., Teece D. J. Dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in business strategy and economic performance. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):410–421Link, Google Scholar
• Baker S.The Numerati (2008) (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing, New York) Google Scholar
• Baum J. A. C., Oliver C. Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1991) 36:187–218Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayus B. L., Agarwal R. The role of pre-entry experience, entry timing, and product technology strategies in explaining firm survival. Management Sci. (2007) 53:1887–1902Link, Google Scholar
• Beckman C. M., Burton M. D. Founding the future: Path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19(1):3–24Link, Google Scholar
• Benson D., Ziedonis R. H. Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):329–351Link, Google Scholar
• Brittain J. W., Freeman J. Entrepreneurship in the semiconductor industry. (1986) . Unpublished manuscript, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
• Burgelman R. A. Fading memories: A process theory of strategic business exit in dynamic environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1994) 39:24–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capron L., Mitchell W. Selection capability: How capability gaps and internal social frictions affect internal and external strategic renewal. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):294–312Link, Google Scholar
• Carroll G. R., Bigelow L. S., Seidel M.-D. L., Tsai L. B. The fates of de novo and de alio producers in the American automobile industry 1885–1981. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17:117–137Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen P., Williams W. C., Agarwal R. Growing pains: The effects of size, age, and technology regime on the pre entry experience—growth relationship. (2009) . Working paper, University of Illinois, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
• Chittoor R., Sarkar M. B., Ray S., Aulakh P. S. Third-world copycats to emerging multinationals: Institutional changes and organizational transformation in the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(1):187–205Link, Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M., Rosenbloom R. S. Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Res. Policy (1995) 24(2):233–257Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M., Suarez F. F., Utterback J. M. Strategies for survival in fast-changing industries. Management Sci. (1998) 44:S207–S220Link, Google Scholar
• Cooper A. C., Schendel D. Strategic responses to technological threats. Bus. Horizons (1976) 19(1):61–69Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dastidar P. International corporate diversification and performance: Does firm self-selection matter? J. Internat. Bus. Stud. (2009) 40:71–85Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis S. J., Haltiwanger J. Gross job creation, gross job destruction, and employment reallocation. Quart. J. Econom. (1992) 107(3):819–863Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deutsch C. H. Kodak bets old strategy can go digital. New York Times (2005) January 26Google Scholar
• Dierickx I., Cool K. Asset stock accumulation and the sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Sci. (1991) 35:1504–1513Link, Google Scholar
• Dyer J. H., Kale P., Singh H. How to make strategic alliances work: The role of the alliance function. MIT Sloan Management Rev. (2001) 42:37–43Google Scholar
• Echambadi R., Bayus B. L., Agarwal R. Entry timing and the survival of startup and incumbent firms in new industries. (2008) . Working paper, University of Illinois, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
• Eggers J. P., Kaplan S. Cognition and renewal: Comparing CEO and organizational effects on incumbent adaptation to technical change. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):461–477Link, Google Scholar
• Floyd S. W., Lane P. J. Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Acad. Management Rev. (2000) 25:154–177Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franco A., Sarkar M. B., Agarwal R., Echambadi R. Swift and Smart: The moderating effects of technological capabilities on the market pioneering–firm survival relationship. (2008) . Working paper, University of Illinois, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
• Garvin D. A., Levesque L. C. Meeting the challenge of corporate entrepreneurship. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2006) 84(10):102–112Google Scholar
• Gulati R., Puranam P. Renewal through reorganization: The value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):422–440Link, Google Scholar
• Haveman H. A. Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1994) 38(4):593–627Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E. Simple indicators of adaptation versus rigidity in history-dependent firm activities and decision rules. Indust. Corporate Change (1998) 7:49–75Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Helfat C. E. Stylized facts regarding the evolution of organizational resources and capabilities. The SMS Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Capabilities (2002) (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA) 1–11Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Lieberman M. B. The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Indust. Corporate Change (2002) 11(4):725–760Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Raubitschek R. S. Product sequencing: Co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):961–979Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat C. E., Finkelstein S., Mitchell W., Peteraf M. A., Singh H., Teece D. J., Winter S. G.Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations (2007) (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA) Google Scholar
• Henderson R. M., Clark K. B. Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(1):9–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herrald J. B., O'Reilly C. A., Tushman M. L. Dynamic capabilities at IBM: Driving strategy into action. California Management Rev. (2007) 49(4):21–43Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huff J. O., Huff A. S., Thomas H. Strategic renewal and the interaction of cumulative stress and inertia. Strategic Management J. (1992) 13:55–75Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S., Mitchell W. Path-dependent and path-breaking change: Reconfiguring business resources following acquisitions in the U.S. medical sector, 1978–1995. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):1061–1082Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S., Mitchell W. Innovating through acquisition and internal development a quarter-century of boundary evolution at Johnson & Johnson. Long Range Planning (2004) 37:525–547Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R. New product search over time: Past ideas in their prime? Acad. Management J. (2002) 45:995–1010Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R., Ahuja G. Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product interaction. Acad. Management J. (2002) 45:1183–1194Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim H. E., Pennings J. M. Innovation and strategic renewal in mature markets: A study of the tennis racket industry. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):368–383Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S. The capabilities of new firms and the evolution of the us automobile industry. Indust. Corporate Change (2002) 11:645–666Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S. Disagreements, spinoffs, and the evolution of Detroit as the capital of the U.S. automobile industry. Management Sci. (2007) 53:616–631Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Simons K. L. Dominance by birthright: Entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the U.S. television receiver industry. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21(10–11):997–1016Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S., Sleeper S. Entry by spinoffs. Management Sci. (2005) 51(8):1291–1306Link, Google Scholar
• Knott A. M., Posen H. E. Firm R&D behavior and evolving technology in established industries. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):352–367Link, Google Scholar
• Lohr S. The new leader of IBM explains his strategic course. New York Times (2002) October 31Google Scholar
• Lohr S. Big blue's big bet: less tech, more touch. New York Times (2004a) January 25Google Scholar
• Lohr S. Sale of I.B.M. PC unit is a bridge between companies and cultures. New York Times (2004b) December 8Google Scholar
• Madsen T. L., Leiblein M. J. Resource stocks, innovation, and persistent heterogeneity. (2008) Presentation, West Coast Research SymposiumSeptember 5–6Stanford University, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
• Madsen T. L., Walker G. Incumbent and entrant rivalry in a deregulated industry. Organ. Sci. (2007) 18:667–687Link, Google Scholar
• Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2008) (Merriam-Webster, Springfield, MA) . http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionaryGoogle Scholar
• Methe D., Swamanithan A., Mitchell W. The underemphasized role of established firms as major sources of innovation. Indust. Corporate Change (1996) 5:1181–1203Crossref, Google 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
• Mitchell W. Dual clocks: Entry order influence on incumbent and newcomer market share and survival when specialized assets retain their value. Strategic Management J. (1991) 12:85–100Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore G., Davis K., Bresnahan T., Gambardella A. Learning the silicon valley way. Building High-Tech Clusters: Silicon Valley and Beyond (2004) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) 7–39Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murray F., O'Mahoney S. Exploring the foundations of cumulative innovation: Implications for organization science. Organ. Sci. (2007) 18(6):1006–1021Link, Google Scholar
• Natarajan B. Incumbent-entrant asymmetries and learning by doing. (2007) . Working paper, Florida International University, MiamiGoogle Scholar
• Nelson R. R. Why do firms differ and how does it matter? Strategic Management J. (1991) 12(Winter):61–74Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson R. R., Winter S. G.An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (1982) (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• O'Reilly C. A., Tushman M. L., Staw B., Brief A. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma. Research in organizational Behavior (2008) 28(JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 185–206Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P., Singh H., Chaudhuri S. Integrating aquired capabilities: When structural integration is (un)necessary. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):313–328Link, Google Scholar
• Reuters Konica Minolta, a photo giant, quitting cameras and color film. New York Times (2006) January 20Google Scholar
• Rivkin J. W., Porter M. E. Matching Dell. (1999) . Case 9-799-158, Harvard Business School, BostonGoogle Scholar
• Romer P. M. Endogenous Technological Change. J. Political Econom. (1990) 98(October, Part 2):71–102Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel F. T., Hess A. M. Building dynamic capabilities: Innovation driven by individual-, firm-, and network-level effects. Organ. Sci. (2007) 18(6):898–921Link, Google Scholar
• Rumelt R. P., Schendel D. E., Teece D. J., Rumelt R. P., Schendel D. E., Teece D. J. Fundamental issues in strategy. Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda (1994) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) 9–47Google Scholar
• Salvato C. Capabilities unveiled: The role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):384–409Link, Google Scholar
• Saxenian A.Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (1994) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Schumpeter J. A.The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle (1934) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Spletzer J. R. The contribution of establishment births and deaths to employment growth. J. Bus. Statist. (2000) 18(1):113–126Google Scholar
• Taylor A., Helfat C. E. Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organ. Sci. (2009) . ForthcomingLink, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M. Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18:119–142Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M. Customer preference discontinuities: A trigger for radical technological change. Managerial Decision Econom. (2008) 29:79–97Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M. Technology, identity, and inertia: Through the lens of “The Digital Photography Company”. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):441–460Link, Google Scholar
• Turner S., Mitchell W., Bettis R. Responding to rivals and compliments: How market concentration shapes generational product innovation strategy. (2008) . Working paper, University of South Carolina, ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
• Tushman M. L., Anderson P. Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1986) 31:439–465Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman M. L., O'Reilly C. A. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2004) 82(4):74–81Google Scholar
• Usselman S. W. IBM and its imitators: Organizational capabilities and the emergence of the international computer industry. Bus. Econom. History (1993) 22(2):1–35Google Scholar
• Utterback J. M. Radical innovation and corporate regeneration. Res. Tech. Management (1994) 37(4):10Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster's New World Dictionary (1962) College Ed.(World Publishing Company, Cleveland) Google Scholar
• Webster's Seven New Collegiate Dictionary (1972) (G&C Merriam Co., Springfield, MA) Google Scholar
• Winter S. G., Teece D. J. Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal (1987) (Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, MA) 159–184Google Scholar
• Winter S. G. Class notes: Management 223. (2007) (Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia) Google Scholar
• Weihrich H. The TOWS matrix—A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning (1982) 15(2):54–66Crossref, Google Scholar