What Firms Make vs. What They Know: How Firms' Production and Knowledge Boundaries Affect Competitive Advantage in the Face of Technological Change

References

• Abadie A, Angrist J, Imbens G. (2002) Instrumental variables estimates of the effect of subsidized training on the quantiles of trainee earnings. Econometrica 70(1):91–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R, Kapoor R. (2010) Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management J. 31(3):306–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R, Kapoor R. (2011) Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Reexamining technology S-curves. . Working paper, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
• Afuah A. (2001) Dynamic boundaries of the firm: Are firms better off being vertically integrated in the face of a technological change? Acad. Management J. 44(6):1211–1228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahmadjian CL, Lincoln JR. (2001) Keiretsu, governance, and learning: Case studies in change from the Japanese automotive industry. Organ. Sci. 12(6):683–701.Link, Google Scholar
• Allen BL. (2000) Wafer fabrication facilities. , Nishi Y, Doering R, eds. Handbook of Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology. (Marcel Dekker, New York), 1047–1066.Google Scholar
• Allison PD. (1995) Survival Analysis Using SAS: A Practical Guide. (SAS, Cary, NC).Google Scholar
• Argyres N. (1996) Evidence on the role of firm capabilities in vertical integration decisions. Strategic Management J. 17(2):129–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres N, Bigelow L. (2007) Does transaction misalignment matter for firm survival at all stages of the industry life cycle? Management Sci. 53(8):1332–1344.Link, Google Scholar
• Argyres N, Mayer KJ. (2007) Contract design as a firm capability: An integration of learning and transaction cost perspectives. Acad. Management Rev. 32(4):1060–1077.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K. (1974) The Limits of Organization. (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ. (1973) Information and economic behavior. . Report, Federation of Swedish Industries, Stockholm.Google Scholar
• Balakrishnan S, Wernerfelt B. (1986) Technical change, competition and vertical integration. Strategic Management J. 7(4):347–359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY, Clark KB. (2000) Design Rules, Vol 1: The Power of Modularity. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayus BL. (1998) An analysis of product lifetimes in a technologically dynamic industry. Management Sci. 44(6):763–775.Link, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S. (2004) How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):249–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM. (1995) Product development: Past research, present findings and future directions. Acad. Management Rev. 20(2):343–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brusoni S, Jacobides MG, Prencipe A. (2009) Strategic dynamics in industry architectures and the challenges of knowledge integration. Eur. Management Rev. 6(4):209–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brusoni S, Prencipe A, Pavitt K. (2001) Knowledge specialization, organizational coupling, and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(4):597–621.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman RA. (1994) Fading memories: A process theory of strategic business exit in dynamic environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(1):24–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G. (2005) Preadaptation, firm heterogeneity, and technological performance: A study on the evolution of fiber optics, 1970–1995. Organ. Sci. 16(6):563–580.Link, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough HW. (2001) Assembling the elephant: A review of empirical studies on the impact of technical change upon incumbent firms. , Burgleman R, Chesbrough HW, eds. Comparative Studies of Technological Evolution. Research on Technological Innovation, Management, and Policy, Vol. 7 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 1–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM. (1992) Exploring the limits of the technology S-curve. Part I: Component technologies. Production Oper. Management 1(4):334–357.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM. (1993) The rigid disk drive industry: A history of commercial and technological turbulence. Bus. Hist. Rev. 67(4):531–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM. (1997) The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Christensen CM, Rosenbloom RS. (1995) Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network. Res. Policy 24(2):233–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM, Verlinden M, Westerman G. (2002) Disruption, disintegration, and the dissipation of differentiability. Indust. Corporate Change 11(5):955–993.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark KB. (1985) The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Res. Policy 14(5):235–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark KB, Fujimoto T. (1991) Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World Auto Industry. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cleves MA, Gould WW, Gutierrez RG. (2008) An Introduction to Survival Analysis Using Stata. (StataCorp, College Station, TX).Google Scholar
• Cooper AC, Schendel D. (1976) Strategic response to technology threats. Bus. Horizons 19(1):61–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cox DR, Oakes D. (1984) Analysis of Survival Data. (Chapman & Hall, London).Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG. (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. (Blackwell, Malden, MA).Google Scholar
• Dyer JH, Singh H. (1998) The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad. Management Rev. 23(4):660–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Schoonhoven CB. (1996) Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organ. Sci. 7(2):136–150.Link, Google Scholar
• Enz MJ. (2003) Estimates of first-mover advantages in markets with relatively short product life cycles: An examination of the DRAM industry. . Ph.D. thesis, University of Oregon, Eugene.Google Scholar
• Fine CH. (1998) Clockspeed: Winning Industry Control in the Age of Temporary Advantage. (Perseus Books, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Foster R. (1986) Innovation: The Attacker's Advantage. (Simon & Schuster, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gatignon H, Tushman ML, Smith W, Anderson P. (2002) A structural approach to assessing innovation: Construct development of innovation locus, type, and characteristics. Management Sci. 48(9):1103–1122.Link, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Levinthal DA. (2000) Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):113–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman SJ, Hart OD. (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. J. Political Econom. 94(4):691–719.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Ziedonis RH. (2001) The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the U.S. semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND J. Econom. 32(1):101–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hatch NW, Mowery DC. (1998) Process innovation and learning by doing in semiconductor manufacturing. Management Sci. 44(11):1461–1477.Link, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE, Campo-Rembado M. (2010) Integrative capabilities, vertical integration, and innovation over successive technology lifecycles. . Working paper, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
• Henderson RM. (1988) The failure of established firms in the face of technical change: A study of photolithographic alignment equipment. . Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB. (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
• Henderson R, Cockburn I. (1994) Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management J. 15(S1):63–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R, Cockburn I. (1996) Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. RAND J. Econom. 27(1):32–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G. (2005) How much you know versus how well I know you: Selecting a supplier for a technically innovative component. Strategic Management J. 26(1):75–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hughes TP. (1983) Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society 1880–1930. (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iansiti M. (1998) Technology Integration: Making Critical Choices in a Dynamic World. (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Integrated Circuit Engineering (ICE). (1983) Status 1983: A report on the integrated circuit industry. . Report, Integrated Circuit Engineering, Scottsdale, AZ.Google Scholar
• Irwin DA, Klenow PJ. (1994) Learning-by-doing spillovers in the semiconductor industry. J. Political Econom. 102(6):1200–1227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacobides MG, Winter SG. (2005) The co-evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: Explaining the institutional structure of production. Strategic Management J. 26(5):395–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kale P, Dyer JH, Singh H. (2002) Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management J. 23(8):747–767.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kapoor R, Adner R. (2007) Technology interdependence and the evolution of semiconductor lithography. Solid State Tech. 50(11):51–53.Google Scholar
• Kapoor R, Lim K. (2007) The impact of acquisitions on the productivity of inventors at semiconductor firms: A synthesis of knowledge-based and incentive-based perspectives. Acad. Management J. 50(5):1133–1155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koenker R, Bilias Y. (2001) Quantile regression for duration data: A reappraisal of the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Experiments. Empirical Econom. 26(1):199–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koenker R, Geling O. (2001) Reappraising medfly longevity: A quantile regression survival analysis. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 96(454):458–468.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U. (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3):383–397.Link, Google Scholar
• Leiblein MJ, Miller DJ. (2003) An empirical examination of transaction- and firm-level influences on the vertical boundaries of the firm. Strategic Management J. 24(9):839–859.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leiblein MJ, Reuer JJ, Dalsace F. (2002) Do make or buy decisions matter? The influence of organizational governance on technological performance. Strategic Management J. 23(9):817–833.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman MB, Montgomery DB. (1988) First-mover advantages. Strategic Management J. 9(Summer):41–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loch CH, Terwiesch C. (1998) Communication and uncertainty in concurrent engineering. Management Sci. 44(8):1032–1048.Link, Google Scholar
• Macher JT. (2006) Technological development and the boundaries of the firm: A knowledge-based examination in semiconductor manufacturing. Management Sci. 52(6):826–843.Link, Google Scholar
• Macher JT, Mowery DC. (2004) Vertical specialization and industry structure in high technology industries. , Baum JAC, McGahan AM, eds. Business Strategy Over the Industry Lifecycle: Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 21 (Elsevier Press, New York), 317–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahoney JT. (1992) The choice of organizational form: Vertical financial ownership versus other methods of vertical integration. Strategic Management J. 13(8):559–584.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martin X, Salomon R. (2003) Tacitness, learning, and international expansion: A study of foreign direct investment in a knowledge-intensive industry. Organ. Sci. 14(3):297–311.Link, Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ, Salomon RM. (2006) Capabilities, contractual hazards, and governance: Integrating resource-based and transaction cost perspectives. Acad. Management J. 49(5):942–959.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Methe DT. (1992) The influence of technology and demand factors on firm size and industrial structure in the DRAM market—1973–1988. Res. Policy 21(1):13–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell W. (1989) Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbents' entry into emerging industrial subfields. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34(2):208–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monteverde K. (1995) Technical dialog as an incentive for vertical integration in the semiconductor industry. Management Sci. 41(10):1624–1638.Link, Google Scholar
• Moore GE. (1995) Lithography and the future of Moore's law. Proc. Internat. Soc. Optical Engrg. , Vol. 2437 (SPIE, Bellingham, WA), 2–17.Google Scholar
• Mowery DC. (1983) The relationship between intrafirm and contractual forms of industrial research in American manufacturing, 1900–1940. Explorations Econom. Hist. 20(4):351–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Muzio EG, Seidel PK. (2000) Mask cost of ownership for advanced lithography. Proc. Internat. Soc. Optical Engrg. , Vol. 4066 (SPIE, Bellingham, WA), 73–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. (Belknap, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Nickerson JA, Zenger TR. (2004) A knowledge-based theory of the firm—The problem-solving perspective. Organ. Sci. 15(6):617–632.Link, Google Scholar
• Novak S, Stern S. (2008) How does outsourcing affect performance dynamics? Evidence from the automobile industry. Management Sci. 54(12):1963–1979.Link, Google Scholar
• Novak S, Stern S. (2009) Complementarity among vertical integration decisions: Evidence from automobile product development. Management Sci. 55(2):311–332.Link, Google Scholar
• Parmigiani A, Mitchell W. (2010) The hollow corporation revisited: Can governance mechanisms substitute for technical expertise in managing buyer-supplier relationships? Eur. Management Rev. 7(1):46–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Patel P, Pavitt K. (1997) The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Res. Policy 26(2):141–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pisano GP. (1990) The R&D boundaries of the firm: An empirical analysis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):153–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Poppo L, Zenger T. (1998) Testing alternative theories of the firm: Transaction cost, knowledge-based, and measurement explanations for make-or-buy decisions in information services. Strategic Management J. 19(9):853–877.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prencipe A. (2000) Breadth and depth of technological capabilities in CoPS: The case of the aircraft engine control system. Res. Policy 29(7–8):895–911.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenberg N. (1982) Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Salomon R, Martin X. (2008) Learning, knowledge transfer, and technology implementation performance: A study of time-to-build in the global semiconductor industry. Management Sci. 54(7):1266–1280.Link, Google Scholar
• Schoonhoven CB, Eisenhardt KM, Lyman K. (1990) Speeding products to market: Waiting time to first product introduction in new firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):177–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA. (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106(6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Stalk G, Hout TM. (1990) Competing Against Time: How Time-Based Competition Is Reshaping Global Markets. (Free Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Takeishi A. (2002) Knowledge partitioning in the interfirm division of labor: The case of automotive product development. Organ. Sci. 13(3):321–338.Link, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ. (1988) Technological change and the nature of the firm. , Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G, Soete L, eds. Technical Change and Economic Theory. (Pinter Publishing, New York), 256–281.Google Scholar
• Teece DJ. (1996) Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 31(2):193–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. 18(7):509–533.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tiwana A, Keil M. (2007) Does peripheral knowledge complement control? An empirical test in technology outsourcing alliances. Strategic Management J. 28(6):623–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Anderson P. (1986) Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 31(3):439–465.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walker G, Weber D. (1984) A transaction cost approach to make-buy decisions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 29(3):373–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber CM, Berglund CN. (2005) A strategic assessment of the photomask manufacturing industry. , Timothy T, Anderson R, Daim U, Kocaoglu DF, eds. Tech. Management: Unifying Discipline Melting Boundaries (PICMET), (Portland State University, Portland, OR), 18–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wheelwright SC, Clark KB. (1992) Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality. (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1991) Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Admin. Sci. Quart. 36(2):269–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1999) Strategy research: Governance and competence perspective. Strategic Management J. 20(12):1087–1108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wolter C, Veloso FM. (2008) The effects of innovation on vertical structure: Perspectives on transaction costs and competences. Acad. Management Rev. 33(3):586–605.Crossref, Google Scholar