The Dynamics of Learning and Competition in Schumpeterian Environments

References

• 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, Snow D (2010) Old technology responses to new technology threats: Demand heterogeneity and technology retreats. Indust. Corporate Change 19(5):1655–1675.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Audretsch DB (2001) Does entry size matter? The impact of the life cycle and technology on firm survival. J. Indust. Econom. 49(1):21–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Gort M (1996) The evolution of markets and entry, exit and survival of firms. Rev. Econom. Statist. 78(3):489–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Gort M (2001) First-mover advantage and the speed of competitive entry, 1887–1986. J. Law Econom. 44(1):161–177.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Helfat CE (2009) Strategic renewal of organizations. Organ. Sci. 20(2):281–293.Link, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Shah SK (2014) Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators. Res. Policy 43(7):1109–1133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Audretsch DB, Sarkar MB (2007) The process of creative construction: Knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 1(2):263–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Ganco M, Ziedonis RH (2009) Reputations for toughness in patent enforcement: implications for knowledge spillovers via inventor mobility. Strategic Management J. 30(13):1349–1374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Audretsch DB, Sarkar MB (2010) Knowledge spillovers and strategic entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 4(4):271–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Campbell BA, Franco AM, Ganco M (2016) What do I take with me? The mediating effect of spin-out team size and tenure on the founder–firm performance relationship. Acad. Management J. 59(3):1060–1087.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Echambadi R, Franco AM, Sarkar MB (2004) Knowledge transfer through inheritance: Spin-out generation, development and performance. Acad. Management J. 47(4):501–522.Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60(2):323–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Tirole J (1994) The management of innovation. Quart. J. Econom. 109(4):1185–1209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Harris C, Howitt P, Vickers J (2001) Competition, imitation and growth with step-by-step innovation. Rev. Econom. Stud. 68(3):467–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P, Prantl S (2009) The effects of entry on incumbent innovation and productivity. Rev. Econom. Statist. 91(1):20–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Katila R (2001) Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management J. 22(3):197–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Katila R (2004) Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management J. 25(8–9):887–907.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G, Lampert C (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management J. 22(6–7):521–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alcácer J, Chung W (2007) Location strategies and knowledge spillovers. Management Sci. 53(5):760–776.Link, Google Scholar
• Alcácer J, Gittelman M (2006) Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(4):774–779.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amemiya T (1974) Multivariate regression and simultaneous equation models when the dependent variables are truncated normal. Econometrica 42(6):999–1012.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Angrist JD, Pischke JS (2009) Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M (2003) Panel Data Econometrics (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balasubramanian N, Sivadasan J (2010) What happens when firms patent? New evidence from U.S. Economic Census data. Rev. Econom. Statist. 93(1):126–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ (2007) The incumbent discount: Stock market categories and response to radical technological change. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):703–720.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benner MJ (2010) Securities analysts and incumbent response to radical technological change: Evidence from digital photography and Internet telephony. Organ. Sci. 21(1):42–62.Link, Google Scholar
• Benson D, Ziedonis RH (2009) Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organ. Sci. 20(2):329–351.Link, Google Scholar
• Capron L, Mitchell W (2010) Finding the right path. Harvard Bus. Rev. 88(7–8):102–107.Google Scholar
• Cassiman B, Veugelers R (2002) R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(4):1169–1184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK (2009) Spawned with a silver spoon? Entrepreneurial performance and innovation in the medical device industry. Strategic Management J. 30(2):185–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Fabrizio KR (2012) How do product users influence corporate invention? Organ. Sci. 23(4):971–987.Link, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Fabrizio KR (2014) Using users: When does external knowledge enhance corporate product innovation? Strategic Management J. 35(10):1427–1445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ (1996) Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Acad. Management Rev. 21(1):100–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ, Miller D (1994) Competitive attack, retaliation and performance: An expectancy‐valence framework. Strategic Management J. 15(2):85–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ, Miller D (2012) Competitive dynamics: Themes, trends, and a prospective research platform. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):135–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ, Hambrick DC (1995) Speed, stealth, and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Acad. Management J. 38(2):453–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen MJ, Lin HC, Michel JG (2010) Navigating in a hypercompetitive environment: The roles of action aggressiveness and TMT integration. Strategic Management J. 31(13):1410–1430.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1989) Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Econom. J. 99(397):569–596.Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1994) Fortune favors the prepared firm. Management Sci. 40(2):227–252.Link, Google Scholar
• Corredoira RA, Rosenkopf L (2010) Should auld acquaintance be forgot? The reverse transfer of knowledge through mobility ties. Strategic Management J. 31(2):159–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cozzolino A, Rothaermel FT (2018) Discontinuities, competition, and cooperation: Coopetitive dynamics between incumbents and entrants. Strategic Management J. 39(12):3053–3085.Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• d’Aspremont C, Gabszewicz JJ, Thisse JF (1979) On Hotelling’s “Stability in competition.” Econometrica 47(5):1145–1150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dushnitsky G, Lenox MJ (2005) When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures? Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates. Res. Policy 34(5):615–639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dushnitsky G, Shaver JM (2009) Limitations to interorganizational knowledge acquisition: The paradox of corporate venture capital. Strategic Management J. 30(10):1045–1064.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eggers JP (2012) Falling flat: Failed technologies and investment under uncertainty. Admin. Sci. Quart. 57(1):47–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eggers JP, Kaplan S (2009) Cognition and renewal: Comparing CEO and organizational effects on incumbent adaptation to technical change. Organ. Sci. 20(2):461–477.Link, Google Scholar
• Eggers JP, Kaul A (2018) Motivation and ability? A behavioral perspective on the pursuit of radical invention in multi-technology incumbents. Acad. Management J. 61(1):67–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Esarey J, Menger A (2019) Practical and effective approaches to dealing with clustered data. Political Sci. Res. Methods 7(3):541–559.Google Scholar
• Ferguson H (1988) Beyond entrepreneurialism to U.S. competitiveness: From the people who brought you voodoo economics. Harvard Bus. Rev. 66(3):55–62.Google Scholar
• Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Sci. 47(1):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O (2004) Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management J. 25(8‐9):909–928.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
• Ghosh A, Martin X, Pennings JM, Wezel FC (2014) Ambition is nothing without focus: Compensating for negative transfer of experience in R&D. Organ. Sci. 25(2):572–590.Link, Google Scholar
• Gimeno J (1999) Reciprocal threats in multimarket rivalry: Staking out “spheres of influence” in the U.S. airline industry. Strategic Management J. 20(2):101–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gimeno J, Woo CY (1999) Multimarket contact, economies of scope, and firm performance. Acad. Management J. 42(3):239–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ginsberg A, Venkatraman N (1985) Contingency perspectives of organizational strategy: A critical review of the empirical research. Acad. Management Rev. 10(3):421–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griliches Z (1992) The search for R&D spillovers. Scandinavian J. Econom. 94(Supplement):S29–S47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Ziedonis RH (2007) An empirical analysis of patent litigation in the semiconductor industry. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley.Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Helfat CE (1994) Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D. Management Sci. 40(12):1720–1747.Link, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE (1997) Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic Management J. 18(5):339–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill CW, Rothaermel FT (2003) The performance of incumbent firms in the face of radical technological innovation. Acad. Management Rev. 28(2):257–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G, Agarwal R (2007) Death hurts, but it isn’t fatal: The postexit diffusion of knowledge created by innovative companies. Acad. Management J. 50(2):446–467.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hotelling H (1929) Stability in competition. Econom. J. 39(153):41–57.Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB (1986) Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. Amer. Econom. Rev 76(5):984–1001.Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB (1989) Real effects of academic research. Amer. Econom. Rev. 79(5):957–970.Google Scholar
• Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M, Fogarty MS (2000) Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: Evidence from a survey of inventors. Amer. Econom. Rev. 90(2):215–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeffrey K (2001) Machines in Our Hearts: The Cardiac Pacemaker, the Implantable Defibrillator, and American Healthcare (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore).Google Scholar
• Jiang L, Tan J, Thursby M (2011) Incumbent firm invention in emerging fields: Evidence from the semiconductor industry. Strategic Management J. 32(1):55–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jovanovic B, MacDonald GM (1994) The life cycle of a competitive industry. J. Political Econom. 102(2):322–347.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
• Kaplan AV, Baim DS, Smith JJ, Feigal DA, Simons M, Jefferys D, Fogerty TJ, Kuntz RE, Leon MB (2004) Medical device development: From prototype to regulatory approval. Circulation 109(25):3068–3072.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kapoor R, Furr NR (2015) Complementarities and competition: Unpacking the drivers of entrants’ technology choices in the solar photovoltaic industry. Strategic Management J. 36(3):416–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Ahuja G (2002) Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1183–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Chen EL (2008) Effects of search timing on innovation: The value of not being in sync with rivals. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(4):593–625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Chen EL, Piezunka H (2012) All the right moves: How entrepreneurial firms compete effectively. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 6(2):116–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaul A (2012) Technology and corporate scope: Firm and rival innovation as antecedents of corporate transactions. Strategic Management J. 33:347–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaul A, Wu B (2016) A capabilities‐based perspective on target selection in acquisitions. Strategic Management J. 37(7):1220–1239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim JYR, Steensma HK (2017) Employee mobility, spin‐outs, and knowledge spill‐in: How incumbent firms can learn from new ventures. Strategic Management J. 38(8):1626–1645.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S (1996) Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86(3):562–583.Google Scholar
• Klepper S (2002) The capabilities of new firms and the evolution of the US automobile industry. Indust. Corporate Change 11(4):645–666.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S, Sleeper S (2005) Entry by spinoffs. Management Sci. 51(8):1291–1306.Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S, Thompson P (2010) Disagreements and intra-industry spinoffs. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 28(5):526–538.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knott AM, Posen HE, Wu B (2009) Spillover asymmetry and why it matters. Management Sci. 55(3):373–388.Link, Google Scholar
• Kotha S (2010) Spillovers, spill‐ins, and strategic entrepreneurship: America’s first commercial jet airplane and Boeing’s ascendancy in commercial aviation. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 4(4):284–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lampe R (2010) Strategic citation. Rev. Econom. Statist. 94(1):320–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lane PJ, Lubatkin M (1998) Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management J. 19(5):461–477.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lavie D (2006) The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Acad. Management Rev. 31(3):638–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levin RC, Klevorick AK, Nelson RR, Winter SG (1987) Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers Econom. Activity 18(3):783–833.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1991) Organizational adaptation and environmental selection-interrelated processes of change. Organ. Sci. 2(1):140–145.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1992) Surviving Schumpeterian environments: An evolutionary perspective. Indust. Corporate Change 1(3):427–443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. 14(Special issue):95–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman MB (1989) The learning curve, technology barriers to entry, and competitive survival in the chemical processing industries. Strategic Management J. 10(5):431–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman MB, Montgomery DB (1988) First-mover advantages. Strategic Management J. 9(Special issue):41–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lowe LA, Ziedonis A (2006) Overoptimism and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Management Sci. 52(2):173–186.Link, Google Scholar
• Martin S (1994) Industrial Economics: Economic Analysis and Public Policy (Prentice Hall, New York).Google Scholar
• Marx M, Gans JS, Hsu DH (2014) Dynamic commercialization strategies for disruptive technologies: Evidence from the speech recognition industry. Management Sci. 60(12):3103–3123.Link, Google Scholar
• Melitz MJ, Ottaviano GI (2008) Market size, trade, and productivity. Rev. Econom. Stud. 75(1):295–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moeen M, Agarwal R (2017) Incubation of an industry: Heterogeneous knowledge bases and modes of value capture. Strategic Management J. 38(3):566–587.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mowery DC, Oxley JE, Silverman BS (1998) Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm. Res. Policy 27(5):507–523.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1973) Toward an evolutionary theory of economic capabilities. Amer. Econom. Rev. 63(2):440–449.Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1978) Forces generating and limiting concentration under Schumpeterian competition. Bell J. Econom. 9(2):524–548.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson R, Winter S (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Nerkar A (2003) Old is gold? The value of temporal exploration in the creation of new knowledge. Management Sci. 49(2):211–229.Link, Google Scholar
• Nerkar A, Roberts PW (2004) Technological and product‐market experience and the success of new product introductions in the pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management J. 25(8–9):779–799.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker SC (2010) A predator–prey model of knowledge spillovers and entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 4(4):307–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polidoro F (2013) The competitive implications of certifications: The effects of scientific and regulatory certifications on entries into new technical fields. Acad. Management J. 56(2):597–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polidoro F, Toh PK (2011) Letting rivals come close or warding them off? The effects of substitution threat on imitation deterrence. Acad. Management J. 54(2):369–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Posen HE, Chen JS (2013) An advantage of newness: Vicarious learning despite limited absorptive capacity. Organ. Sci. 24(6):1701–1716.Link, Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF (2007) Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behav. Res. 42(1):185–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Srikanth K (2007) What they know vs. what they do: How acquirers leverage technology acquisitions. Strategic Management J. 28(8):805–825.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Singh H, Zollo M (2006) Organizing for innovation: Managing the coordination-autonomy dilemma in technology acquisitions. Acad. Management J. 49(2):263–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L, Almeida P (2003) Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility. Management Sci. 49(6):751–766.Link, Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A (2001) Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management J. 22(4):287–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT (2001) Incumbent’s advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strategic Management J. 22(6–7):687–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salop SC (1979) Monopolistic competition with outside goods. Bell J. Econom. 10(1):141–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schildt HA, Laamanen T (2006) Who buys whom: Information environments and organizational boundary spanning through acquisitions. Strategic Organ. 4(2):111–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Harper & Brothers, New York).Google Scholar
• Shaver JM, Flyer F (2000) Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States. Strategic Management J. 21(12):1175–1193.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Silverman BS (1999) Technological resources and the direction of corporate diversification: Toward an integration of the resource-based view and transaction cost economics. Management Sci. 45(8):1109–1124.Link, Google Scholar
• Singh J, Agrawal A (2011) Recruiting for ideas: How firms exploit the prior inventions of new hires. Management Sci. 57(1):129–150.Link, Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Stuart TE (2000) Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sosa ML (2011) From old competence destruction to new competence access: Evidence from the comparison of two discontinuities in anticancer drug discovery. Organ. Sci. 22(6):1500–1516.Link, Google Scholar
• Stackelberg H (1952) The Theory of The Market Economy (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Steensma HK, Howard M, Lyles M, Dhanaraj C (2012) The compensatory relationship between technological relatedness, social interaction, and knowledge flow between firms. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 6(4):291–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stepner M (2014) Binscatter: binned scatterplots in Stata. Accessed December 9, 2018, https://michaelstepner.com/binscatter/binscatter-StataConference2014.pdf.Google Scholar
• Stock JH, Watson MW (2008) Heteroskedasticity‐robust standard errors for fixed effects panel data regression. Econometrica 76(1):155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (1986) Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15(6):285–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Theeke M, Polidoro F Jr, Fredrickson JW (2018) Path-dependent routines in the evaluation of novelty: The effects of innovators’ new knowledge use on brokerage firms’ coverage. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(4):910–942.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toh PK, Miller CD (2017) Pawn to save a chariot, or drawbridge into the fort? Firms’ disclosure during standard setting and complementary technologies within ecosystems. Strategic Management J. 38(11):2213–2236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toh PK, Polidoro F (2013) A competition-based explanation of collaborative invention within the firm. Strategic Management J. 34(10):1186–1208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M (1997) Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. 18(Summer special issue):119–142.Google Scholar
• Tripsas M, Gavetti G (2000) Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management J. 21(10–11):1147–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatraman N (1989) The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Acad. Management Rev. 14(3):423–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatraman N, Camillus JC (1984) Exploring the concept of “fit” in strategic management. Acad. Management Rev. 9(3):513–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagner S, Goossen MC (2018) Knowing me, knowing you: Inventor mobility and the formation of technology-oriented alliances. Acad. Management J. 61(6):2026–2052.Google Scholar
• Wang RD, Shaver JM (2014) Competition‐driven repositioning. Strategic Management J. 35(11):1585–1604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang RD, Shaver JM (2016) The multifaceted nature of competitive response: Repositioning and new product launch as joint response to competition. Strategy Sci. 1(3):148–162.Link, Google Scholar
• Winter SG (1984) Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 5(3–4):287–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2001) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2015) Control function methods in applied econometrics. J. Human Resources 50(2):420–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu B, Wan Z, Levinthal DA (2014) Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices. Strategic Management J. 35(9):1257–1278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang H, Phelps C, Steensma HK (2010) Learning from what others have learned from you: The effects of knowledge spillovers on originating firms. Acad. Management J. 53(2):371–389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zaheer A, Hernandez E, Banerjee S (2010) Prior alliances with targets and acquisition performance in knowledge-intensive industries. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1072–1091.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhou KZ, Li CB (2012) How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic Management J. 33(9):1090–1102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou KZ, Wu F (2010) Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management J. 31(5):547–561.Crossref, Google Scholar