History-Friendly Modeling: An Evolutionary Tool for Strategy Research

References

• Adams P, Fontana R, Malerba F (2019) Linking vertically related industries: Entry by employee spinouts across industry boundaries. Indust. Corporate Change 28(3):529–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres NS, De Massis A, Foss NJ, Frattini F, Jones G, Silverman BS (2020) History-informed strategy research: The promise of history and historical research methods in advancing strategy scholarship. Strategic Management J. 41(3):343–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Awate S, Larsen MM, Mudambi R (2012) EMNE catch-up strategies in the wind turbine industry: Is there a trade-off between output and innovation capabilities? Global Strategy J. 2(3):205–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belter CW (2017) A relevance ranking method for citation-based search results. Scientometrics 112(2):731–746.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boschma RA, Weterings ABR (2005) The effect of regional differences on the performance of software firms in the Netherlands. J. Econom. Geography 5(5):567–588.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brenner T, Murmann JP (2016) Using simulation experiments to test historical explanations: The development of the German dye industry 1857–1913. J. Evolutionary Econom. 26(4):907–932.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bryant BP, Lempert RJ (2010) Thinking inside the box: A participatory, computer-assisted approach to scenario discovery. Tech. Forecasting Soc. Change 77(1):34–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capone G, Li D, Malerba F (2021) Catch-up and the entry strategies of latecomers: Chinese firms in the mobile phone sector. Indust. Corporate Change 30(1):189–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capone G, Malerba F, Orsenigo L (2019a) Spinoffs in context: Entry and performance across different industries. Indust. Corporate Change 28(2):259–282.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capone G, Malerba F, Nelson RR, Orsenigo L, Winter SG (2019b) History-friendly models: Retrospective and future perspectives. Eurasian Bus. Rev. 9(1):1–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G, Porac JF, Thomas H (2017) Categories and competition. Strategic Management J. 38(1):64–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cowan R, Foray D (2002) Evolutionary economics and the counterfactual threat: On the nature and role of counterfactual history as an empirical tool in economics. J. Evolutionary Econom. 12(5):539–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM, Bingham CB (2007) Developing theory through simulation methods. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):480–499.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Rond M, Thietart RA (2007) Choice, chance and inevitability in strategy. Strategic Management J. 28(5):535–551.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dosi G (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 11(3):147–162.Google Scholar
• Dosi G, Nelson RR (1994) An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics. J. Evolutionary Econom. 4(3):153–172.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dranove D, Peteraf M, Shanley M (1998) Do strategic groups exist? An economic framework for analysis. Strategic Management J. 19(11):1029–1044.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Durand R, Vaara E (2009) Causation, counterfactuals, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management J. 30(12):1245–1264.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Engler D (2015) Is it a car or a truck? Managerial beliefs, the choice of product architecture and the emergence of the minivan market segment. Indust. Corporate Change 24(3):697–719.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Engler D, Cattani G, Porac J (2020) Studying the incubation of a new product market through realized and alternative histories. Strategy Sci. 5(3):160–192.Link, Google Scholar
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal DA (2004) Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Sci. 50(2):159–173.Link, Google Scholar
• Ferguson N (1997) Virtual history: Toward a “chaotic” theory of the past. Ferguson N, ed. Virtual History: Alternatives and Counterfactuals (Picador, London), 1–90.Google Scholar
• Frenken K (2006) Technological innovation and complexity theory. Econom. Innovation New Tech. 15(2):137–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fruchterman TMJ, Reingold EM (1991) Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Software Practice Experience 21(11):1129–1164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ganco M, Agarwal R (2009) Performance differentials between diversifying entrants and entrepreneurial start-ups: A complexity approach. Acad. Management Rev. 34(2):228–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garavaglia C (2010) Modelling industrial dynamics with “history-friendly” simulations. Struct. Change Econom. Dynam. 21(4):258–275.Crossref, 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
• Gavetti G, Levinthal DA (2004) The strategy field from the perspective of Management Science: Divergent strands and possible integration. Management Sci. 50(10):1309–1318.Link, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Helfat CE, Marengo L (2017) Searching, shaping, and the quest for superior performance. Strategy Sci. 2(3):194–209.Link, Google Scholar
• Geels FW (2002) Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 31(8):1257–1274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golovko E, Valentini G (2014) Selective learning-by-exporting: Firm size and product vs. process innovation. Global Strategy J. 4(3):161–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE (2015) Vertical firm structure and industry evolution. Indust. Corporate Change 24(4):803–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE (2021) What does firm shaping of markets really mean? Strategy Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
• Jedidi K, Kohli R (2005) Probabilistic subset-conjunctive models for heterogeneous consumers. J. Marketing Res. 42(4):483–494.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knudsen T, Levinthal DA, Puranam P (2019) A model is a model. Strategy Sci. 4(1):1–3.Link, Google Scholar
• Kumaraswamy A, Mudambi R, Saranga H, Tripathy A (2012) Catch-up strategies in the Indian auto components industry: Domestic firms’ responses to market liberalization. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 43(4):368–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Landini F, Malerba F (2017) Public policy and catching up by developing countries in global industries: A simulation model. Cambridge J. Econom. 41(3):927–960.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Landini F, Lee K, Malerba F (2017) A history-friendly model of the successive changes in industrial leadership and the catch-up by latecomers. Res. Policy 46(2):431–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee K, Lim C (2001) Technological regimes, catching-up, and leapfrogging: Findings from the Korean industries. Res. Policy 30(3):459–483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lenox MJ, Rockart SF, Lewin AY (2007) Interdependency, competition, and industry dynamics. Management Sci. 53(4):599–615.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Li C, Csaszar FA (2019) Government as landscape designer: A behavioral view of industrial policy. Strategy Sci. 4(3):175–192.Link, Google Scholar
• Li D, Capone G, Malerba F (2019) The long march to catch-up: A history-friendly model of China’s mobile communications industry. Res. Policy 48(3):649–664.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li D, Liang Z, Tell F, Xue L (2021) Sectoral systems of innovation in the era of the fourth industrial revolution: An introduction to the special section. Indust. Corporate Change 30(1):123–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luo Y, Tung RL (2007) International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 38(4):481–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F (2002) Innovation and market structure in the dynamics of the pharmaceutical industry and biotechnology: Toward a history-friendly model. Indust. Corporate Change 11(4):667–703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F, Nelson RR, eds. (2012) Economic Development as a Learning Process: Variation Across Sectoral Systems (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F, Mani S, Adams P, eds. (2017) The Rise to Market Leadership (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F, Nelson R, Orsenigo L, Winter S (1999) “History-friendly” models of industry evolution: The computer industry. Indust. Corporate Change 8(1):3–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malerba F, Nelson RR, Orsenigo L, Winter SG (2016) Innovation and the Evolution of Industries: History Friendly Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Sproull LS, Tamuz M (1991) Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organ. Sci. 2(1):1–13.Link, Google Scholar
• Martinelli A, Mina A, Moggi M (2021) The enabling technologies of industry 4.0: Examining the seeds of the fourth industrial revolution. Indust. Corporate Change 30(1):161–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mathews JA (2002) Competitive advantages of the latecomer firm: A resource-based account of industrial catch-up strategies. Asia Pacific J. Management 19(4):467–488.Google Scholar
• Mu Q, Lee K (2005) Knowledge diffusion, market segmentation and technological catch-up: The case of the telecommunication industry in China. Res. Policy 34(6):759–783.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mordhorst M (2008) From counterfactual history to counternarrative history. Management Organ. Hist. 3(1):5–26.Google Scholar
• Murmann JP (2003) Knowledge and Competitive Advantage: The Coevolution of Firms, Technology, and National Institutions (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murmann JP (2012) Marrying history and social science in strategy research. Kahl SJ, Silverman BS, Cusumano MA, eds. Advances in Strategic Management, vol. 29 (Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK), 89–115.Google Scholar
• Murmann JP (2014) Reflections on choosing the appropriate level of abstraction in social science research. Management Organ. Rev. 10(3):381–389.Google Scholar
• Murmann JP (2015) Deepening the conversation between business history and evolutionary economics. Bus. Hist. 57(5):705–715.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Narula R (2006) Globalization, new ecologies, new zoologies, and the purported death of the eclectic paradigm. Asia Pacific J. Management 23(2):143–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR (2020) On “reasoned history.” Indust. Corporate Change 29(4):1035–1036.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Peng MW, Wang DYL, Jiang Y (2008) An institution-based view of international business strategy: A focus on emerging economies. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 39(5):920–936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peng MW, Sun SL, Pinkham B, Chen H (2009) The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Acad. Management Perspect. 23(3):63–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quinn J (2015) Re-introducing evolutionary theory to business history: Making sense of today’s structures. Bus. Hist. 57(5):655–663.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW (2000) Imitation of complex strategies. Management Sci. 46(6):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW, Siggelkow N (2003) Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Sci. 49(3):290–311.Link, Google Scholar
• Sci2 Team (2009) Science of Science (Sci2) Tool. Accessed January 13, 2021, http://sci2.cns.iu.edu.Google Scholar
• Shin J-S (2017) Dynamic catch-up strategy, capability expansion and changing windows of opportunity in the memory industry. Res. Policy 46(2):404–416.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart. J. Econom. 69(1):99–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaara E, Lamberg J (2016) Taking historical embeddedness seriously: Three historical approaches to advance strategy process and practice research. Acad. Management Rev. 41(4):633–657.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of “small-world” networks. Nature 393(6684):440–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winter SG (2013) An evolutionary program for business history? Enterprise Soc. 14(3):498–506.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winter SG (2018) Appendix to Chapter 4: History-friendly modeling. Nelson RR, ed. Modern Evolutionary Economics: An Overview (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 129–142.Google Scholar