STOP SOPA ☣ STOP RWA

Two bills are making their way through the U.S. Congress that would have highly negative consequences for AcaWiki and the public good. Please take action against both.

Many large sites are blacked out January 18 to spur action against SOPA. Visit americancensorship.org to take action against this bill, which is a censorship and security risk for the entire internet. Wikimedia's General Counsel explains how SOPA would hurt wikis.

RWA would prohibit federal agencies from conditioning their grants to require that articles reporting on publicly funded research be made accessible to the public online. This is unjust and would specifically harm AcaWiki by greatly reducing the number of people with access to important literature — access is required to summarize. Please tell congresspeople to oppose RWA.

See AcaWiki:SOPA-RWA for planning and discussion of this message.

Technological extinctions of industrial firms: An inquiry into their nature and causes

From AcaWiki

Jump to: navigation, search


Citation: Steven Klepper, Kenneth L Simons (1997) Technological extinctions of industrial firms: An inquiry into their nature and causes. Ind Corp Change (RSS)

doi: 10.1093/icc/6.2.379


Tagged: Business (RSS) Economics (RSS), Innovation (RSS)


Summary:

Steven Klepper and Kenneth Simons' article is an attempt to mediate what they argue are three conflicting explanations for "industry shakeouts." As Utterback and Suarez (1993) show (and as population ecologists have shown more widely) industries often see a growth of the number of rims until there is a shakeout when the number of firms tends to drop precipitously. Klepper and Simons point to three arguments in the literature:

Klepper abd Simon go into extreme depth in a careful treatment of four different industries: automobiles, tires, televisions, and penicillin and carefully tests what each theory would predict. In the process, they take issue with some of the designs that Utterback and Suarez (1993) refer to as dominant or argue that they came at the wrong time to predict the shakeout.

Essentially, the paper ends with a list of 7 items synthesized from the data that describe the nature of change its relationship to technology:

  1. Entry was concentrated early
  2. All four products experienced prolonged shakeouts.
  3. Early entrants generally came to dominant each of the four products
  4. Industry leaders dominated product and process innovation in the four products
  5. Individual innovations rarely stood out above the overall ongoing technical advance in each products
  6. Product innovation started to decline about the start of the shakeouts in autos and tires but increased after the start of the shakeouts in television and penicillin.
  7. Process innovation rose for many years beginning at or prior to the start of the shakeouts in autos and tires, whereas process innovation in televisions and penicillin was greatest initially and then declined over time.

None of the theories predict all perfectly but Klepper and Simon conclude that, "overall, the evidence is supportive of an R&D-related dynamic of increasing returns but suggests that the increasing returns dynamic pertained to product as well as process innovation and was not consistently the driving force behind patterns of product and process innovation.

Theoretical and practical relevance:

Klepper and Simons' article has been cited about 150 times in the innovation sub-literature on technological innovation and industry dynamics.



Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
New
Tools
Discussion
Help
Toolbox