Search results

Variation, replication and selection processes are acknowledged as key constructs in studies on how industries evolve, but no theoretical and empirical contributions have applied these key constructs to analyzing industries in specific stages of their history. This paper aims to fill this gap, taking for reference the firm and its strategic action in particular.

After delineating and discussing the three processes of interest – variation, replication and selection – this paper analyzes three very different evolutionary contexts: “red” industries, that reached maturity maintaining a polypolistic structure, and that continue to evolve in this phase; the oligopolistic transformation undergone by certain industries; and the emergence of new market spaces around new products developed by firms.

Variations are mainly reactions to the competitive environment in the evolution of red industries or environment-modifying in the case of industries evolving toward an oligopoly, and in the creation of new market spaces. Horizontal replication through employee mobility prevails in red industries, while in the other two contexts firms driving the evolution raise barriers to replication, inhibiting both horizontal and vertical replication. While selection does not come about in a new market space as long as the barriers erected by the first comer remain in place, it occurs in the form of subset selection in the other two settings.

This paper takes an entirely novel approach and proposes a pluralist framing of how industries evolve, interpreting the different evolutionary situations on the strength of the key variables of variation, replication and selection.

Recently, the entry of new players has prompted significant restructuring in the Australian coal market with value migrating away from the existing fragmented, traditional production/export model characterised by competing operators generally using 'common user' infrastructure facilities to new, fully integrated supply chains creating a multi-tiered production-consumer framework.

This paper argues that not only are coal markets restructuring but they are doing so within the framework of a significant paradigm shift towards efficiency-seeking and efficiency-driven mechanisms. Value innovation and a deregulated market are enabling operators to enter the industry seeking and implementing end-to-end control of the supply chain - and, in so doing, capturing the significant gains of integration.

This paper explores these changes within the framework of integrative efficiency - a product of end-to-end control by a single party, derived from a number of companies, or chain elements, working cooperatively rather than competitively, or a single operator vertically integrating the chain from point of production to point of consumption to capture and deliver significantly higher value. The paper focuses attention on this paradigmatic shift in a brief though detailed case study of a major new industry entrant into export coal chains from the rapidly developing Galilee Basin in northern Queensland. It examines the dynamics and implications of this shift in the context of chain efficiency and value innovation

Chinese consumers’ cross-border internet shopping, so called “haitao” is an emerging popular trend in China. Haitao can be understood as service innovation process because it creates new market spaces and provides differentiated values for Chinese customers.

This study aims to explore the service innovation strategies and success factors of haitao business in the Chinese market. The authors selected two successful haitao sites of Amazon.cn and Gmarket.co.kr, as representatives of a global player and a niche player, and conducted a comparative case study to analyze their service innovation strategies and key success factors.

This comparative case analysis based on value chain framework revealed some common success factors such as trust, advanced system and alliances as well as their service innovation efforts. Amazon has advantages such as efficient logistics system and global sourcing, whereas Gmarket has advantages such as product category, sales promotions, and payment system.

This study provides some implications for managers with localization, alliances and platform strategies.

This paper aims to construct a process model of business founding in the biotech industry.

An inductive method is used, and five case studies analyzed. Data are coded by applying Gioia’s method.

Aspirant entrepreneurs conduct resource analysis and industry analysis to formulate research and development targets. They perform transactions and networks because they require resources, and they then deploy and coordinate these resources. Such coordination generates activities with social and financial impacts.

The results are specific to the biotech industry. A future study could examine business founding processes in other industries (e.g. entertainment, fashion, public utilities and sport). Additionally, the paper argues that during the founding process entrepreneurs show little concern for knowledge-sharing risk, as they want to collaborate to implement their ideas. Quantitative papers could test the consequences of such behavior.

The process model provides insights into aspirant founders on how to start a business in the biotech industry.

The paper shows: the differences between the founding process in the biotech industry versus other industries; and the shape of the Bower–Burgelman model in the context of biotech business founding. The paper delineates how private companies discover competencies in the public sector; a model of technology transfer from public to private sector; entrepreneurs’ absence of risk perceptions regarding knowledge-sharing during founding; and how conferences can serve as vehicles for benchmarking in networking.