Suchergebnisse

Current literature demonstrates that, at least initially, incumbents invest less in the in-house development of a new technology than do entrants, whether diversifying or de novo; this is because, for incumbents, new technology challenges managers' mental models through changes in capabilities, revenue models, or product features. What has not been explored, despite its significance for strategic action, is whether (and if so, why) incumbent, diversifying, and de novo firms might invest differently across variants of a new technology through a discontinuity. This paper uses unique quantitative, archival, and interview data on the investment choices of incumbent, diversifying, and de novo firms around three variants of biotechnology—small-molecule, large-molecule and gene therapy drugs—to show there are differences in investment choices across groups of firms and to suggest that these can be explained through differences in volatility of outcomes across variants. When volatility in product performance generates volatility in firm-level outcomes, de novo firms can cap negative consequences through bankruptcy, an alternative that is extremely costly for established firms (whether incumbent or diversifying), given their complex corporate structure. By keeping indirect bankruptcy costs low, de novo firms' simple corporate structure allows them to extract option value from volatility, making established versus de novo firms the key groups for analysis of investment choices, not incumbent versus entrant firms. This article thus identifies the interaction between a technological investment's volatility and de novo firms' simple corporate structure as the explanatory variable for the observed investment differences. I discuss implications for technology strategy and the competitive analysis of discontinuities.

Research in creative destruction has argued that competence-destroying discontinuities result in incumbents' underperformance in research and development (R&D) with respect to entrants, even if complementary assets aid incumbents in retaining market share. In this paper, I propose that attention to the extent of competence destruction is necessary but not sufficient. An analysis of differences in R&D performance through a discontinuity requires assessment not only of old competence destruction but also of new competence access; that is, it requires assessment of both old capability obsolescence and new capability acquisition. I find evidence for this proposition in data from the biotechnology disruption to the anticancer drug market. In particular, my research design is a within-market matched pair of discontinuities: from chemotherapy to small-molecule targeted drugs, and from chemotherapy to large-molecule targeted drugs. Although equally competence destroying, the two discontinuities differ in the access incumbents have to the new capabilities required: whereas all new capabilities are available in the former, one new capability is inaccessible to incumbents (and to many entrants) in the latter. The contrasting results of these two discontinuities support my proposition: in the competence-destroying discontinuity with full access to new capabilities, incumbents did not fall behind entrants; in the other discontinuity, incumbents fell behind only those entrants that owned the difficult-to-access new capability. I close with implications for research in creative destruction, in rational adaptation to environmental change, and in strategic renewal.

Citation: Koppel, K., Higa, F., Godwin, S., Gutierrez, N., Shalimov, R., Cardinal, P., . . . Chambers, E. (2016). Food Leftover Practices among Consumers in Selected Countries in Europe, South and North America. Foods, 5(3), 14. doi:10.3390/foods5030066 ; Foodborne illnesses may be related to many food production factors with home practices of consumers playing an important role in food safety. Consumer behavior for handling food leftovers has been studied, however little work on comparisons among countries has been published. The objective of this study was to investigate home food leftover practices of people from North American, South American, and European countries. Surveys were conducted with approximately 100 or more consumers in Argentina, Colombia, the United States, Estonia, Italy, Russia, and Spain. The participants responded to questions related to the length of time different types of food leftovers; such as meat, fresh salads, or restaurant dishes would be kept refrigerated or would be left at room temperature before refrigeration. Researchers also investigated how consumers would determine if the food was still safe for consumption. Potentially risky behaviors were observed in all seven countries. For instance, 55.8% of Estonians, 25% of Russians and 25.8% of Argentinean participants left food out at room temperature for several hours before storing in the refrigerator. Furthermore, 25%-29% of Colombian, Estonian, and Spanish consumers would look, smell, and taste leftovers to determine its probable safety. Correct handling of leftovers is an important aspect of consumer food safety. Although the surveys cannot be representative of all consumers in each country, they do provide an initial overview of comparative practices for handling leftovers among different countries. This provides government and educators with information on potential universal and unique consumer food safety issues related to handling leftover foods among various countries.