The adoption process for disruptive innovation: A theoretical analysis

WANG Ye; QU Linchi

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202021002

Issue 6

Nov. 2020

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences) > 2020 > (6): 99-104

WANG Ye, QU Linchi. The adoption process for disruptive innovation: A theoretical analysis[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2020, (6): 99-104. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202021002

Citation:

WANG Ye, QU Linchi. The adoption process for disruptive innovation: A theoretical analysis[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2020, (6): 99-104. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202021002

Citation:

PDF( 477 KB)

The adoption process for disruptive innovation: A theoretical analysis

doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5641.202021002

WANG Ye,
QU Linchi^,

School of Economics and Management, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai　201306, China

Received Date: 2020-01-06
Available Online: 2020-03-31
Publish Date: 2020-11-25

Abstract

Abstract

Looking back on history, we observe that many industries generate disruptive innovations intermittently. It is worth noting that those who adopt new technologies for commercialization are usually not the incumbent leading companies with the strongest technical and financial strength, but rather companies that are established later in time, who operate on a smaller scale and with less technical strength. This article explains this phenomenon based on a two-stage game model. The advantages of incumbent companies in traditional technologies often become obstacles in their switch to innovative technologies. Companies established later in time can leverage the late-comer advantage to strategically reduce profits of new technology products, thereby blocking incumbent enterprises from the new product market.
- disruptive innovation,
- two-stage game,
- switching cost,
- late-comer advantage

FullText(HTML)

References(14)

References

[1]	SCHUMPETER J A. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961.
[2]	CHRISTENSEN C M. The rigid disk drive industry: A history of commercial and technological turbulence [J]. Business History Review, 1993, 67(4): 531-588. doi: 10.2307/3116804
[3]	DANNEELS E. Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda [J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2004, 21(4): 246-258. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00076.x
[4]	O’REILLY III C A, TUSHMAN M L. The ambidextrous organization [J]. Harvard Business Review, 2004, 82(2): 74-81.
[5]	陈劲, 戴凌燕, 李良德. 突破性创新及其识别 [J]. 科技管理研究, 2002(5): 22-28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7695.2002.05.006
[6]	郭政. 后发企业破坏性创新的机理与路径研究 [D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2007.
[7]	宋建元. 成熟型大企业开展破坏性创新的机理与途径研究 [D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2006.
[8]	RIORDAN M H, WILLIAMSON O E. Asset specificity and economic organization [J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 1985, 3(4): 365-378. doi: 10.1016/0167-7187(85)90030-X
[9]	田红云. 破坏性创新与我国制造业国际竞争优势的构建 [D]. 上海: 上海交通大学, 2007.
[10]	CHRISTENSEN C M, OVERDORF M. Meeting the challenge of disruptive change [J]. Harvard Business Review, 2000, 78(2): 66-77.
[11]	NELSON R R, WINTER S G, SCHUETTE H L. Technical change in an evolutionary model [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, 90(1): 90-118. doi: 10.2307/1886088
[12]	马洁玲, 唐立倩, 李强. 柯达衰落的真实教训 [J]. 现代国企研究, 2016, 21: 66-69.
[13]	陈司星. 柯达破产: 自满的代价 [J]. 国企, 2013(3): 116-123. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8336.2013.03.032
[14]	顾问君. 柯达: 被 IT 击倒的巨人 [J]. 上海经济, 2012, 2(5): 24-26. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-4211.2012.05.006