Difference between revisions of "P. Anderson and M. Tushman: Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Design: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change."
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Moshe |
imported>Moshe |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
# The mean number of new designs introduced during the era of ferment is greater than during the era of incremental change. | # The mean number of new designs introduced during the era of ferment is greater than during the era of incremental change. | ||
# The era of ferment following a competence destroying discontinuity is longer than the era of ferment following a competence enhancing discontinuity. | # The era of ferment following a competence destroying discontinuity is longer than the era of ferment following a competence enhancing discontinuity. | ||
+ | # The era of ferment grows shorter in each series of consecutive competence-enhancing discontinuities. | ||
+ | # In regimes of low appropriability a single dominant design will emerge following each technological discontinuity. | ||
+ | # After each technological discontinuity, sales of all versions of the new technology will peak after the emergence of a dominant design, not during the era of ferment. | ||
+ | # A technological discontinuity will not itself become a dominant design. | ||
+ | # A dominant design will not be located on the frontier of technical performance at the time it becomes dominant. | ||
+ | # Dominant designs arising from competence-destroying discontinuities will be initiated by new entrants in the industry while dominant designs arising from competence-enhancing discontinuities will be initiated by firms whose entrance preceded the discontinuity. | ||
+ | # Most of the total performance improvement of the lifetime of a technology will occur outside the era of incremental change. |
Revision as of 00:18, 24 May 2012
Return to BPP Field Exam Papers 2012
Theory
The authors propose a cyclical model of technological change. In their model, A technological discontinuity occurs followed by an era of ferment which is characterized by design competition and substitution. Next, a dominant design emerges, and an era of incremental change follows. This era is characterized by elaboration of dominant design.
Hypothesis
- The mean number of new designs introduced during the era of ferment is greater than during the era of incremental change.
- The era of ferment following a competence destroying discontinuity is longer than the era of ferment following a competence enhancing discontinuity.
- The era of ferment grows shorter in each series of consecutive competence-enhancing discontinuities.
- In regimes of low appropriability a single dominant design will emerge following each technological discontinuity.
- After each technological discontinuity, sales of all versions of the new technology will peak after the emergence of a dominant design, not during the era of ferment.
- A technological discontinuity will not itself become a dominant design.
- A dominant design will not be located on the frontier of technical performance at the time it becomes dominant.
- Dominant designs arising from competence-destroying discontinuities will be initiated by new entrants in the industry while dominant designs arising from competence-enhancing discontinuities will be initiated by firms whose entrance preceded the discontinuity.
- Most of the total performance improvement of the lifetime of a technology will occur outside the era of incremental change.