A Duration Approach to High-Tech Industry: An Evidence from the Rigid Hard Disk Drive Industry

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper analyzes an everlasting paradoxical phenomenon why technically superior firms tend to exit earlier. We tackle this issue using probit analysis as well as survival analysis. We mainly focus on four variables: absolute technology superiority, relative technology superiority, portfolio capability, and marketing ability. The absolute technological superiority is measured by the smallest drive production ability and the relative technological advantage represents the degree of superior storage capacity a firm owns against rival firms. The portfolio capability is measured by the number of disk drive inches produced annually and so it is a proxy for the economies of scope and the number of model out of each disk drive category is a proxy for marketing ability. Estimation results suggest that the absolute technological superiority affects negatively on firm longevity whilst the relative technological advantage, measured by normalized technology position index, affects positively. Further, portfolio capability rather than relative technological superiority turn out to be more important to firm survival, which implies that superior technology cannot guarantee long-run survival alone, quite differently from a conventional wisdom.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 임형록, "합작투자(Joint Venture)와 기업성과: 제조업 부문 vs. 서비스 부문 vs. 파이낸스 부문" 한국기업경영학회 21 (21): 27-42, 2014

2 임형록, "기술우위가 기업 생존성에 미치는 효과 분석 -하드 디스크 드라이브(HDD) 산업을 중심으로-" 한국기업경영학회 17 (17): 109-132, 2010

3 William P. B., "Why Are Some Organizations More Competitive than Others? Evidence from a Changing Global Market" 49 (49): 535-571, 2004

4 Reinganum, J. F., "The Timing of Innovation : Research, Development, and Diffusion" 1 : 850-908, 1989

5 Eaton, B. C., "The Theory of Market Pre-emption : The Persistence of Excess Capacity and Monopoly in Growing Spatial Markets" 46 : 149-158, 1979

6 Mitchell, M. F., "The Scope and Organization of Production : Firm Dynamics over the Learning Curve" 31 (31): 180-205, 2000

7 Christensen, C. M., "The Rigid Disk Drive Industry: A History of Commercial and Technological Turbulence" 67 : 531-588, 1993

8 Jovanovic, B., "The Life Cycle of a Competitive Industry" 102 (102): 322-347, 1994

9 Li, S. X., "The Effect of Within-Industry Diversification on Firm Performance : Synergy Creation, Multi-Market Contact and Market Structuration" 25 (25): 1131-1153, 2004

10 Glazer, A., "The Advantages of Being First" 75 (75): 473-480, 1985

11 Christensen, C. M., "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries" 44 (44): 207-220, 1998

12 Filson, D., "Strategic Innovation Technology Adoption in an Evolving Industry" 51 (51): 89-121, 2004

13 Franco, A. M., "Spinouts:Knowledge Diffusion through Employee Mobility" Revision of Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department 2002

14 Cottrell, T., "Product Variety and Firm Survival in the Microcomputer Software Industry" 25 (25): 1005-1025, 2004

15 Lerner, J., "Pricing and Financial Resources : An Analysis of the Disk Drive Industry, 1980-88" 77 (77): 585-598, 1995

16 Christopher J. M., "Persistence of Technological Leadership : Emerging Technologies and Incremental Innovation" 59 (59): 199-224, 2011

17 Audia, P. G., "Past Success and Creativity over Time : A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry" 53 (53): 1-15, 2007

18 Gimeno, J, "Multimarket Contact Economies of Scope and Firm Performance" 42 (42): 239-259, 1999

19 임형록, "M&A 집약도가 산업생산성에 미치는 동태적 충격분석" 한국기업경영학회 15 (15): 207-223, 2008

20 Irwin, D. A., "Learning-by-Doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry" 102 (102): 1200-1227, 1994

21 Agarwal, R., "Knowledge Transfer through Inheritance : Spin-out Generation, Development, and Survival" 47 (47): 501-522, 2004

22 King, A. A., "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches:The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities" 48 (48): 171-186, 2002

23 Gans, J. S., "Incumbency and R&D Incentives : Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction" 9 (9): 485-511, 2000

24 Jovanovic, B., "Entry, Exit, and Diffusion with Learning by Doing" 79 (79): 690-699, 1989

25 Klepper, S., "Entry, Exit, Growth and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle" 86 : 562-583, 1996

26 Kim, H. Y., "Economies of Scale and Economies of Scope in Multiproduct Financial Institutions: Further Evidence from Credit Unions" 18 (18): 220-226, 1986

27 Hoetker, G., "Death Hurts, but It Isn't Fatal : The Postexit Diffusion of Knowledge Created by Innovative Companies" 50 (50): 446-467, 2007

28 Hill, C. W. L., "Cooperative versus Competitive Structures in Related and Unrelated Diversified Firms" 3 (3): 501-521, 1992

29 Lerner, J., "An Empirical Exploration of a Technology Race An Empirical Exploration of a Technology Race" 28 (28): 228-247, 1997

30 Dixit, A., "A Model of Duopoly Suggesting a Theory of Entry Barrier" 10 : 20-32, 1979

31 McKendrick, D. G., "A Good Riddance? Spin-Offs and the Technological Performance of Parent Firms" 20 (20): 979-992, 2009