Reconciling the paradox of supply-side and demand-side strategies in industrial innovation

Abernathy and Utterback [Abernathy, W.J. & Utterback, J.M., (1978). Patterns of industrial innovation. In Burgelman, R.A., Maidique, M.A. and Wheelwright, S.C., Strategic management of technology and innovation: 149–155. McGraw Hill.] argued that successful firms seek a functional product performance strategy in the early stage of industrial innovation and seek a cost reduction strategy in the late stage. However, Adner and Levinthal [Adner, R. & Levinthal, D., (2001). Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: Implications for product and process. Management Science, 47(5), 611–628.] argued firms enhance functionality or reduce prices to a level that corresponds to consumer willingness to pay in the early stage, and increase performance at a relatively stable product price (i.e. new strategy they claimed) in the late stage. This study reconciles this paradox of choosing strategies using an integrative framework for theory development. Generated from the framework, a numerical indicator of performance/cost ratio directs firm strategy choices in industrial innovation when an environment changes. This study justifies the popular use of performance/cost ratio in practices as primary criteria to predict the winning dominant standard from a value creation perspective and elucidates an evolution of industrial innovations by using a three-year field study.