260:
constantly experimenting and therefore cannot enjoy economies of scale. After the emergence of the dominant design, some firms accumulate complementary assets and exploit possible economies of scale, which in turn raises entry and mobility barriers in the industry. Firms that enter the industry during a period of experimentation risk choosing the wrong technological path, but have high upside if they choose the right one. Pre-dominant design entrants have been shown to have a higher chance of survival than those that enter after the emergence of the dominant design. Utterback and Kim (1985) and
Anderson and
112:
dominant design can be a new technology, product or a set of key features incorporated from different distinct technological innovations introduced independently in prior product variants. Their 1975 paper, however, never uses the term "dominant design". It does refer to "dominant strategy" and "dominant type of innovations". Yet, in their 1993 work, Suarez and
Utterback reference the 1975 paper as the source of the concept of "Dominant design". David Teece, of later fame for the theory of dynamic capabilities, overtly develops the concept of dominant design in his 1984 paper on
264:(1990) considered the effect of a disruption that invades a mature industry and thus starts a new cycle. In each cycle, the number of firms increases in the early ("fluid" or "ferment") period, reaches a peak with the emergence of the dominant design, decreases until a few firms dominate the industry, and then restarts again when a disruption creates the conditions for a new wave of entry and the re-enactment of the industry life cycle.
154:
Dominant design milestones have been identified in many product lines. The emergence of a dominant design typically coincides with the point at which the number of firms competing in the industry peaks. Once it emerges, it implicitly sends a message to producers and consumers that its key features is
259:
Utterback and Suarez propose that once a dominant design emerges, it can have a profound impact on both the direction of further technical advance, on the rate of that advance, and on the resulting industry structure and competitive dynamics. Prior to the creation of the dominant design, firms are
102:
Dominant designs are often only identified after they emerge. Some authors consider the dominant design as emerging when a design acquires more than 50% of the market share. A more promising approach is to study the specific product innovations introduced by different firms over time to determine
111:
Utterback and
Abernathy first introduced the concept of "dominant design" in 1975. They proposed that the emergence of a dominant design is a major milestone in an industry evolution and changed the way firms compete in an industry and thus, the type of organizations that succeed and prevail. A
138:
The first commercial product is launched, connecting consumers to this new architecture for the first time. It is usually directed at a small group of customers. This milestone acts as a “last minute call” for competitors to review and speed up their research
629:
301:
76:. The dominant design has the effect of enforcing or encouraging standardization so that production or other complementary economies can be sought. Utterback and Suarez (1993) argue that the competitive effects of
758:
622:
294:
34:. A dominant design is the one that wins the allegiance of the marketplace, the one to which competitors and innovators must adhere if they hope to command significant market following.
80:
only become important after the emergence of a dominant design, when competition begins to take place on the basis of cost and scale in addition to product features and performance.
466:
495:
523:
670:
142:
A clear front-runner emerges from the early market. For example, in the personal computer industry, Apple
Computers dominated after the introduction of their Apple I in 1976.
756:
135:
The first working prototype of the new product/ technology is introduced, sending a signal to competitors to review the feasibility of their research programs.
735:
700:
95:
but now almost universally preferred over other keyboard designs. Dominant designs end up capturing the allegiance of the marketplace; this can be due to
145:
Finally, at some point in time, a particular technological trajectory achieves dominance and this marks the final milestone in the dominance process.
334:
116:, in which he acknowledges the contribution of Utterback and Abernathy in their conceptual treatment of the evolution of technology in an industry.
573:
83:
Dominant designs may not be better than other designs; they simply incorporate a set of key features that sometimes emerge due to technological
594:
Teece, David (1986). "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy".
458:
750:
Role of universities in the product development process: strategic considerations for the telecommunications industry, Alok K Chakrabati
488:
519:
767:
Utterback, J. M. and F. F. Suarez (1993). 'Innovation, competition, and industry structure', Research Policy, 22 (1), pp. 1–2.
654:
746:
729:
Innovations and
Dominant Design in Mobile Telephony from The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy – Koski and Kretschmer
730:
384:
692:
780:
236:, considered a dominant airplane design consisting of variable-pitch propeller, retractable landing gear,
326:
124:
The process by which a specific design achieves dominance consists of a few characteristic milestones:
720:
545:
409:
72:. At some point, an architecture that becomes accepted as the industry standard may emerge, such as
785:
129:
69:
87:
and not necessarily strict customer preferences. An often cited, albeit incorrect, example is the
725:
489:"Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change"
357:"Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change"
23:
246:
186:
27:
8:
175:
171:
132:
with the intention of creating a new commercial product or improving an existing design.
261:
156:
77:
662:
607:
565:
561:
439:
425:
376:
73:
49:
31:
603:
557:
429:
421:
368:
205:
155:
a "must have" by future products. Examples of a dominant design include the simple
41:
762:
99:, technological superiority, or strategic manoeuvering by the sponsoring firms.
84:
179:
96:
751:
774:
743:
666:
569:
443:
380:
233:
241:
434:
356:
254:
220:
209:
198:
92:
91:
keyboard, supposedly designed to overcome operative limitations on the
53:
237:
45:
44:) – often firms will introduce a number of alternative designs (e.g.
372:
273:
755:
Dominant
Designs and the Survival of Firms – Utterback and Suarez
216:
190:
623:"Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework"
295:"Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework"
164:
88:
57:
724:
Invention and innovation: an introduction – Open
University –
30:
in 1975, identifying key technological features that become a
16:
Technological features that become de facto industry standards
160:
65:
128:
A pioneer firm or research organization begins conducting
194:
61:
38:
226:
Many industry examples are included in
Utterback's book
544:
Utterback, James M; Abernathy, William J (1975-12-01).
408:
Utterback, James M.; Suárez, Fernando F. (1993-02-01).
520:"Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries"
459:"Fact of Fiction? The Legend of the QWERTY Keyboard"
255:
Implications for innovation and competitive dynamics
546:"A dynamic model of process and product innovation"
212:
became the dominant design in PC operating systems.
739:Environment: Opportunity or Threat? – Clive Savory
543:
68:). Updated designs will be released incorporating
410:"Innovation, competition, and industry structure"
772:
719:Changing the Dominant Design (Gary S Vasilash)
486:
407:
354:
487:Anderson, Philip; Tushman, Michael L. (1990).
355:Anderson, Philip; Tushman, Michael L. (1990).
240:, radial air-cooled engine, and wing flaps. (
37:When a new technology emerges (e.g. computer
26:concept introduced by James M. Utterback and
693:"Dominant designs and the survival of firms"
610:– via Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.
223:articulated the Apple/iPod dominant design
119:
690:
433:
324:
149:
106:
655:"Almost iPod, but in the End a Samsung"
114:Profiting from technological innovation
773:
620:
327:"Mastering the dynamics of innovation"
292:
652:
593:
403:
401:
228:Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation
13:
14:
797:
456:
398:
361:Administrative Science Quarterly
703:from the original on 2024-01-14
691:Utterback, James (1995-01-01).
684:
673:from the original on 2019-12-29
646:
635:from the original on 2024-01-15
614:
576:from the original on 2020-02-06
526:from the original on 2024-01-15
501:from the original on 2024-01-15
469:from the original on 2019-05-07
387:from the original on 2024-01-15
337:from the original on 2024-01-15
325:Utterback, James (1994-01-01).
307:from the original on 2024-01-15
197:, when VHS became the de facto
587:
537:
512:
480:
450:
348:
318:
286:
182:electricity in the late 1800s.
1:
331:Harvard Business School Press
279:
697:Strategic Management Journal
621:Suarez, Fernando F. (2004).
608:10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
562:10.1016/0305-0483(75)90068-7
426:10.1016/0048-7333(93)90030-L
293:Suarez, Fernando F. (2004).
7:
734:Why the World Went Windows
653:Pogue, David (2006-03-09).
267:
167:. Other examples include:
10:
802:
103:which ones are retained.
157:four function calculator
70:incremental improvements
120:Dominant theory process
230:(see references below)
150:Evidence and examples
107:Origins of the theory
93:mechanical typewriter
24:technology management
781:Strategic management
742:The Curse of Qwerty
463:Smithsonian Magazine
247:The Fifth Discipline
187:videotape format war
28:William J. Abernathy
172:War of the currents
761:2014-02-22 at the
659:The New York Times
78:economies of scale
74:Microsoft Windows
42:operating systems
32:de facto standard
793:
712:
711:
709:
708:
688:
682:
681:
679:
678:
650:
644:
643:
641:
640:
634:
627:
618:
612:
611:
591:
585:
584:
582:
581:
541:
535:
534:
532:
531:
516:
510:
509:
507:
506:
500:
493:
484:
478:
477:
475:
474:
454:
448:
447:
437:
405:
396:
395:
393:
392:
352:
346:
345:
343:
342:
322:
316:
315:
313:
312:
306:
299:
290:
215:A review of the
206:desktop metaphor
801:
800:
796:
795:
794:
792:
791:
790:
786:1975 neologisms
771:
770:
763:Wayback Machine
716:
715:
706:
704:
689:
685:
676:
674:
651:
647:
638:
636:
632:
625:
619:
615:
596:Research Policy
592:
588:
579:
577:
542:
538:
529:
527:
518:
517:
513:
504:
502:
498:
491:
485:
481:
472:
470:
455:
451:
414:Research Policy
406:
399:
390:
388:
373:10.2307/2393511
353:
349:
340:
338:
323:
319:
310:
308:
304:
297:
291:
287:
282:
270:
257:
152:
122:
109:
97:network effects
85:path dependence
20:Dominant design
17:
12:
11:
5:
799:
789:
788:
783:
769:
768:
765:
753:
748:
740:
737:
732:
727:
722:
714:
713:
683:
645:
613:
602:(6): 285–305.
586:
556:(6): 639–656.
536:
511:
479:
457:Stamp, Jimmy.
449:
397:
367:(4): 604–633.
347:
317:
284:
283:
281:
278:
277:
276:
269:
266:
256:
253:
252:
251:
231:
224:
213:
208:introduced by
202:
183:
180:direct-current
151:
148:
147:
146:
143:
140:
136:
133:
121:
118:
108:
105:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
798:
787:
784:
782:
779:
778:
776:
766:
764:
760:
757:
754:
752:
749:
747:
745:
744:Jared Diamond
741:
738:
736:
733:
731:
728:
726:
723:
721:
718:
717:
702:
698:
694:
687:
672:
668:
664:
660:
656:
649:
631:
624:
617:
609:
605:
601:
597:
590:
575:
571:
567:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
540:
525:
521:
515:
497:
490:
483:
468:
464:
460:
453:
445:
441:
436:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
404:
402:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
358:
351:
336:
332:
328:
321:
303:
296:
289:
285:
275:
272:
271:
265:
263:
250:on p. 6)
249:
248:
243:
239:
235:
232:
229:
225:
222:
218:
214:
211:
207:
203:
200:
196:
192:
188:
184:
181:
177:
173:
170:
169:
168:
166:
162:
158:
144:
141:
137:
134:
131:
127:
126:
125:
117:
115:
104:
100:
98:
94:
90:
86:
81:
79:
75:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
43:
40:
35:
33:
29:
25:
21:
705:. Retrieved
696:
686:
675:. Retrieved
658:
648:
637:. Retrieved
616:
599:
595:
589:
578:. Retrieved
553:
549:
539:
528:. Retrieved
514:
503:. Retrieved
482:
471:. Retrieved
462:
452:
417:
413:
389:. Retrieved
364:
360:
350:
339:. Retrieved
330:
320:
309:. Retrieved
288:
258:
245:
242:Peter Senges
234:Douglas DC-3
227:
210:Xerox's Alto
176:alternating-
153:
123:
113:
110:
101:
82:
36:
19:
18:
435:1721.1/2335
420:(1): 1–21.
775:Categories
707:2024-01-14
677:2022-05-06
639:2024-01-14
580:2024-01-14
530:2024-01-14
505:2024-01-14
473:2021-07-05
391:2024-01-14
341:2024-01-14
311:2024-01-14
280:References
221:MP3 player
199:video tape
54:Apple Inc.
667:0362-4331
570:0305-0483
444:0048-7333
381:0001-8392
238:monocoque
201:standard.
46:Microsoft
759:Archived
701:Archived
671:Archived
630:Archived
574:Archived
524:Archived
522:. 1996.
496:Archived
467:Archived
385:Archived
335:Archived
302:Archived
274:Monopoly
268:See also
189:between
174:between
159:and the
139:efforts.
262:Tushman
217:Samsung
191:Betamax
130:R&D
50:Windows
665:
568:
442:
379:
165:iPhone
89:QWERTY
58:Mac OS
633:(PDF)
626:(PDF)
550:Omega
499:(PDF)
492:(PDF)
305:(PDF)
298:(PDF)
244:book
22:is a
663:ISSN
566:ISSN
440:ISSN
377:ISSN
204:The
193:and
185:The
178:and
163:and
161:iPod
66:OS/2
60:and
604:doi
558:doi
430:hdl
422:doi
369:doi
219:Z5
195:VHS
62:IBM
39:GUI
777::
699:.
695:.
669:.
661:.
657:.
628:.
600:15
598:.
572:.
564:.
552:.
548:.
494:.
465:.
461:.
438:.
428:.
418:22
416:.
412:.
400:^
383:.
375:.
365:35
363:.
359:.
333:.
329:.
300:.
64:–
56:–
52:,
48:–
710:.
680:.
642:.
606::
583:.
560::
554:3
533:.
508:.
476:.
446:.
432::
424::
394:.
371::
344:.
314:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.