The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Innovation, competition, and industry structure
Open accessAbstract
Why some firms die while others survive? Survival has long been recognized as a basic goal for a manufacturing firm. At least in the long term, survival should be related to various measures of performance, such as market share and profitability. Advocates of population ecology have argued that life chances of organizations are affected by population density at the time of founding. According to this argument, organizations founded during periods of intense competition will have persistently higher age-specific rates of mortality than those founded during periods with lower numbers of competitors. At least for the case of manufacturing firms, there may be more profound causes than competitive turmoil that explain a firm's survival chances. These have to do with the evolution of technology in an industry. Population density may only be a reflection of underlying driving forces based on technological change that determine the form and level of competition, the attractiveness of entry, and ultimately the structure of an industry.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Teece, D. J. (1986) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2 · Cited by 7,842
Technological paradigms and technological trajectories
Dosi, G. (1982) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6 · Cited by 6,685
Cited by
Teece, D. J. (2007) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.640 · Cited by 16,825
Technological paradigms and technological trajectories
Dosi, G. (1982) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6 · Cited by 6,685
Unruh, G. C. (2000) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/s0301-4215(00)00070-7 · Cited by 3,304
Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation
Gnyawali, D. R., & Park, B.-J. (. (2011) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.009 · Cited by 1,044
An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics
Dosi, G., & Nelson, R. R. (1994) · Journal of Evolutionary Economics · doi:10.1007/bf01236366 · Cited by 804
Reflections on “Profiting from Innovation”
Teece, D. J. (2006) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.009 · Cited by 733
Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change
Kaplan, S., & Tripsas, M. (2008) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.02.002 · Cited by 661
Murmann, J. P., & Frenken, K. (2006) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.011 · Cited by 654
Innovation patterns and location of European low- and medium-technology industries
Heidenreich, M. (2009) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.005 · Cited by 284
Innovating big tech firms and competition policy: favoring dynamic over static competition
Petit, N., & Teece, D. J. (2021) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtab049 · Cited by 109
Metadata
- Authors
- Utterback, J. M., & Suárez, F. F.
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1993-02
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-21
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1993395544
- Cited by
- 840
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 31.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
