본 연구의 목적은 지배적 디자인 결정에 영향을 미치는 기술특성요인들을 새로이 제시하고, 이 개념들에 관한 이론적인 논거를 구축하는데 있다. 지배적 디자인의 개념에 관한 기존의 연구들은 일반적으로 기술외적인 요인들을 중심으로 경영 전략적인 관점을 취한 반면, 본 연구는 기술 그 자체의 고유한 특성에 초점을 맞추고 이러한 특성에 따라 지배적 디자인 에 관한 경쟁과정의 동태성이 달라짐에 주목하고자 하였다. 본 연구진이 제시하는 기술특성 요인은 기술의 시장요구적합 성, 기업 간 기술적 협력가능성, 기술의 응용가능성의 3가지로서, 제시된 개념들의 실증적 타당성을 검증하기 위하여 디스플레이 시장에서의 LCD와 PDP기술경쟁 사례를 개발하여 제시된 기술특성요인들이 LCD와 PDP기술 간의 지배적 디자인을 위한 경쟁과정에서 어떠한 역할을 하였는지 분석하였다. 연구결과, 첫째, 기업이 초기 기술선택과정에서 택한 기 술의 특성이 제품사양이나 성능을 통해 진화하는 시장의 요구에 보다 적합할수록 해당 기술을 이용한 제품이 지배적 디자 인으로 선정될 가능성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 기술특성이 반영되는 제품구조와 제조공정에서 기업 간 기술적 협력가능성이 높을수록 제품혁신이 활성화되어 지배적 디자인으로 선정될 가능성이 높아지는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 초기에 선택된 기술이 응용될 수 있는 제품군이 다양할수록 규모의 경제와 위험분산과정을 통해 지배적 디자인 결정과정 에 유리하게 작용하는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과는 기술의 고유 특성들에 대한 이해를 바탕으로 전략을 구축하고 실행한다면 기술 확산을 자극하는 것뿐 만 아니라 지배적 디자인 결정과정에 유리한 위치를 점할 수 있음을 제시했으며, 자료 부족으로 인해 실증적 연구가 미진한 지배적 디자인의 대한 연구를 독려할 수 있는 새로운 방법론적 대안을 제시하고자 하였다.
Dominant design refers to a de-facto standard technology or product that performs a standard role in a market while it is not officially or legally considered an industry standard. Dominant design emerges within markets and reasons for that include the learning effect by firms and consumers, economies of scale through increased production of related parts and components, and the positive network externality effect through an enlarged consumer base. Furthermore, firms can enjoy the greater possibility of technological collaboration among firms sharing the dominant technology through which they can design shared platforms enabling the design of more diverse products, leading to even greater network externality through a network of producers regarding complementary goods. On the other hand, however, technologies and products that are not selected as a dominant design gradually lose their base in the market and will be in a difficult position as they are not able to recover their investment in R&D, installation of manufacturing process, and next generation of technology. Therefore, it is important to pay close attention and place effort towards placing the development or selection of technology in a position of dominant design. Extant research on dominant design approaches the issue from a perspective of management strategy and focuses on the strategic decision making process. For example, they have identified the difference in firms` capability to manage external and internal factors such as ability to form an inter-firm collaboration, ability to understand and react to market and consumers, ability to ramp-up production, ability to form a strategic alliance with producers of complementary goods, and the ability to exercise a proper licensing strategy as key factors which influence the selection process of dominant design within a given market. The extant researches have made important contributions toward the formation of corporate and marketing strategies but did not provide sufficient analyses on the technology per se that becomes a dominant design. In other words, the extant researches didn`t address the inherent characteristics concerning technologies as an influential reason that influences the competition for dominant design. Rather, they normatively assume that technology offering improved product functionality is in a superior position to be a dominant design, and thus focus more on strategic aspects regarding competition. Of course, if there is little difference between technologies in terms of product performance, a more meaningful study can be done by focusing on the factors outside of the technology. For example, if a product with better technology at the onset fails to maintain a meaningful gap with a competing technology, or if non-technology related factors such as: ability for marketing and distributing products, ability to form a strategic alliance, ability for large-scale production, availability of complementary products, and firm`s R&D ability, become more important than the perceived difference between technologies, then the initial technological advantage becomes less important throughout competition concerning the dominant design. A closely related example would be the case of Sony and JVC who participated in a competition regarding standards within VTR product categories. In this instance, an analysis of the case from a business strategy can provide very useful information. However, if a deciding force in the competition process lies in the technology itself, then excluding it and focusing only on strategic aspects of competition would lead to a distorted conclusion. The current study considers technology itself as a main factor in the process of competition for dominant design. We claim that inherent characteristics of a technology plays a fundamental and pervasive role in the process of competition, and the primary difference among characteristics between competing technologies is not something that can be overturned through firms` strategic maneuvering efforts. This particular perspective is our core analytic viewpoint that we will use to help us understand the process of competition for dominant design. There are various ways through which technological characteristics influence the determination process of dominant design. For example, if a certain technology has an inherent advantage in designing and improving product architecture within the process of manufacturing and distribution, in comparison with other technologies used in production of complementary goods, in the process of industrial innovation since modularization is relatively easy to be implemented, or in potential for future improvement, then the technology has a superior chance of being the dominant design. Current study aims at theoretical investigation regarding the relationship between the technological characteristics and emergence of dominant design, and attempts to identify key constructs that play important roles within that particular relationship. We believe our study will help in providing important information on the technological aspect of competition for dominant design, which has been largely unexplored with regards to extant researches. Furthermore, while the extant researches on dominant design focus on the issues such as the technology spillover effect and follower`s strategy that are arising after firms` choice of technology base (Tegatden et al., 1999), the current study focuses on the issue of technology choice which is becoming prevalent throughout the early phase of competition for dominant design. The choice of technology at the early phase of competition is an important issue as it influences subsequent decisions on product architecture, process technology, and organizational structure. However, to our knowledge, there are few studies that directly deal with the issue and identify factors related to the decision concerning the ideal selection of technology. In the current study, we suggest three technology-based constructs: fitness for market requirement, possibility of inter-firm collaboration on product/process innovations, and applicability in a range of product categories. In order to examine the empirical validity of the three constructs, we develop a case on LCD and PDP technologies in a display market and analyze what role each construct has played and how they have influenced the competition for dominant design within the display industry. Our results indicate that a technology has a better chance of being selected as a dominant design if the technology exhibits superior capabilities for evolving market requirements in terms of product features and product performance, if it requires product architecture and a related manufacturing process that are more open to firms` collaboration in ensuing innovations, and if it is applicable to a wider range of product categories so that it yields more benefits in terms of scale economy and risk pooling. Our results also demonstrate that a firm can not only better stimulate diffusion of its technology but also has better position in the competition for dominant design if it executes a business strategy that is firmly rooted in thoroughly understanding the inherent characteristics of the technology adopted. We also show that our approach in the current paper, development from theoretical constructs through case analyses, can be a useful methodological alternative that assists one in overcoming the difficulty of getting empirical data for research on dominant design.