본 연구는 제품수명주기가 매우 짧은 하드 디스크 드라이브(HDD) 시장을 대상으로 최소형의드라이브에 최대의 집적도 (areal density)를 상품화할 수 있는 경우를 절대적 기술우위라 정의하고, 전체평균 대비 자신이 보유한 최대의 집적도 수준을 표준화(normalization)하여 기술적 순서에 대한 지표를 결정한 것을 상대적 기술우위로 정의하여 이들이 기업의 생존성에 미치는 효과를 검증하였다. 즉, 절대적 기술우위가 존재한다는 것은 ‘업계 최초’라는 수식어가 적합한 경우를 의미하며, 상대적 기술우위가 높다는 것은기술변화 속도를 이길 수 있는 능력을 보유하고 있어 기술적으로 도태되지 않고 벤치마킹을 통하여서 생존할 수 있다는 것을 의미한다. 한편 각 기업들은 매년 몇 개의 디스크 드라이브 군을 유지할 것인가를 결정하는데, 이를 포트폴리오(portfolio) 능력이라고 정의하였고, 각 인치군에서 차별화를 통하여 출시한 총 모델수를 마케팅 능력으로 파악하였다. 이들 변수들은 유기적인 상호작용(interaction)을 통하여 기업의 생존성에영향을 미치게 된다. 본 연구는 절대적/상대적 기술우위의 高低를 축으로 포트폴리오 능력과 마케팅 능력의高低에 따라 각각에 1의 값을 주는 더미변수들을 생성하여 해당 변수들 간의 단순 선형조합, 2변수 조합, 그리고 3변수 조합 별로 시나리오 분석을 하였다. 분석결과 기업의 생존성은 절대적 기술우위보다는 상대적기술우위에 더욱 의존하고, 포트폴리오 능력이 매우 중요하다는 점을 알 수 있었다. 한편 상대적 기술우위와포트폴리오 능력 그리고 차별화 능력의 2변수 조합이 절대적 기술우위를 생성시킬 확률에 대한 probit 분석결과 2변수 조합이 모두 낮을 경우 절대적 기술우위를 갖지 못하게 된다. 본 연구의 결과들은 왜 최첨단 기술을 보유한 시장선도 기업들이 때때로 시장에서 퇴출되기도 하는가 하는 의문에 대한 근본적인 원인을 설명하고, 첨단기술 산업에서 절대적인 기술격차를 보유하지 못할 경우에도 기업의 생존이 가능한 원인에 대한 구체적인 해석을 가능하게 한다
This paper proposes an simple but important question on firm survival: “Can firms with world-first or market-first innovations survive longer compared to other competitors?” According to product life cycle theory, leading firms that can initiate new product life cycle seems to be able to survive longer.
However, it is still obscure if market-leading innovation or top-edge technology can guarantee firm survival indeed as SONY is struggling recently while Zenith that owned the North American standard digital TV broadcasting raw technology has been acquired LG.
To tackle this issue, this paper uses the areal density information in the Disk/Trend Report on Ridge Disk Drives from 1982 to 1997, which includes 167 firms with 9,781 disks. The most salient contribution to related field would be considering two types of technological advantages: absolute technological advantage and relative technological advantage. Firms are considered to have an absolute technological advantage if they can market the smallest disk drive with the largest areal density.
Instead, a relative technological advantage represents the rankings of technological superiority in hard disk industry based on a normalized technology position index that locates each firm’s technological ranking according to annual normalized areal density. So, if a firm has an absolute advantage, the firm is considered as a technology leader. Firms owning relative technological advantages can be said to have competency to catch up with rapid technology evolution speed through benchmarking. In addition,because of product life cycle, firms have to decide how many they will manage disk group lineups annually, which captures firm specific portfolio ability. This in turn can be said to be firm specific risk management. In each disk group, firms market models through differentiation and this represents firm marketing ability.
These four factors interact each other, critically affecting firm survival. Each factor can have either a ‘high’ or a ‘low’ value, which means that we are able to create several scenarios based on their combinations. This paper particularly attempts a dummy-variable scenario analysis based on the twovariable combinations and three-variable combinations. In two-variable combinations, ‘high-high’,‘high-low’, ‘low-high’, and ‘low-low’ combinations are available. In three-variable combinations, ‘highhigh-high’, ‘high-high-low’, ‘high-low-high’, ‘high-low-low’, ‘low-high-high’, ‘low-high-low’, ‘low-lowhigh’,and ‘low-low-low’ are considered.According to some panel empirical results, the survivability of disk drive manufacturers depends much more on relative technological advantage than on absolute technological advantage. Portfolio ability is important to the survivability as well. This can explain two important occurrences in high tech industries. First, market leaders with top edge technologies can experience market exits frequently unless they have strong portfolio abilities. Second, firms with technological gaps against market leaders can often survive longer through effective product portfolios along with marketing strategy.
Scenario analyses suggest that firms are likely to survive if they have both portfolio capability and marketing competency even without absolute technological advantage. Firms are most likely to survive longer when they have relative technological advantage, portfolio capability, and marketing competency at the same time while such firms without any of three factors are least likely to survive.
These result provide a critical implication. ‘World first’ or ‘market first’ might be niche marketing slogans but such absolute technological advantage cannot assure long term survival. Rather, firms that can trace recent technological evolutions are able to survive longer even if they cannot lead technological breakthrough. A good example for this strategy must be Samsung, which uses a late-entry-resource-bombing strategy. For instance, Samsung is a late entrant in smart phone market and it has struggled shortly accordingly but, now, it is bombing Galaxy series for dominating the smart phone market that Apple preempted. Back to 1980s, Apple that pioneered personal computer market has lost its popularity ever since IBM opened its PC architecture. This history is about to occur once more. Combined with Samsung’s portfolio capability and marketing capability, it is very likely that Samsung would be a market leader sooner or later. Summarizing, in top edge industry, relative technological advantage is much more important than absolute technological advantage is, at least, in terms of firm survival.