With Victor Bennett and Ines Black
Several literatures in strategy propose models of the displacement of incumbent firms by newer firms that adopt newer technologies. Although that pattern likely plays out often, it is also often the case that incumbents adopt new technologies less intensively than entrants and yet, are not displaced; the new and old firms coexist. We propose one explanation built on the fundamental notion in strategy of the importance of fit between activity system components. We combine three existing models from strategy in a way that allows us to generate novel predictions. When corroborated, these predictions suggest that the patterns we observe are likely the result of issues of multidimensional fit and cannot be explained by a simpler model. One model predicts that market segment choice is a function of the order of entry. A second suggests that organizational form must fit with market segment choice, and a third suggests that information technology adoption returns depend on organizational form. Jointly, these models produce a chain of logic explaining why early entrants might be less likely to adopt information technology. The combined model also yields a novel prediction about when we expect this pattern to emerge. Specifically, in settings without a sufficiently large scope for product customization or the possibility of variation in organizational form, we predict that the relationship between entry order and technology adoption is attenuated. We find patterns consistent with our predictions using rich employer-employee linked administrative data from Portugal.
Keywords: Organizations, Software, Complements, Technology adoption, Entry
Citation: Bennett, V. M., Black, I., & Hall, T. A. (2023) Market Segment, Organizational Form, and Information Technology Fit. Strategy Science 9(1):38-57.
With Sharique Hasan
Many organizations have embraced formal experimentation, i.e., A/B testing, to improve the performance of their products and services. Experimentation, some have argued, should democratize innovation inside organizations by creating a platform to test new ideas, regardless of origin. In this article, we argue that experimentation’s promise hinges on having the proper organizational decision-making process that encourages innovation while mitigating the risk of unanticipated failures. We study this question by developing a model of experimentation inside organizations, where decisions to implement are either centralized or decentralized—a tension identified by practitioners and scholars alike. Organizations with centralized mechanisms that rely too much on the input of other teams benefit least from experimentation, as do ones with completely decentralized ones. In contrast, organizations with mostly decentralized decisions, with a single authority that sets consistent thresholds for implementation, achieve growth but with less downside risk. Thus, without considering the organizational decision-making structure, the benefits of experimentation may be limited.
Keywords: Experimentation, Digitization, Organizations, Decision-making
Citation: Hall, T. A., & Hasan, S. (2022). Organizational decision-making and the returns to experimentation. Journal of Organization Design, 11(4), 129-144.
With Victor Bennett
What happens to market structure as an industry's operations lean ever more on software? We find that software availability is associated with an increase in entry and an increase in exit by the oldest and most established firms. We suggest three potential mechanisms and, through post hoc analysis, determine which is most consistent with observed patterns. We find the effect of software availability on entry is stronger in settings with more available IT talent, more permissive labor policies, and greater demand uncertainty. Observed patterns are most consistent with software enhancing labor productivity and thus reducing exposure to uncertainty.
Keywords: Digitization, Entrepreneurship, Entry, Scaling, Software
Citation: Bennett, V. M., & Hall, T. A. (2020). Software availability and entry. Strategic Management Journal. 41(5). 950-962