A careful case study of the history of the turboprop engine industry (1948-1997) is offered as an example of non-shakeout pattern. The persistence of high concentration is not associated with the exit of smaller manufacturers, but instead a stable coexistence of generalist and specialist strategies emerges, in sharp contrast to the pattern observed in the, otherwise similar, jet engine industry. This paper identifies the relevant variables of a more general theory of industry life cycle by taking into account the lack of creation of significant increasing returns in R&D, manufacturing or marketing, all of which are commonly found in industries that produce systemic products. © 2000 Elsevier Science B.V.
When shakeout doesn't occur: The evolution of the turboprop engine industry
Bonaccorsi A.;Giuri P.
2000
Abstract
A careful case study of the history of the turboprop engine industry (1948-1997) is offered as an example of non-shakeout pattern. The persistence of high concentration is not associated with the exit of smaller manufacturers, but instead a stable coexistence of generalist and specialist strategies emerges, in sharp contrast to the pattern observed in the, otherwise similar, jet engine industry. This paper identifies the relevant variables of a more general theory of industry life cycle by taking into account the lack of creation of significant increasing returns in R&D, manufacturing or marketing, all of which are commonly found in industries that produce systemic products. © 2000 Elsevier Science B.V.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
