The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP URL' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.

Understanding intra-industry boundaries is important because it offers insight into firms' strategic options based on their competences. Defining intra-industry heterogeneity in terms of the technological and customer competences that are required to produce and sell different products in each submarket, this paper explores whether the convergence of these competences, i.e., an increase in the degree to which competences can be leveraged across submarkets, exerts differential effects on the success of industry incumbents versus entrants. Empirical evidence from the global semiconductor manufacturing industry shows that convergence in both technological and customer competences decreases entrants' survival chances, whereas a lack of convergence in any one of the two types of competence-that is, in one set of competences or another but not in both-gives entrants sufficient room to gain a foothold in the industry and to potentially disrupt incumbents. As a strategic response to disruption, multiplant industry incumbents can reposition themselves by changing their focus across submarkets while not necessarily exiting the industry entirely. The paper contributes to the literature on industry evolution, disruption, and competitive dynamics and has implications for future research and practice.

Interorganizational scholars have long thought about how firms learn through buyer relationships. However, it is not clear whether dyadic learning gains are susceptible to imitation or are only inherited and whether these gains decay over time or are of an enduring nature. In this paper, I import ideas from the organizational imprinting literature into the interorganizational literature and apply the knowledge-based and learning views of the firm to examine how suppliers with differing initial endowments learn to work together with a buyer. The findings from an inductive multiple case study of spinoff and nonspinoff suppliers of an automotive manufacturer parent in Turkey reveal the following three learning mechanisms: informal relationships and social capital, transfer of routines, and shared identity. Although nonspinoff suppliers also exhibit evidence of several learning processes to a certain extent, spinoff suppliers’ deeper relationship, in particular their shared identity, with their parent based on their direct parental heritage tends to be more difficult for them to copy. No matter how hard nonspinoff suppliers try, they have “one hand tied behind their back,” they remain stepchildren, and they never truly become a biological child. By providing a novel setting and a rich set of qualitative data on the learning behaviors of these two types of suppliers, this study teases apart the knowledge and resources that can be “learned from external sources” versus those that can “only be inherited.”

To what extent is regulation associated with supply in the platform economy (PE)? We address this research question by analyzing the relationship between the strictness of rules/laws in 59 U.S. cities and the number of short-stay accommodation offerings. We find that the stricter regulation is, the higher the supply in these platforms. We also investigate how the presence (or lack thereof) of money transactions in the platform affects this relationship. We discover that the presence of money transactions in these platforms negatively moderates the positive relationship between regulation strictness and the supply of short-stay accommodations. This paper contributes to the literature by investigating how aggregate supply in the PE is affected by legal uncertainties, thereby joining the debate on how digital platforms are reforming labor practices in major parts of the economy and industrial value chains.

No abstract