Standardization in technology-based markets

By Gregory Tassey. 2000

427 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0f8f7f38e89eae737e210815a32fb10559108601

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Blockchains for Business Process Management - Challenges and Opportunities (2017, background): “Such analysis includes, for instance, the assessment of which processes can be improved with blockchains, which new strategic priorities emerge from using blockchain technology in business processes, or which strategic risks comparable to lock-in eﬀects [Tassey, 2000] might emerge.”
Research and standardisation in nanotechnology: evidence from Germany (2009, background): “In order to structure the perceived needs for standardisation in nanotechnology systematically, we follow a typology already presented in Fig. 2, which characterises the standards according to their economic functions ( Tassey 2000 ).”
The Economics of Standardization: An Update (2010, background): “This point is well founded in the literature - for example, Branscomb and Kahin (1995), Krechmer (1996a, 1996b), Link and Scott (1998), Monteiro and Hanseth (1999), OTA (1992), Tassey (1992, 1995, 2000), and other references cited in Swann (2000, section 1.3).”
The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors (2008, background): “Whereas innovations protected by intellectual property rights, like patents, restrict others from using the technologies covered, technical standards are in general public goods and a form of technical infrastructure ( Tassey 2000 ).”
Cocreation of Value in a Platform Ecosystem: The Case of Enterprise Software (2012, background): “…compatibility is often a prerequisite to gaining access to the user base of the platform owner (Katz and Shapiro 1994; Matutes and Regibeau 1988; Tassey 2000), and there is a large body of empirical evidence on the value of technology compatibility (Brynjolfsson and Kemerer 1996; Kauffman et…”
The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy (2004, background): “Examples are non-product standards ( Tassey, 2000 ), foresight programmes (Smits, 2002b; Cuhls and Salo, 2003) and information campaigns of governments and branch organisations to raise the awareness of the public and enterprises for the opportunities specific technologies are offering.”
When Risks Cannot Be Seen: Regulating Uncertainty in Emerging Technologies (2017, positive): “Overcoming this trap may require an evolutionary regulatory approach over the course of the life cycle of the technology to avoid early inhibition of innovation (Tassey, 2000).”
Institutional Entrepreneurship (2006, background): “These organizations basically supplant a market process with a political committee process that reduces uncertainty over technical standards, thus lowering transaction costs and facilitating the adoption of an innovation (North, 1990; Farrell and Saloner, 1987; Rogers, 1995; Tassey, 2000).”
Managing modularity of product architectures: toward an integrated theory (2003, background): “Furthermore, the formalization and development of interface specifications has a tremendous impact on setting worldwide industry standards [27], [44].”
Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change (2007, background): “Examples are non-product standards [37], foresight programs [38], and information campaigns of governments and branch organizations to raise the awareness of the public and enterprises for the opportunities offered by specific technologies.”