View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
1
CPET 575 Management Of Technology
Lecture on Reading II-2, II-3
Exploring the Limits of Technology S-Curve Part I: Component Technologies
Part II: Architectural TechnologiesClayton M. Christensen
Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration
Paul I-Hai Lin, Professor http://www.etcs.ipfw.edu/~lin
M.S. Technology - IT and Advanced Computer ApplicationsPurdue University Fort Wayne Campus
Prof. Paul Lin
2
Patterns of Industrial Innovation
Introduction
Context of the Study
An Aggregate, Industry-Level View of Technological Maturity in Rigid Magnetic Drives
Using S-Curve to Prescribe Development of New Component Technologies
Do Systematic Differences Exist in How in How Firms Respond to Potential Maturity in Component Technology
SummaryProf. Paul Lin
2
3
Patterns of Industrial InnovationIntroduction
Technology S-Curve• A framework describing the substitution of new for old
technologies at the industry level
• A descriptive or predictive theory
• Technology life cycle, adoption
• Apply S-Curve in the strategic management of technology
• The industry’s leading incumbent firms Most aggressive in S-curve switching strategies
Technology• Process, Techniques, or Methodology
• Disk Drive Industries
• Product design, Manufacturing, Service ProcessesProf. Paul Lin
4
Technology S-Curve Theory
• Introductory stage (the rate of progress in performance –relatively slow)
• Growing stage (better understood, controlled, diffused stage) -the rate of technological improvement increased rapidly
• Maturity stage (technology => natural or physical limit, requires greatest efforts to achieve performance improvement)
Prof. Paul Lin
3
5
Typologies of Technological Changes
Architectural technology change• Fundamental technological basis remains unchange
• Rearrangement in the way components are relate to each other
• Require intense degree of market innovation
• Ceiling Fan => Table Fan
Modular technology change• Fundamental change in technological approach
employed in a component where the architecture is left unchanged
• Change the type of motor in a ceiling fan
Prof. Paul Lin
6
Typologies of Technological Changes
Incremental technology changes• Improvement in component performance
• Refinements in system design
Radical innovation/changes• Change in architecture
• new approach at the component level
• Fan => motor powered fan
• Motor fan => Air-conditioner
Prof. Paul Lin
4
7
Types of Technological Changes
Radical new technologies • Frequently developed and brought into an industry by
“new entering firms”
• Not from incumbent leaders
• Examples Foam rubber (Roussel, 1984)
Aircraft engines (Constant, 1980)
Permanent magnets (van Wyk, Haour, and Japp, 1991)
A range of industries (Foster, 1986)
Substitution of steam for wind-powered ships
Prof. Paul Lin
8
Disk Drive Technologies – S Curve
1st Disk Drive: invented in 1956 by IBM’s San Jose laboratory
Disk Drive Components• Comprised of one or more rotating disks
• Data is recorded and read on concentric tracks on the surfaced of disks
• Recording area density
• Electronic circuitry
• Read/write heads
Prof. Paul Lin
5
9
Disk Drive Technologies – S Curve Performance Measurement: Recording area
density:
Exhibit 2 a: Area Density vs. Time• Millions of bits Per Square Inch (0.2, 0.4, 1.0, 2.0 ..
70) vs. Time (1970, 1972, .. 1988 1990)
• No apparent S-Curve pattern of progress
• Radical technologies have offered greater “greater recording density, speed, or reliability.
Prof. Paul Lin
10
Disk Drive Technologies – Performance Measurement
Exhibit 2 b – Area Density vs. Engineering Efforts• Millions of bits Per Square Inch (0.2, 0.4, 1.0, 2.0 ..
70) vs. Engineering Efforts (cumulative industry revenue as proxy for engineering efforts)
• See apparent S-Curve pattern of progress
• Why magnetic recording technology has held competing approaches at bay for long time –Engineering Efforts
• Performance of alternative techniques rarely surpasses that of the established technologies
• Less incentive to switch to alternative technologies
Prof. Paul Lin
6
11
Applying the Technology S-Curve
Why it is harder to obtain performance improvement as a technology reaches its maturity?• Scale phenomenon (too small or too large)
• System complexity
Prof. Paul Lin
12
Prescriptive S-Curve Strategy
Prof. Paul Lin
7
13
Using S-Curve to Prescribe Development of New Component Technologies
1st Disk Drive: invented in 1956 by IBM’s San Jose laboratory• History of IBM Magnetic Disk Drives,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_IBM_magnetic_disk_drives
Disk Drive System Component Technology• Read/Write Technology Improvement
Thin Film Heads replace Ferrite and Oxide Technologies (1978)
Incumbents prefer to work on existing technologies and make incremental changes (performance improvement)
Hitachi and Fujitsu switched in mid 1980s
Did not improve the performanceProf. Paul Lin
14
Disk Drive Technologies – S Curve
Disk Drive System• Radical component improvement
Investment by resource rich companies on thin-film photoliothography technology to create much smaller, more precise electromagnets on the head
Thin film heads cost IBM over $300 million, longer than 10 years
The whole industry spent over $1 billion
Prof. Paul Lin
8
15
PART II: Architectural Technologies
Architectural technology change• Fundamental technological basis remains unchange
• Rearrangement in the way components are relate to each other
• Follow S-curve patterns
In Disk Drive Industry• It was the advent of new architectural technologies,
not component technologies, that caused the downfall of industry’s leading firms
Prof. Paul Lin
16
PART II: Architectural Technologies
Entrant, Attacking Firms with Architectural Technology In Disk Drive Industry• It was the advent of new architectural technologies,
not component technologies, that caused the downfall of industry’s leading firms
Reasons• Architectural innovation generally found earliest use
in emerging markets
• Entrant, attacking firms succeed - better at attackingemerging markets
• Not because they possessed superior capabilities to develop the architectural technology
Prof. Paul Lin
9
17
Leaders in Developing and Shipping Each New Architecture Products
Entrant firms were the leaders in developing and shipping each new architectural generation of products.
Why were the established drive makers able to lead the industry in development technology, while they were dethroned at points of architectural change?
Prof. Paul Lin
18
Winners of New Architecture Technologies and Products (Disk Industry)
Why were the established drive makers able to lead the industry in development technology, while they were dethroned at points of architectural change?• Incumbent Firms and New Component Technologies
Leading New component technologies (drivers of performance improvement, designed them into new product models, sold to existing customers in the established market)
• Incumbent Firms and New Architectural Technologies Incumbent firms were typically among the first in industry to
develop working prototypes of the new architecture products
Quality of incumbent leaders’ architectural designs (cost and performance) was fully competitive with that of entrant firms
Prof. Paul Lin
10
19
Winners of New Architecture Technologies and Products (Disk Industry)
Why were the established drive makers able to lead the industry in development technology, while they were dethroned at points of architectural change?• New Architectural Technologies, Applications, and
Markets Redefine product’s functionality
Parameters, system performance – assessed
For new markets and new applications
• Incumbent’s failed to innovate in the “Market”, rather than fail to innovate in the laboratory
Prof. Paul Lin
20
Disk Drive Technologies – 1973 to 1990, and Markets
Architectural Features• 1) Reduced sizes, 2) Reduction of total part count, 3)
Parts and system integration methods
Five Successive Architectural Technologies (Winchester drives)• 14-, 8-inch Architecture
Customers – makers of mainframe and minicomputers
Performance measurement: Total Capacity and Speed
100-500 M-bytes, 30 ms access speed
Prof. Paul Lin
11
21
Disk Drive Technologies – 1973 to 1990, and Markets
5.25-inches Architecture (Emerged in 1980)
• Performance: 5 Mbytes, 160 ms Ignored by mainframe and minicomputers market due to it’s
performance
• Other dimensions of performance were irrelevant in the large computer markets (superior features) Capacity per Cubic Inch
Total cost
• Emerging market applications? Desktop personal Computing – Heavy demand in this emerging
market
Established firms were late to spot opportunities to exploit attractive, emerging market
180 Kbytes, 360 Kbytes, 512 Kbyte, 1.2MbytesProf. Paul Lin
22
Disk Drive Technologies – 1973 to 1990, and Markets
5.25-inches Architecture (Emerged in 1980)
• New architecture technology become established in the market
• Improve the performance at much faster rate Capacity, Speed
• Able to compete with earlier drives used in mainframes and minicomputers on the Capacity, Speed
Prof. Paul Lin
12
23
Disk Drive Technologies – 1973 to 1990, and Markets
5.25-inches Architecture (Emerged in 1980)
• Entrant firms’ gains in new architecture technology and markets 1) Much higher volume, 2) Deeper technological experience, 3)
Lower cost
• Invaded the larger-computer markets with these capabilities
• Quickly capture these markets
• New firms dethroned prior industry leaders in 5 of the 7 architecturally defined disk drive products generation
Prof. Paul Lin
24
Disk Drives Technology Comparisons
2nd Gen Tech, Initially was inferior to the 1st Gen. tech
3rd Gen Tech, initially was inferior to the 2nd Gen Tech
But with the rate of improvement, the new architectures surpassed the old.
Prof. Paul Lin
13
25
Exhibit 2. A Different S-Curve Model of Architectural Innovation (page 280)
New technology 2 is deployed in a new application “B”, with different performance requirements
At some point of commercial maturity, the new architecture become capable of addressing the performance demanded in the original market
More effectively than the established technology
Prof. Paul Lin
26
Conclusion
Prof. Paul Lin
Recommended