The Competitive Dynamics of Entrepreneurial Market Entry

The Competitive Dynamics of Entrepreneurial Market Entry

The Johns Hopkins University series on Entrepreneurship

Edited by Gideon D. Markman and Phillip H. Phan

Research on general market entry usually focuses on large enterprises. Often, however, small entrants can alter the competitive dynamics of an industry. This volume brings together the most prominent thought leaders and the best research on the asymmetric entrant-incumbent dynamics. The ideas presented offer a more nuanced perspective on how, when, where and with what consequences small, single-product firms enter markets that are dominated by large, multiproduct and multimarket incumbents.

Chapter 3: A Retrospective on ‘Hypercompetition in a Multimarket Environment’

Javier Gimeno and Carolyn Y. Woo

Subjects: business and management, entrepreneurship, economics and finance, industrial economics


3. A retrospective on “Hypercompetition in a multimarket environment” Javier Gimeno The paper “Hypercompetition in a Multimarket Environment: The Role of Strategic Similarity and Multimarket Contact in Competitive Deescalation” (Gimeno and Woo 1996) reflected a transition moment in the competitive strategy literature. During the 1970s and 1980s, the general endeavor, both from the strategic management and industrial organization perspectives, had been in relaxing the homogeneity assumption embedded in traditional economic models of rivalry and industry structure. In both disciplines, this was done under the banner of the “strategic group” concept (Hatten and Schendel 1977, Caves and Porter 1977). For strategy scholars, strategic groups were a mechanism to categorize the diverse strategies within the industry into more homogeneous sets (Hatten and Hatten 1987), which could explain variance in firm-level performance. For industrial economists, strategic groups were a mechanism to model differences in intra-industry structure, which could complement industry structure measures (such as concentration or barriers to entry) in explaining rivalry and industry-level performance. Despite the flourishing of an empirical literature on strategic groups during the 1980s, there were substantial concerns about the robustness and completeness of this concept as a foundation for competitive strategy (Barney and Hoskisson 1990). First, the resource-based view emerged as an alternative explanation of interfirm performance differences, which focused more on strategic uniqueness rather than strategic similarity. Second, most studies focused on explaining performance differences, even though the theoretical mechanisms hinged on the impact of strategic groups on competitive dynamics and rivalry (Cool and Dierickx 1993, Peteraf...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information