Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFischer, Marc
dc.contributor.authorHimme, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorSönke, Albers
dc.date.accessioned2017-12-02T14:52:48Z
dc.date.available2017-12-02T14:52:48Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12127/4985
dc.description.abstractPrevious empirical research on order of entry effects shows strong evidence for the existence of a first-mover advantage. Conventional strategic recommendations are therefore based on the assumption that pioneering is preferable in order to create competitive advantages. However, theoretical work has argued that there are also considerable potential advantages for early movers. But this hypothesis lacks empirical evidence, which is due to the limitations of previous empirical research designs. On the one hand, early movers have not been precisely separated from pioneers and late movers. On the other hand, previous research designs often specified a monotone relationship between order of entry and a success variable. As a consequence, it was not possible to find an inverted u-shaped relationship supporting the early mover advantage hypothesis. In this study, authors propose ways to overcome these limitations. An empirical application to 12 pharmaceutical markets finds a surprising early mover advantage that contrasts with the conventional wisdom in this industry.
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectMarketing & Sales
dc.titlePioneer, early follower, or late follower: Which entry strategy should you prefer?
dc.identifier.journalZeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft
dc.source.volume77
dc.source.issue5
dc.source.beginpage539
dc.source.endpage573
vlerick.knowledgedomainMarketing & Sales
vlerick.typearticleJournal article
vlerick.vlerickdepartmentMKT
dc.identifier.vperid165968
dc.identifier.vperid165967
dc.identifier.vperid173297
dc.identifier.vpubid6184


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record