This paper focuses on technology battles that are fought in network industries. The literature primarily focuses on battles that have occurred in single industries. With the convergence of industries, products that originate from different industries can be connected in technological systems, and battles are fought over standards for these systems. In this paper, we focus on these types of battles and investigate which factors impact their outcome and how these factors are related to each other. We analyse two technology battles: for wireless home networking and for an e-purse technology. Our findings show that provided that the actors are committed to the success of the standard, size and diversity in the inter-organisational network increase the availability and variety of complementary goods which positively influence the installed base of the standard which then may lead to its dominance.@en

Automation systems for buildings interconnect components and technologies from the information technology industry and the telecommunications industry. In these industries, existing platforms and new platforms (that are designed to make building automation systems work) compete for market acceptance and consequently several platform battles among suppliers for building automation networking are being waged. It is unclear what the outcome of these battles will be and also which factors are important in achieving platform dominance. Taking the fuzziness of decision makers’ judgments into account, a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology called the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process is applied to investigate the importance of such factors in platform battles for building automation networking. We present the relative importance of the factors for three types of platforms (subsystem platforms, system platforms, and evolved subsystem platforms). The results provide a first indication that the set of important factors differs per type of platform. For example, when focusing on other stakeholders, for subsystem platforms, the previous installed base is of importance; for system platforms, the diversity of the network of stakeholders is essential; and for evolved subsystem platforms, the judiciary is an important factor.@en

The outcome of battles between competing interface formats shapes technology fields and implies success or failure for the companies involved. Recently, this journal published a paper, which proposes a new framework of factors that impact the outcome of such battles. We apply this framework to three format battles: for wired connectivity in home applications, for wireless connectivity in home applications, and for multi-channel sound. The framework appears to be more complete than earlier frameworks, and therefore provides a better understanding of interface format battles. Firms can use this framework to make more accurate forecasts about the winner, if any, of a format battle, and can adjust their strategies by exploiting certain factors to enhance their chances of success.@en

In many markets, battles are fought over technology standards. Often, these battles result in a single standard that achieves dominance. Decision making in standards battles is complex due to the lack of insights about the factors that influence the outcome of such battles. These include the characteristics of the standard, the stakeholders, the standard supporters, and the standard support strategies. The importance of these factors determines the dominance of a technology standard. This study investigates the usability of a multiattribute utility approach named fuzzy analytic hierarchy process in decision making in technology standards battles. Three technology standards battles are analyzed using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. The empirical results show that the outcome of these standards battles is not fully characterized by path dependency, but that factors for standard dominance can be used to explain the outcome of these battles. We show that it is possible to model the process of standard selection. The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process decision support tool is useful to determine the relative weight of factors for standard dominance, and can be successfully used in decision-making problems relating to standardization.@en

The literature has dedicated significant attention to the effects of standard-supporting, interorganizational networks on the content of standards and standard survival. However, minimal attention has been paid to the effects of the standard’s characteristics and dynamics on these networks. This paper contributes to closing this gap. We introduce the paradoxical concept of ‘standard flexibility’ and study the interaction between the characteristics of a standard-supporting network and the development of the standard itself, including the effect of the interaction on standard success. More specifically, we show how a standard’s flexibility can serve to attract new network members, facilitating growth and diversity of the network, which in turn has implications for further adaptations of the standard. We study this co-evolutionary process in three standards battles: Blu-ray versus HD-DVD, USB versus Firewire, and WiFi versus HomeRF. Our findings suggest that those participating in standardization can persuade non-participating stakeholders to join by allowing for changes in the standard. In turn, the existing members can expect that the new members will request further changes. The cases suggest that early timing of the co-evolutionary process enhances the chances of standard success. We also explore the emergence of path dependencies in the process and the forces that restrict the co-evolutionary process over time. For managers, our findings indicate that changes in standards should not be considered undesirable, but as opportunities that may strengthen the interorganizational network and contribute to a standard’s success.@en

In this study, we apply a step-by-step approach for the identification of standards for home networking. We develop a classification and we use this classification to categorize sixty-four (sets of) standards. By developing this categorization, we have brought order to the chaos of home networking standards.@en