Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990).
Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
OM_ 2011321137 YOON EUNSIK
SUMMARY
This paper presents the architecture innovation soothed from the appearance of the reform divided into the incremental innovation and radical innovation. Occasionally, the radical innovation canbe unable to be concluded to the corporate large-scale failure and the incremental innovation is unable to guarantee the large-scale earnings. The architecture innovation proposed in this paper means that there is no change of the components, the innovation is brought to this structural composition. Everyone who it doesn't become the Core concepts with the overturn completely is different in the point that it is different from the radical innovation and it is the change of the structural linkages in the point from the increment innovation. When this small constructive deformation shows the large number, we will be able to confirm the architecture innovation.
In case the companies are unable to succeed with the time although there is the innovative technology, they go. On the contrary, the predominance in competition in which the change of the small innovation is big can be brought. Why the dominant large-scale company be unable tohave to unable to react as to the innovation and on the whole it has to modify their predominance in competitions to be trouble. Therefore, the small new innovation companies are more advantageous on the contrary in borrowing the innovation technology and holding the predominance in competition. these are also the interactions that are criticalto effective design this paper, the attitude taking the company market advantage through the part innovation it is novel through the development of photolithographic can be checked.
We have assumed that architectural knowledge embedded inroutines and channels becomes hard to change. These ideas not only give us a richer characterization of different types of innovation, but they open up new areas in understanding the connections between innovation and organizational capability.
Contribution
As to this paper, there is the contribution obtaining the stimulation effect in the dominant company holding the predominance in competition in the existing.
There is the contribution in which it is comprised the structural innovation through the learning to be established the communication channel and in which the innovation is long company in which relatively the Screen effect is long is unable to changeflexible.
Critique
it is doubtful that it is derived from the innovation separately from the environment in which the company predominance in competition is the outside existence in which the division of the increment innovation and architecture innovation is very vague gives as this paper mentions.
And the structural innovation of this opposite example as to logic, in which the new firm is advantageous is likely to be in the existing than the company of the predominance in competition.
Finally, the content about the organizational capability wanted to handle.