{"title":"探索、开发和市场进入模式:亚马逊和Alphabet的收购与内部开发","authors":"Gwendolyn K Lee, M. Lieberman","doi":"10.1093/icc/dtad015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Research on the tension between exploration and exploitation has made fundamental contributions to our understanding of firm growth via entry into new businesses. While there is consensus about the merits of balancing exploration and exploitation, there has been debate about the best means for achieving balance. In our prior analysis of firms’ choices between acquisition and internal development as entry modes, we found that the role of acquisitions tends to differ inside versus outside a firm’s primary business domain: firms use within-domain acquisitions largely for exploitation, while out-of-domain acquisitions support exploration. To examine these issues in greater depth, we focus here on the historical use of acquisition versus internal development by two major technology firms, Amazon and Alphabet. We show that the two firms have been remarkably different in their use of acquisitions versus internal development. Consistent with our prior analysis, Amazon has emphasized internal development but has used acquisitions to strengthen its existing businesses and to enter new products and services that were (initially) outside Amazon’s primary business domain. In contrast, Alphabet has relied heavily on acquisitions to enter new businesses within its primary domain but has emphasized internal development of “moonshot” businesses outside this domain. These differences illuminate the use of acquisitions in market entry and make clear that there is no single right way to utilize acquisition versus internal development in the pursuit of balance between exploration and exploitation.","PeriodicalId":48243,"journal":{"name":"Industrial and Corporate Change","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploration, exploitation, and mode of market entry: acquisition versus internal development by Amazon and Alphabet\",\"authors\":\"Gwendolyn K Lee, M. Lieberman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icc/dtad015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Research on the tension between exploration and exploitation has made fundamental contributions to our understanding of firm growth via entry into new businesses. While there is consensus about the merits of balancing exploration and exploitation, there has been debate about the best means for achieving balance. In our prior analysis of firms’ choices between acquisition and internal development as entry modes, we found that the role of acquisitions tends to differ inside versus outside a firm’s primary business domain: firms use within-domain acquisitions largely for exploitation, while out-of-domain acquisitions support exploration. To examine these issues in greater depth, we focus here on the historical use of acquisition versus internal development by two major technology firms, Amazon and Alphabet. We show that the two firms have been remarkably different in their use of acquisitions versus internal development. Consistent with our prior analysis, Amazon has emphasized internal development but has used acquisitions to strengthen its existing businesses and to enter new products and services that were (initially) outside Amazon’s primary business domain. In contrast, Alphabet has relied heavily on acquisitions to enter new businesses within its primary domain but has emphasized internal development of “moonshot” businesses outside this domain. These differences illuminate the use of acquisitions in market entry and make clear that there is no single right way to utilize acquisition versus internal development in the pursuit of balance between exploration and exploitation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48243,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial and Corporate Change\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial and Corporate Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtad015\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial and Corporate Change","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtad015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Exploration, exploitation, and mode of market entry: acquisition versus internal development by Amazon and Alphabet
Research on the tension between exploration and exploitation has made fundamental contributions to our understanding of firm growth via entry into new businesses. While there is consensus about the merits of balancing exploration and exploitation, there has been debate about the best means for achieving balance. In our prior analysis of firms’ choices between acquisition and internal development as entry modes, we found that the role of acquisitions tends to differ inside versus outside a firm’s primary business domain: firms use within-domain acquisitions largely for exploitation, while out-of-domain acquisitions support exploration. To examine these issues in greater depth, we focus here on the historical use of acquisition versus internal development by two major technology firms, Amazon and Alphabet. We show that the two firms have been remarkably different in their use of acquisitions versus internal development. Consistent with our prior analysis, Amazon has emphasized internal development but has used acquisitions to strengthen its existing businesses and to enter new products and services that were (initially) outside Amazon’s primary business domain. In contrast, Alphabet has relied heavily on acquisitions to enter new businesses within its primary domain but has emphasized internal development of “moonshot” businesses outside this domain. These differences illuminate the use of acquisitions in market entry and make clear that there is no single right way to utilize acquisition versus internal development in the pursuit of balance between exploration and exploitation.
期刊介绍:
The journal covers the following: the internal structures of firms; the history of technologies; the evolution of industries; the nature of competition; the decision rules and strategies; the relationship between firms" characteristics and the institutional environment; the sociology of management and of the workforce; the performance of industries over time; the labour process and the organization of production; the relationship between, and boundaries of, organizations and markets; the nature of the learning process underlying technological and organizational change.