Dynamics of Vertical Integration for Technological Innovation in Business
Keywords:
integration dynamics, digital technology, technological advancement, corporate innovationAbstract
Enterprises aim to gain optimal benefits and methodologies in a cutting-edge and all-encompassing market to establish a more robust presence. Despite research suggesting a decrease in vertical integration due to information technology (IT), businesses are increasingly adopting this corporate approach. This study aims to illustrate how the scientific literature has evolved over the last 22 years concerning the impact of IT on vertical integration, a key facet of corporate strategies. The results reveal a balanced evolution of vertical integration within a technological landscape. Through cluster analysis, three categories—digital technology, inventive processes, and operational methods—emerged to elucidate this correlation. When making integration decisions, factors such as the direction of operational integration, industry concentration levels, demand variability, and the scope of innovation must all be taken into account.
References
Porter, M.E. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors: With a New Introduction. 1998.
Available online:
http://www.mim.ac.mw/books/Michael%20E.%20Porter%20-%20Competitive%20Strategy.pdf
Lee, P. Innovation and the firm: A new synthesis. Stanf. Law Rev. 2018, 70, 1431–1501. Available online: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=130238911&site=eds-live
Wu, D. The Impact of Information Technology on Vertical Relationships. 2006. Available online: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/etd/d/2006/wud47382/wud47382 .
Kitchenham, B.; Brereton, O.P.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Bailey, J.; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2009, 51, 7–15. [CrossRef]
Pereira, R.; Serrano, J. A review of methods used on IT maturity models development: A systematic literature review and a critical analysis. J. Inf. Technol. 2020, 35, 161–178. [CrossRef]
Cooper, H.M. Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowl. Soc. 1988, 1, 104–126. [CrossRef]
Cooper, H.M. Scientific guidelines for conducting integrative research reviews. Rev. Educ. Res. 1982, 52, 291–302. [CrossRef]
Gómez, J.; Salazar, I.; Vargas, P. Firm boundaries, information processing capacity, and performance in manufacturing firms.
J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2016, 33, 809–842. [CrossRef]
Handley, S.M.; Angst, C.M. The impact of culture on the relationship between governance and opportunism in outsourcing relationships. Strat. Manag. J. 2014, 36, 1412–1434. [CrossRef]
Klepper, S. Industry Life Cycles. Ind. Corp. Chang. 1997, 6, 105–118. [CrossRef]
Jones, F.J. The Division of Labor is Limited by the Extent of Worker Alienation. J. Polit. Econ. 1951, 19, 18–20. [CrossRef]
Jacobides, M.G.; Winter, S.G. The co-evolution of capabilities and transaction costs: Explaining the institutional structure of production. Strateg. Manag. J. 2005, 26, 395–413. [CrossRef]
Jacobides, M.G. Industry change through vertical disintegration: How and why markets emerged in mortgage banking. Acad.
Manag. J. 2005, 48, 465–498. [CrossRef]
Teece, D.J. Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 1996, 31, 193–224. [CrossRef]
Helfat, C.E.; Campo-Rembado, M.A. Integrative Capabilities, Vertical Integration, and Innovation Over Successive Technology
Lifecycles. Organ. Sci. 2016, 27, 249–264. [CrossRef]
Gu, Y. Global knowledge management research: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2004, 61, 171–190. [CrossRef]
Randolph, J.J. A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 2009, 14, 13.
Silva, J. O Estado-da-Arte da Literatura em Economia e Gestão da Inovação e Tecnologia: Um Estudo Bibliométrico. 2008.
Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10216/121152012
Van der Vaart, T.; Van Donk, D.P. A critical review of survey-based research in supply chain integration. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2008,
, 42–55. [CrossRef]
Vanpoucke, E.; Vereecke, A.; Muylle, S. Leveraging the impact of supply chain integration through information technology. Int. J.
Oper. Prod. Manag. 2017, 37, 510–530. [CrossRef]
Kulp, S.C.; Lee, H.L.; Ofek, E. Manufacturer benefits from information integration with retail customers. Manag. Sci. 2004,
, 431–444. [CrossRef]
Leuschner, R.; Rogers, D.S.; Charvet, F.F. A meta-analysis of supply chain integration and firm performance. J. Supply Chain
Manag. 2013, 49, 34–57. [CrossRef]
Frohlich, M.T.; Westbrook, R. Arcs of integration: An international study of supply chain strategies. J. Oper. Manag. 2001,
, 185–200. [CrossRef]
Van der Vaart, T.; Van Donk, D.P.; Gimenez, C.; Sierra, V. Modelling the integration-performance relationship: Collaborative
practices, enablers and contextual factors. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2012, 32, 1043–1074. [CrossRef]
Informatics 2023, 10, 25 20 of 20
Vereecke, A.; Muylle, S. Performance improvement through supply chain collaboration in Europe. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2006,
, 1176–1198. [CrossRef]
Kembro, J.; Näslund, D. Information sharing in supply chains, myth or reality? A critical analysis of empirical literature. Int. J.
Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2014, 44, 179–200. [CrossRef]
Sharma, S.; Patil, S.V. Development of holistic framework incorporating collaboration, supply-demand synchronization, traceability and vertical integration in agri-food supply Chain. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Supply Chain Manag. 2011, 4, 18–45. [CrossRef]
Ray, G.; Wu, D.; Konana, P. Competitive environment and the relationship between IT and vertical integration. Inf. Syst. Res.
, 20, 585–603. [CrossRef]
Sambamurthy, V.; Bharadwaj, A.; Grover, V. Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information
Technology in Contemporary Firms. Foreign Aff. 2003, 91, 1689–1699. [CrossRef]
Hoffman, W.; Keedy, J.; Roberts, K. The Unexpected Return of B2B; McKinsey & Company, Inc: Hong Kong, China, 2002.
Lee, H.L. Aligning Supply Chain Strategies with Product Uncertainties. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2002, 41–53. [CrossRef]
Menon, N.M.; Lee, B. Cost control and production performance enhancement by IT investment and regulation changes: Evidence
from the healthcare industry. Decis. Support Syst. 2000, 30, 153–169. [CrossRef]
Lin, W.T.; Chiang, C.-Y. The impacts of country characteristics upon the value of information technology as measured by
productive efficiency. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2011, 132, 13–33. [CrossRef]
Doty, D.H.; Glick, W.H.; Huber, G.P. Fit, Equifinality, and Organizational Effectiveness: A Test of Two Configurational Theories.
Acad. Manag. J. 1993, 36, 1196–1250. [CrossRef]
Dewan, S.; Michael, S.C.; Min, C.K. Firm Characteristics and Investments in Information Technology: Scale and Scope Effects. Inf.
Syst. Res. 1998, 9, 219–232. [CrossRef]
Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120. [CrossRef]
Yao, L.J.; Liu, C.; Chan, S.H. The influence of firm specific context on realizing information technology business value in
manufacturing industry. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2010, 11, 353–362. [CrossRef]
Dewan, S.; Ren, F. Information technology and firm boundaries: Impact on firm risk and return performance. Inf. Syst. Res. 2011,
, 369–388. [CrossRef]
Adner, R.; Kapoor, R. Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm
performance in new technology generations. Strateg. Manag. J. 2010, 31, 306–333. [CrossRef]
Argyres, N.; Bigelow, L. Vertical integration over the industry lifecycle: Evidence from the early U.S. auto industry. In Proceedings
of the Academy of Management 2007 Annual Meeting: Doing Well by Doing Good, AOM 2007, Philadelphia, PA, USA,
–8 August 2007. [CrossRef]
Qian, Y. Impacts of entry by counterfeiters. Q. J. Econ. 2008, 123, 1577–1609. [CrossRef]
Brandenburger, A.M.; Stuart, H.W. Value-based business strategy. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 1996, 5, 5–24. [CrossRef]
Adner, R.; Zemsky, P. A demand-based perspective on sustainable competitive advantage. Strateg. Manag. J. 2006, 27, 215–239. [CrossRef]
Vaaland, T.I.; Heide, M. Can the SME survive the supply chain challenges? Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2007, 12, 20–31. [CrossRef]
Skjoett-Larsen, T. European logistics beyond 2000. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2000, 30, 377–387. [CrossRef]
Contractor, F.J.; Lorange, P. The growth of alliances in the knowledge-based economy. Int. Bus. Rev. 2002, 11, 485–502. [CrossRef]
Kapoor, R.; Lee, J.M. Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: How organizational forms shape new technology investments.
Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 274–296. [CrossRef]
Qian, L.; Agarwal, R.; Hoetker, G. Configuration of value chain activities: The effect of pre-entry capabilities, transaction hazards,
and industry evolution on decisions to internalize. Organ. Sci. 2012, 23, 1330–1349. [CrossRef]
Kim, S.M.; Mahoney, J.T. Mutual commitment to support exchange: Relation-specific IT system as a substitute for managerial
hierarchy. Strat. Manag. J. 2006, 27, 401–423. [CrossRef]
Legros, P.; Newman, A.F. A price theory of vertical and lateral integration. Q. J. Econ. 2013, 128, 725–770. [CrossRef]
Bach, L.; Cohendet, P.; Schenk, E. Technological transfers from the European space programs: A dynamic view and comparison
with other R&D projects. J. Technol. Transf. 2002, 27, 321–338. [CrossRef]
Growitsch, C.; Wetzel, H. Testing for economies of scope in European railways. J. Trans. Econ. Policy 2009, 43, 1–24.
Arruñada, B.; González-Díaz, M.; Fernández, A. Determinants of organizational form: Transaction costs and institutions in the
European trucking industry. Ind. Corp. Chang. 2004, 13, 867–882. [CrossRef]
