965
Views
126
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Making a Technological Catch‐up: Barriers and opportunities

Pages 97-131 | Published online: 24 Feb 2011
 

Summary

This paper has discussed several issues regarding the barriers and opportunities for technological catch‐up by the late‐comer countries and firms. As one of the barriers to technological catch‐up, the paper emphasizes the uncertainty involved with the third stage of learning how to design. The barriers arise because as the forerunner firms refuse to sell or give license to successful catching‐up firms who thus have to design the product by themselves. The paper discusses how to overcome this barrier. It also notes that if the crisis of design technology is a push factor for leapfrogging, arrival of new techno‐economic paradigm can serve as a pull factor for leapfrogging, serving as a winder of opportunity. The, it emphasized the two risks with leapfrogging, namely the risk of choosing right technology or standards and the risk of creating initial markets, and how to overcome these risks. It discusses how to overcome these risks in leapfrogging, and differentiates diverse forms of knowledge accesses.

Then, the paper takes up the issue of whether there can be a single common or several models for catch‐up. A common element of catching‐up is to enter new markets segments quickly, to manufacture with high levels of engineering excellence, and to be first‐to‐market by means of the best integrative designs. This observation is supported by the fact that Korea and Taiwan has achieved higher levels of technological capabilities in such sectors as featured by short cycle time of technology. The possibility of two alternative models for catch‐up is also discussed in terms of the key difference between Korean and Taiwan, especially in the position toward the source of foreign knowledge and the paths taken toward the final goal of OBM. Taiwan followed the sequential steps of OEM, ODM and OBN, in collaboration or integration with the MNCs. Korean chaebols jumped from OEM directly to OBM even without consolidating design technology.

Notes

This paper draws from a longer paper that was presented at the 2005 Asialics Conference, held in Jeju, Korea, April 2005. This research is supported by the LG Yonam foundation.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.