A dynamic framework for analyzing technology standardisation using network analysis and game theory

Figures & data

Figure 1. The research process.

Table 1. n = 2, Cournot model.

	X	Y
X
Y

Figure 2. Technology co-appearance network.

Figure 3. TC of HD-DVD.

Figure 4. TC of Blu-ray.

Figure 5. Annual network size.

Figure 6. Annual network density.

Figure 7. TA of HD-DVD and Blu-ray.

Figure 8. Absolute preference on HD-DVD.

Figure 9. Absolute preference on Blu-ray.

Figure 10. Annual technology differentiation.

Table 2. Firm’s technology relative preference.

	Firm	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008
1	Funai	0	0	0	0	0.040	0.180	0.250
2	Hitachi	0	0	0.711	0.835	0.770	0.584	0.593
3	Philips	0	0.498	0.478	0.627	0.681	0.702	0.653
4	LG	0.439	0.625	0.597	0.621	0.610	0.621	0.598
5	Matsushita	0	0.177	0.086	0.239	0.260	0.251	0.238
6	Samsung	0.318	0.241	0.177	0.193	0.282	0.397	0.384
7	Sharp	0.505	0.312	0.333	0.383	0.400	0.374	0.361
8	Sony	0	0.771	0.765	0.862	0.930	0.931	0.942
9	Thomson	0	0.430	0.420	0.431	0.462	0.477	0.481
10	Toshiba	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Figure 11. Firm’s relative preference.

Table 3. Game theory result.

	2002		2003
	HD	BD	HD	BD
HD	(3.536, 3.880)	(1.780, 0.981)	(3.037, 3.888)	(1.520, 1.377)
BD	(0.201, 0.987)	(0.401, 2.012)	(0.466, 0.597)	(0.912, 2.781)
	2004		2005
HD	(2.991, 3.910)	(1.497, 1.366)	(2.994, 3.925)	(1.497, 1.460)
BD	(0.492, 0.613)	(0.967, 2.754)	(0.494, 0.523)	(0.972, 2.937)
	2006		2007
HD	(2.838, 3.938)	(1.419, 1.485)	(2.649, 3.946)	(1.324, 1.411)
BD	(0.574, 0.501)	(1.134, 2.983)	(0.668, 0.576)	(1.325, 2.830)
	2008
HD	(2.614, 3.948)	(1.306, 1.384)
BD	(0.685, 0.603)	(1.361, 2.776)

Note: HD: HD-DVD, BD: Blu-ray disk.