Can we design an industry classification system that reflects industry architecture?

References

• Bain, J. S. (1951). Relation of profit rate to industry concentration: American manufacturing, 1936–1940. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 65(3), 293–324.
   Google Scholar
• Baldwin, C. Y. (2008). Where do transactions come from? modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(1), 155–195.
   Google Scholar
• Basole, R. C. (2009). Visualization of interfirm relations in a converging mobile ecosystem. Journal of Information Technology, 24(2), 144–159.
   Google Scholar
• Basole, R. C., Clear, T., Hu, M., Mehrotra, H., & Stasko, J. (2013). Understanding interfirm relationships in business ecosystems with interactive visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2526–2535.
   Google Scholar
• Basole, R. C., Park, H., & Barnett, B. C. (2015a). Coopetition and convergence in the ICT ecosystem. Telecommunications Policy, 39(7), 537–552.
   Google Scholar
• Basole, R. C., Russell, M. G., Huhtamäki, J., Rubens, N., Still, K., & Park, H. (2015b). Understanding business ecosystem dynamics: A data-driven approach. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 6(2), 6.
   Google Scholar
• BEA. (2017). Bureau of economic analysis input-output accounts data. Retrieved from https://www.bea.gov/industry/io_annual.htm
   Google Scholar
• Boileau, D., & Sydor, A. (2011). Global value chains in Canada. In A. Sydor (Ed.), Global value chains: Impacts and implications (pp. 157–178). Ottawa, Canada: Trade Policy Research, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
   Google Scholar
• Bryce, D. J., & Winter, S. G. (2009). A general interindustry relatedness index. Management Science, 55(9), 1570–1585. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1040.
   Google Scholar
• Cattani, G., Porac, J. F., & Thomas, H. (2017). Categories and competition. Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), 64–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2591.
   Google Scholar
• Cetorelli, N., Jacobides, M. G., & Stern, S. (2017). Transformation of corporate scope in US banks: Patterns and performance implications. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Staff Report 813. https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr813
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, J. L. (2013). The ability of current statistical classifications to separate services and manufacturing. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 26, 47–60.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, L., & Frazzini, A. (2008). Economic links and predictable returns. The Journal of Finance, 63(4), 1977–2011.
   Google Scholar
• Colfer, L. J., & Baldwin, C. Y. (2016). The mirroring hypothesis: Theory, evidence, and exceptions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 25(5), 709–738. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtw027.
   Google Scholar
• Dalziel, M. (2007). A systems-based approach to industry classification. Research Policy, 36(10), 1559–1574.
   Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo, J. M., & Silverman, B. S. (2012). Firm survival and industry evolution in vertically related populations. Management Science, 58(9), 1632–1650. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1507.
   Google Scholar
• Dedrick, J., Kraemer, K. L., & Linden, G. (2009). Who profits from innovation in global value chains?: A study of the iPod and notebook PCs. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(1), 81–116.
   Google Scholar
• Drejer, I. (2002). Input-output based measures of interindustry linkages revisited-a survey and discussion. 14th International Conference on Input-Output Techniques, Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, J. A., Fee, C. E., & Thomas, S. E. (2012). Proprietary costs and the disclosure of information about customers. Journal of Accounting Research, 50(3), 685–727.
   Google Scholar
• Eppinger, S. D., Whitney, D. E., Smith, R. P., & Gebala, D. A. (1994). A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. Research in Engineering Design, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588087.
   Google Scholar
• Fixson, S. K., & Park, J. (2008). The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure. Research Policy, 37(8), 1296–1316.
   Google Scholar
• Frésard, L., Hoberg, G., & Phillips, G. M. (2017). Vertical acquisitions, integration and the boundaries of the firm. Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2242425.
   Google Scholar
• Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7), 1239–1249.
   Google Scholar
• Gay, S., & Karger, E. (2014). Patent citations and stock performance: Constructing a dynamic industry classification. Available at SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2496414.
   Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549.
   Google Scholar
• Hertzel, M. G., Li, Z., Officer, M. S., & Rodgers, K. J. (2008). Inter-firm linkages and the wealth effects of financial distress along the supply chain. Journal of Financial Economics, 87(2), 374–387.
   Google Scholar
• Hicks, D. (2011). Structural change and industrial classification. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 22(2), 93–105.
   Google Scholar
• Hirschman, A. O. (1958). The strategy of economic development. New York, and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoberg, G., & Phillips, G. (2016). Text-based network industries and endogenous product differentiation. Journal of Political Economy, 124(5), 1423–1465.
   Google Scholar
• Hoetker, G., Swaminathan, A., & Mitchell, W. (2007). Modularity and the impact of buyer–supplier relationships on the survival of suppliers. Management Science, 53(2), 178–191.
   Google Scholar
• Holten, D. (2006). Hierarchical edge bundles: Visualization of adjacency relations in hierarchical data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12(5), 741–748.
   Google Scholar
• Hrazdil, K., Trottier, K., & Zhang, R. (2013). A comparison of industry classification schemes: A large sample study. Economics Letters, 118(1), 77–80.
   Google Scholar
• Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobides, M. G., Knudsen, T., & Augier, M. (2006). Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures. Research Policy, 35(8), 1200–1221.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobides, M. G., & MacDuffie, J. P. (2013). How to drive value your way. Harvard Business Review, 91(7), 92–100.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobides, M. G., & Tae, C. J. (2015). Kingpins, bottlenecks, and value dynamics along a sector. Organization Science, 26(3), 889–907.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobides, M. G., & Winter, S. G. (2012). Capabilities: Structure, agency, and evolution. Organization Science, 23(5), 1365–1381.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, L. D. (2012). History lessons: Understanding the decline in manufacturuing. Retrieved from https://www.minnpost.com/macro-micro-minnesota/2012/02/history-lessons-understanding-decline-manufacturing
   Google Scholar
• Kenessey, Z. (1987). The primary, secondary, tertiary and quaternary sectors of the economy. Review of Income and Wealth, 33(4), 359–385.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. M., Ma, P., & Wang, C. C. (2015). Search-based peer firms: Aggregating investor perceptions through internet co-searches. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(2), 410–431.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H. L., Padmanabhan, V., & Whang, S. (1997). Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip effect. Management Science, 43(4), 546–558.
   Google Scholar
• Leiponen, A., & Drejer, I. (2007). What exactly are technological regimes?: Intra-industry heterogeneity in the organization of innovation activities. Research Policy, 36(8), 1221–1238.
   Google Scholar
• Leontief, W. W. (1936). Quantitative input and output relations in the economic systems of the united states. The Review of Economic Statistics, 18(3), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/1927837.
   Google Scholar
• Leontief, W. W. (1941). The structure of American economy, 1919–1929: An empirical application of equilibrium analysis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Luo, J. (2017). Architecture and evolvability of innovation ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. (in press).
   Google Scholar
• Luo, J., Baldwin, C. Y., Whitney, D. E., & Magee, C. L. (2012). The architecture of transaction networks: A comparative analysis of hierarchy in two sectors. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(6), 1307–1335. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dts007.
   Google Scholar
• McGahan, A. M., & Porter, M. E. (1997). How much does industry matter, really?. Strategic Management Journal, 18(July), 15–30.
   Google Scholar
• McIntyre, D. P., & Srinivasan, A. (2017). Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), 141–160.
   Google Scholar
• McKelvey, B. (1975). Guidelines for the empirical classification of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(4), 509–525.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input-output analysis: Foundations and extensions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• NAICS. (2012). North american industry classification system. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch?chart=2012
   Google Scholar
• Neffke, F., & Henning, M. (2013). Skill relatedness and firm diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3), 297–316.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45(2), 167–256. https://doi.org/10.1137/S003614450342480
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(23), 8577–8582.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, E. (1957). History of the standard industrial classification. Washington, DC Executive Office of the President Office of Statistical Standards, US Bureau of the Budget)(Mimeograph).
   Google Scholar
• Purchase, V., Parry, G., Valerdi, R., Nightingale, D., & Mills, J. (2011). Enterprise transformation: Why are we interested, what is it, and what are the challenges? Journal of Enterprise Transformation, 1(1), 14–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/19488289.2010.549289
   Google Scholar
• Quesnay, F. (1758). Analyse de la formule mathématique du tableau économique de la distribution des dépenses annuelle d'une nation agricole. History of Economic Thought Chapters. Available at https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/quesnay/tabeco.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Schilling, M. A., & Steensma, H. K. (2001). The use of modular organizational forms: An industry-level analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1149–1168. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069394
   Google Scholar
• SIC. (1957). Standard industrial classification manual. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2496414
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6), 467–482.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Tassey, G. (2010). Rationales and mechanisms for revitalizing US manufacturing R&D strategies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 35(3), 283–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-009-9150-2
   Google Scholar
• Timmer, M. P., Erumban, A. A., Los, B., Stehrer, R., & de Vries, G. J. (2014). Slicing up global value chains. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(2), 99–118.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD. (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). (2013). Global value chains and development: Investment and value-added trade in the global economy. Retrieved from http://unctad.org/en/publicationslibrary/diae2013d1_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2017). Manufacturing value added (% GDP). Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.MANF.ZS
   Google Scholar