Davids vs Goliaths in the small satellite industry:

In this paper, a conceptual framework of the nature, structure, and dynamics of technological innovation is developed and applied to the small satellite industry. Important components of this framework include: a) the speed and acceleration of technological innovation, and b) the linear and non-linear interactions between technology producers and users (technology and market push and pull mechanisms). We conceptualize technology development and commercialization as an ongoing cooperative and competitive (co-opetitive) process involving enabling and inhibiting factors or mechanisms which govern the speed and acceleration of technological innovation. Enabling factors may include CRADAs, strategic alliances, spin-offs, intellectual property rights, SBIRs, and mentor-protege relationships. Inhibiting factors may include excessive regulation at state, national, and international levels, technological, structural or financial barriers to market entry, competitor response to market entry, and culture clashes such as engineering versus marketing culture or firm versus government versus university cultures. These enabling and inhibiting factors influence and are also influenced by technological and market pulling and pushing forces. We postulate that the size of a firm, in addition to its ability to adapt to and/or absorb technological and market discontinuities, determines the rate at which it innovates (speed of innovation), as well as the rate at which it varies its innovation speed (acceleration of innovation). It is also postulated that a firm's speed and acceleration of innovation are directly proportional to its long-term competitiveness and market success. This conceptual framework was employed to evaluate the capability of small and large firms to develop and commercialize new technologies in the small satellite industry. Three firms that are active players in the small satellite industry were examined. These firms are small relative to the large aerospace giants (such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing) but they vary in size and age. Two of the firms studied are US start-ups and one is a British university spin-off. Our findings were synthesized to derive insights that could be generalized for the benefit of technology entrepreneurs as well as policy makers in other technology-driven and alliance-rich industries