Gómez, Lanzolla and Maicas (2016) showed, in a longitudinal panel of 65 European mobile telecommunications operators across 19 countries (1998–2008), that first-mover advantages (FMA) in market share and profitability persist but are eroded differently by industry dynamics: a technological discontinuity (the UMTS/3G transition) harms the persistence of both pioneer market share and pioneer profitability, while high market growth erodes only the persistence of pioneer market share, leaving pioneer profitability resilient. The study closed by raising a set of unresolved questions for future research: how market regulation, informal institutional frameworks, and broader socio-political contexts shape FMA persistence; how granular firm-level resources, strategies, and business models (including advertising and R&D expenditures) interact with industry dynamics in sustaining or eroding FMA; whether the findings generalize from a network-effects service industry to industries with different structural characteristics; and which mechanisms — offsetting pioneering cost advantages versus pricing power — account for the resilience of pioneer profitability under high market growth. Later work has advanced these questions only partially and fragmentarily — examining institutional contingency of entry timing in the same industry, competitive-strategy heterogeneity across entry cohorts, and FMA existence in assorted single industries — but no study has delivered an integrated conditions-and-mechanisms account addressing them. The problem remains open.

Background

A first-mover advantage (FMA) is the performance edge — typically in market share, profitability, or survival — that a firm may obtain by being the earliest entrant in a new market, relative to later entrants. Its theoretical basis, developed by Lieberman and Montgomery, is a set of 'isolating mechanisms' such as switching costs, network effects, preemption of scarce assets, and learning-curve advantages that protect the pioneer from imitation. Empirical support has been mixed: the meta-analysis of VanderWerf and Mahon (1997, Management Science) found most published tests favorable to FMA, but Boulding and Christen (2003, Marketing Science) showed that pioneering tends to yield durable share advantages while profit advantages are rare, and Boulding and Christen (2008, Marketing Science) disentangled the pioneering cost advantages (e.g. cumulative learning) from dissipative disadvantages (e.g. overpriced input preemption) that can offset them. Suárez and Lanzolla (2007, Academy of Management Review) argued that whether FMA arise and persist depends on the 'environmental dynamics' of the industry — in particular the pace of market evolution and the pace of technology evolution — which triggered a stream of contingency research. Lieberman and Montgomery (2013, Long Range Planning) likewise noted that the persistence of FMA had attracted surprisingly little academic attention relative to their mere existence. Gómez, Lanzolla and Maicas (2016, Long Range Planning) contributed to this stream with the first longitudinal, multi-country study of FMA persistence in a service industry. They estimated dynamic panel models by System GMM — a Generalized Method of Moments estimator for autoregressive panel models in which lagged levels and lagged differences of the series serve as internal instruments, so that the coefficient on the lagged dependent variable directly measures persistence — on 65 mobile operators in 19 European countries over 1998–2008, with market share measured by subscribers, profitability by EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) divided by sales, first-mover status as a dummy for the earliest entrant in each national market (or the two earliest if within six months), technological discontinuity as a national dummy switching on at the first UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System, the 3G standard) adoption, and market growth as new subscribers relative to the subscriber base. Market share turned out to be much more inertial (persistence coefficient about 0.93) than profitability (about 0.72); technological discontinuity significantly reduced the persistence of both, while market growth reduced only the persistence of pioneer market share — pioneer profitability was not significantly eroded by growth, which the authors conjectured might reflect pioneers' lower costs from experience effects and greater pricing power offsetting the growth-driven entry of followers. The study's own conclusions then posed the questions that define this problem: extending the set of environmental conditions beyond market growth and technological discontinuity to market regulation, informal institutions (the unwritten norms, culture, and enforcement practices that shape business conduct, as distinct from formal rules such as laws and regulation) and socio-political context; operationalizing firm-level resources, strategies and business models (including advertising and R&D expenditures) and their interaction with industry dynamics; replicating the framework in industries without mobile telephony's structural peculiarities (notably its network effects, i.e. the tendency of a network service's value to grow with its number of users, which protects the incumbent that already has the largest user base); and directly testing the mechanisms behind the profitability-persistence result with finer-grained cost and pricing data.

Problem Statement

The problem is to establish a validated account of the conditions and mechanisms under which first-mover advantages in market share and profitability persist, extending the framework of Gómez, Lanzolla and Maicas (2016) beyond the two industry dynamics they tested (market growth and technological discontinuity). The source study posed each of the following directions separately, as avenues for future research; they are all conditions or mechanisms of the same persistence phenomenon, anchored in the same empirical framework: (1) determine how market regulation, informal institutional frameworks, and broader socio-political contexts shape the persistence of first-mover market-share and profitability advantages — that is, estimate whether and how persistence coefficients and pioneer-condition interactions change when these environmental dimensions are incorporated; (2) determine how firm-level resources, strategies, and business models — operationalized at a granular level, including advertising and R&D expenditures — moderate persistence and interact with industry dynamics, rather than being mere controls; (3) establish the boundary conditions of the original findings by replicating the persistence framework in industries whose structural characteristics differ from mobile telecommunications (which exhibits network effects and standardized technology shifts), covering other service and manufacturing sectors; and (4) identify the mechanism behind the finding that high market growth does not significantly erode the persistence of pioneer profitability — testing whether pioneers' experience-based cost advantages or their pricing power (or both), the mechanism the source authors conjectured but did not test, offset the entry-favoring effect of growth; such a test would call for finer-grained cost and pricing data than the EBITDA-based measures of the original study. The four directions are jointly required components of a single account, none of them alone constituting that account, and direction (3) is bounded to replication in at least one service sector other than mobile telecommunications and at least one manufacturing sector. Because the task package supplies no empirical data of its own — the regulation and informality indices (direction 1), granular advertising and R&D measures (direction 2), cross-industry panels (direction 3), and finer-grained cost and pricing measures (direction 4) that the directions call for are all absent from the package — each direction calls for a grounded specification: an explicitly stated expected effect together with a justified identification strategy over measurable, documented data. Evidence on these facets would build on the source framework's conventions — first-mover status by order of entry, and market-share and profitability persistence estimated separately in comparable dynamic panel models — and would allow researchers to say under which environmental and firm-level conditions pioneering advantages endure, in which industries, and why pioneer profitability resists market growth.

References

  1. Gómez, J., Lanzolla, G., & Maicas, J. P. (2016). The Role of Industry Dynamics in the Persistence of First Mover Advantages. Long Range Planning, 49(2), 265–281. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2015.12.006, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2015.12.006
  2. Suárez, F. F., & Lanzolla, G. (2007). The Role of Environmental Dynamics in Building a First Mover Advantage Theory. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 377–392. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.24349587, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24349587
  3. Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (2013). Conundra and Progress: Research on Entry Order and Performance. Long Range Planning, 46(4–5), 312–324. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2013.06.005, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.06.005
  4. VanderWerf, P. A., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Research Methods on Findings of First-Mover Advantage. Management Science, 43(11), 1510–1519. doi:10.1287/mnsc.43.11.1510, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.11.1510
  5. Boulding, W., & Christen, M. (2003). Sustainable Pioneering Advantage? Profit Implications of Market Entry Order. Marketing Science, 22(3), 371–392. doi:10.1287/mksc.22.3.371.17736, https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.22.3.371.17736
  6. Boulding, W., & Christen, M. (2008). Disentangling Pioneering Cost Advantages and Disadvantages. Marketing Science, 27(4), 699–716. doi:10.1287/mksc.1070.0324, https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1070.0324
  7. Usero, B., & Fernández, Z. (2009). First come, first served: How market and non-market actions influence pioneer market share. Journal of Business Research, 62(11), 1139–1145. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.07.005, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.07.005
  8. Gomez, J., Lanzolla, G., & Maicas, J. P. (2014). Institutions and First Mover Advantages. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1), 12126. doi:10.5465/ambpp.2014.12126abstract, https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2014.12126abstract
  9. Dykes, B. J., & Kolev, K. D. (2018). Entry Timing in Foreign Markets: A Meta-analytic Review and Critique. Journal of International Management, 24(4), 404–416. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2018.05.001, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2018.05.001
  10. Gómez, J., Pérez-Aradros, B., & Salazar, I. (2021). Does order of entry shape competitive strategies? An analysis of European mobile operators. Long Range Planning, 54(2), 101874. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2019.02.007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2019.02.007
  11. He, D.-S., & Tebourbi, I. (2021). Measuring the continuation effects of market order entry: A dynamic model. Managerial and Decision Economics, 42(3), 762–777. doi:10.1002/mde.3271, https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3271
  12. Gómez, J., Pérez-Aradros, B., & Salazar, I. (2022). How to beat early movers: The role of competitive strategy and industry dynamism on followers' performance in the telecommunications industry. Long Range Planning, 55(5), 102244. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102244, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2022.102244
  13. Halberstadt, J., Kollhoff, S., Kraus, S., & Dhir, A. (2022). Early bird or early worm? First-mover (dis)advantages and the success of web-based social enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 181, 121784. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121784, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121784
  14. Lopez-Manuel, L., Maicas-Lopez, J. P., Vázquez, X. H., & Fuentelsaz, L. (2024). On the Paradox of Green Regulation for Pioneers: Does it Really Nurture Green First-Mover Advantages. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2024(1), 20756. doi:10.5465/amproc.2024.77bp, https://doi.org/10.5465/amproc.2024.77bp
  15. Asimakopoulos, G., & Paraskevopoulou, E. (2026). Incumbents' adaptation in institutionally induced transitions: entry timing, institutional experience and performance. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 53(1), 143–166. doi:10.1007/s40812-025-00353-4, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-025-00353-4
  16. Yang, S., & Sun, Y. (2025). The first-mover advantage in FinTech: evidence from the banking industry in China. Applied Economics Letters, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1080/13504851.2025.2575818, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2025.2575818
  17. Antolin, A. (2026). First-Mover Advantage Beyond Markets: Evidence from the Tribal Gaming Industry. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2026(1), 21438. doi:10.5465/amproc.2026.21438abstract, https://doi.org/10.5465/amproc.2026.21438abstract