The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns: A contingent dynamic capabilities perspective

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to theoretically hypothesize and empirically test the impact of 3D printing (3DP) implementation on stock returns. It further explores how the stock returns due to 3DP implementation vary across different industry environments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of operations & production management 2019-12, Vol.39 (6/7/8), p.935-961
Hauptverfasser: Lam, Hugo K.S., Ding, Li, Cheng, T.C.E., Zhou, Honggeng
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 961
container_issue 6/7/8
container_start_page 935
container_title International journal of operations & production management
container_volume 39
creator Lam, Hugo K.S.
Ding, Li
Cheng, T.C.E.
Zhou, Honggeng
description PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to theoretically hypothesize and empirically test the impact of 3D printing (3DP) implementation on stock returns. It further explores how the stock returns due to 3DP implementation vary across different industry environments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper integrates the dynamic capabilities view with contingency theory to provide a contingent dynamic capabilities (CDC) perspective on 3DP implementation. It argues that implementing 3DP enables firms to enhance their manufacturing capabilities and gain a competitive advantage, but the extent to which the competitive advantage can be realized is contingent on the fit between 3DP-enhanced manufacturing capabilities and firms’ operating environments. Those arguments are tested based on an event study of 232 announcements of 3DP implementation made by US publicly listed firms between 2010 and 2017.FindingsThe event study results show that firms implementing 3DP gain higher stock returns compared with their non-implementation industry peers over two years after the implementation. Such stock returns due to 3DP implementation are more pronounced for firms operating in more munificent, more dynamic and less competitive industry environments. Those findings are consistent with the CDC perspective.Originality/valueThis is the first research empirically examining the impact of 3DP implementation on stock returns. It provides important implications for managers to implement 3DP to enhance firms’ manufacturing capabilities and for researchers to study 3DP implementation from the CDC perspective.
doi_str_mv 10.1108/IJOPM-01-2019-0075
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2315885980</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2315885980</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-67e0eb71669103e4b159f0ed499e23bd8b2f2991497562994e576d9458370e0e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkE9PwzAMxSMEEmPwBThV4hyw8z9HNGAMDY3DOEdtl0LH1pYkO_DtSRmSJVvWs5_ej5BrhFtEMHeLl9XbKwWkDNBSAC1PyAS1NFRJy0_JBFAIyqXW5-Qixi0AMI5yQuz60xftfijrVPRNwR-KIbRdaruPcbvze9-lMrV9V-SKqa-_iuDTIXTxkpw15S76q_8-Je9Pj-vZM12u5ovZ_ZLWjKlElfbgK41KWQTuRYXSNuA3wlrPeLUxFWuYtSislioPwkutNlZIwzXkUz4lN8e_Q-i_Dz4mt-2zf7Z0YwRjpDWQVeyoqkMfY_CNyzn2ZfhxCG5E5P4QOUA3InIjIv4LYDJXnQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2315885980</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns: A contingent dynamic capabilities perspective</title><source>Emerald Journals</source><creator>Lam, Hugo K.S. ; Ding, Li ; Cheng, T.C.E. ; Zhou, Honggeng</creator><creatorcontrib>Lam, Hugo K.S. ; Ding, Li ; Cheng, T.C.E. ; Zhou, Honggeng</creatorcontrib><description>PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to theoretically hypothesize and empirically test the impact of 3D printing (3DP) implementation on stock returns. It further explores how the stock returns due to 3DP implementation vary across different industry environments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper integrates the dynamic capabilities view with contingency theory to provide a contingent dynamic capabilities (CDC) perspective on 3DP implementation. It argues that implementing 3DP enables firms to enhance their manufacturing capabilities and gain a competitive advantage, but the extent to which the competitive advantage can be realized is contingent on the fit between 3DP-enhanced manufacturing capabilities and firms’ operating environments. Those arguments are tested based on an event study of 232 announcements of 3DP implementation made by US publicly listed firms between 2010 and 2017.FindingsThe event study results show that firms implementing 3DP gain higher stock returns compared with their non-implementation industry peers over two years after the implementation. Such stock returns due to 3DP implementation are more pronounced for firms operating in more munificent, more dynamic and less competitive industry environments. Those findings are consistent with the CDC perspective.Originality/valueThis is the first research empirically examining the impact of 3DP implementation on stock returns. It provides important implications for managers to implement 3DP to enhance firms’ manufacturing capabilities and for researchers to study 3DP implementation from the CDC perspective.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0144-3577</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-6593</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/IJOPM-01-2019-0075</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>3-D printers ; Additive manufacturing ; Business competition ; Competition ; Competitive advantage ; Contingency ; Energy consumption ; Manufacturing ; Operations management ; Production management ; Rates of return ; Three dimensional printing</subject><ispartof>International journal of operations &amp; production management, 2019-12, Vol.39 (6/7/8), p.935-961</ispartof><rights>Emerald Publishing Limited 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-67e0eb71669103e4b159f0ed499e23bd8b2f2991497562994e576d9458370e0e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5127-6419</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,966,27922,27923</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lam, Hugo K.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, T.C.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Honggeng</creatorcontrib><title>The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns: A contingent dynamic capabilities perspective</title><title>International journal of operations &amp; production management</title><description>PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to theoretically hypothesize and empirically test the impact of 3D printing (3DP) implementation on stock returns. It further explores how the stock returns due to 3DP implementation vary across different industry environments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper integrates the dynamic capabilities view with contingency theory to provide a contingent dynamic capabilities (CDC) perspective on 3DP implementation. It argues that implementing 3DP enables firms to enhance their manufacturing capabilities and gain a competitive advantage, but the extent to which the competitive advantage can be realized is contingent on the fit between 3DP-enhanced manufacturing capabilities and firms’ operating environments. Those arguments are tested based on an event study of 232 announcements of 3DP implementation made by US publicly listed firms between 2010 and 2017.FindingsThe event study results show that firms implementing 3DP gain higher stock returns compared with their non-implementation industry peers over two years after the implementation. Such stock returns due to 3DP implementation are more pronounced for firms operating in more munificent, more dynamic and less competitive industry environments. Those findings are consistent with the CDC perspective.Originality/valueThis is the first research empirically examining the impact of 3DP implementation on stock returns. It provides important implications for managers to implement 3DP to enhance firms’ manufacturing capabilities and for researchers to study 3DP implementation from the CDC perspective.</description><subject>3-D printers</subject><subject>Additive manufacturing</subject><subject>Business competition</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Competitive advantage</subject><subject>Contingency</subject><subject>Energy consumption</subject><subject>Manufacturing</subject><subject>Operations management</subject><subject>Production management</subject><subject>Rates of return</subject><subject>Three dimensional printing</subject><issn>0144-3577</issn><issn>1758-6593</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNotkE9PwzAMxSMEEmPwBThV4hyw8z9HNGAMDY3DOEdtl0LH1pYkO_DtSRmSJVvWs5_ej5BrhFtEMHeLl9XbKwWkDNBSAC1PyAS1NFRJy0_JBFAIyqXW5-Qixi0AMI5yQuz60xftfijrVPRNwR-KIbRdaruPcbvze9-lMrV9V-SKqa-_iuDTIXTxkpw15S76q_8-Je9Pj-vZM12u5ovZ_ZLWjKlElfbgK41KWQTuRYXSNuA3wlrPeLUxFWuYtSislioPwkutNlZIwzXkUz4lN8e_Q-i_Dz4mt-2zf7Z0YwRjpDWQVeyoqkMfY_CNyzn2ZfhxCG5E5P4QOUA3InIjIv4LYDJXnQ</recordid><startdate>20191202</startdate><enddate>20191202</enddate><creator>Lam, Hugo K.S.</creator><creator>Ding, Li</creator><creator>Cheng, T.C.E.</creator><creator>Zhou, Honggeng</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K8~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5127-6419</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20191202</creationdate><title>The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns</title><author>Lam, Hugo K.S. ; Ding, Li ; Cheng, T.C.E. ; Zhou, Honggeng</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c226t-67e0eb71669103e4b159f0ed499e23bd8b2f2991497562994e576d9458370e0e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>3-D printers</topic><topic>Additive manufacturing</topic><topic>Business competition</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Competitive advantage</topic><topic>Contingency</topic><topic>Energy consumption</topic><topic>Manufacturing</topic><topic>Operations management</topic><topic>Production management</topic><topic>Rates of return</topic><topic>Three dimensional printing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lam, Hugo K.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ding, Li</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, T.C.E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhou, Honggeng</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>DELNET Management Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>International journal of operations &amp; production management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lam, Hugo K.S.</au><au>Ding, Li</au><au>Cheng, T.C.E.</au><au>Zhou, Honggeng</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns: A contingent dynamic capabilities perspective</atitle><jtitle>International journal of operations &amp; production management</jtitle><date>2019-12-02</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>6/7/8</issue><spage>935</spage><epage>961</epage><pages>935-961</pages><issn>0144-3577</issn><eissn>1758-6593</eissn><abstract>PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to theoretically hypothesize and empirically test the impact of 3D printing (3DP) implementation on stock returns. It further explores how the stock returns due to 3DP implementation vary across different industry environments.Design/methodology/approachThis paper integrates the dynamic capabilities view with contingency theory to provide a contingent dynamic capabilities (CDC) perspective on 3DP implementation. It argues that implementing 3DP enables firms to enhance their manufacturing capabilities and gain a competitive advantage, but the extent to which the competitive advantage can be realized is contingent on the fit between 3DP-enhanced manufacturing capabilities and firms’ operating environments. Those arguments are tested based on an event study of 232 announcements of 3DP implementation made by US publicly listed firms between 2010 and 2017.FindingsThe event study results show that firms implementing 3DP gain higher stock returns compared with their non-implementation industry peers over two years after the implementation. Such stock returns due to 3DP implementation are more pronounced for firms operating in more munificent, more dynamic and less competitive industry environments. Those findings are consistent with the CDC perspective.Originality/valueThis is the first research empirically examining the impact of 3DP implementation on stock returns. It provides important implications for managers to implement 3DP to enhance firms’ manufacturing capabilities and for researchers to study 3DP implementation from the CDC perspective.</abstract><cop>Bradford</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/IJOPM-01-2019-0075</doi><tpages>27</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5127-6419</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0144-3577
ispartof International journal of operations & production management, 2019-12, Vol.39 (6/7/8), p.935-961
issn 0144-3577
1758-6593
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2315885980
source Emerald Journals
subjects 3-D printers
Additive manufacturing
Business competition
Competition
Competitive advantage
Contingency
Energy consumption
Manufacturing
Operations management
Production management
Rates of return
Three dimensional printing
title The impact of 3D printing implementation on stock returns: A contingent dynamic capabilities perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T07%3A12%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20impact%20of%203D%20printing%20implementation%20on%20stock%20returns:%20A%20contingent%20dynamic%20capabilities%20perspective&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20operations%20&%20production%20management&rft.au=Lam,%20Hugo%20K.S.&rft.date=2019-12-02&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=6/7/8&rft.spage=935&rft.epage=961&rft.pages=935-961&rft.issn=0144-3577&rft.eissn=1758-6593&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/IJOPM-01-2019-0075&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2315885980%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2315885980&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true