For example, in the case of an automobile manufacturer that is unwilling to develop a hybrid electric vehicle, competence will actually be lost rather than gained. Competency is a major factor in this case.
Fuel-cell vehicles, on the other hand, are a more radical innovation that requires more significant changes to be made to the body of a vehicle, to its engine, and to the fueling infrastructure. Consumer behavior is also affected more radically, as the technology involved may be unfamiliar to many consumers, necessitating a change in attitude or thinking (Honda, 2009). Some may argue that fuel cell vehicles are competence-destroying for the petroleum companies, which exist dependent on the status quo of petroleum based engines, and perhaps even for many automakers. They might be competence enhancing for battery makers, since the vehicles will require much larger batteries. Until we know more about the changes consumers will have to make to use fuel-cell vehicles, it is difficult to assess whether the technology will be competence enhancing, competence destroying, or competence neutral for them. It would seem to be a situation in which there are currently too many variables; many are waiting for governments and infrastructure manufacturing private entities to choose one type of fuel technology. Currently, the field is rather crowded with options. The issue is bound to be simpler in the future, if there is a single standards of a more ecologically friendly vehicle, and a single accepted technological change.
#2 Judging by the Honda case, I think that five main factors will influence the rate at which hybrid electric vehicles are adopted by consumers. The first, and perhaps most obvious, of these factors, is price. While many people are talking about a greener future and reducing individual carbon footprints in today’s ecologically