IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v21y2010i3p614-630.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competing in Crowded Markets: Multimarket Contact and the Nature of Competition in the Enterprise Systems Software Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Ramnath K. Chellappa

    (Goizueta Business School, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322)

  • V. Sambamurthy

    (Eli Broad Graduate School of Management, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824)

  • Nilesh Saraf

    (Faculty of Business Administration, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada)

Abstract

As more and more firms seek to digitize their business processes and develop new digital capabilities, the enterprise systems software (ESS) has emerged as a significant industry. ESS firms offer software components (e.g., ERP, CRM, Marketing analytics) to shape their clients' digitization strategies. With rapid rates of technological and market innovation, the ESS industry consists of several horizontal markets that form around these components. As numerous vendors compete with each other within and across these markets, many of these horizontal markets appear to be crowded with rivals. In fact, multimarket contact and presence in crowded markets appear to be the pathways through which a majority of the ESS firms compete. Though the strategy literature has demonstrated the virtues of multimarket contact, paradoxically, the same literature argues that operating in crowded markets is not wise. In particular, crowded markets increase a firm's exposure to the whirlwinds of intense competition and have deleterious consequences for financial performance. Thus, the behavior of ESS firms raises an interesting anomaly and research question: Why do ESS firms continue to compete in crowded markets if they are deemed to be bad for financial performance? We argue that the effects of rivalry in crowded markets are counteracted by a different force, in the form of the economics of demand externalities. Demand externalities occur because the customers of ESS firms expect that software components from one market will be easily integrated with those that they buy from other markets. However, with rapid rates of technological innovation and market formation and dissolution, customers experience significant ambiguity in deciding which markets and components suit their needs. Therefore, they look at crowded markets as an important signal about the legitimacy and viability of specific components for their needs. Through their presence in crowded markets, ESS firms can signal their commitment to many of the components that customers might need for their digital platforms. Customers might find that such firms are attractive because their commitments to crowded markets can mitigate concerns about compatibilities between the components purchased across several markets. This unique potential for demand externality across markets suggests that ESS vendors might, in fact, benefit from competing in many crowded markets. We test our explanations through data across three time periods from a set of ESS firms that account for more than 95% of the revenue in this market. We find that ESS firms do reap performance benefits by competing in crowded markets. More importantly, we find that they can enhance their benefits from crowded markets if they face the same competitors in multiple markets, thereby increasing their multimarket contact with rivals. These results have interesting implications not just for understanding competitive conduct in the ESS industry but also in many of the emerging digital goods industries where the markets have similar competitive characteristics to the ESS industry. Our ideas complement emerging ideas about platform models of competition in the digital goods industry and provide important directions for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramnath K. Chellappa & V. Sambamurthy & Nilesh Saraf, 2010. "Competing in Crowded Markets: Multimarket Contact and the Nature of Competition in the Enterprise Systems Software Industry," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 614-630, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:21:y:2010:i:3:p:614-630
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1100.0300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0300
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1100.0300?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lijesen, Mark G., 2004. "Adjusting the Herfindahl index for close substitutes: an application to pricing in civil aviation," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 123-134, March.
    2. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    3. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    4. Robert G. Fichman & Chris F. Kemerer, 1999. "The Illusory Diffusion of Innovation: An Examination of Assimilation Gaps," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 255-275, September.
    5. Olav Sorenson, 2000. "Letting the market work for you: an evolutionary perspective on product strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(5), pages 577-592, May.
    6. E. Burton Swanson & Neil C. Ramiller, 1997. "The Organizing Vision in Information Systems Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(5), pages 458-474, October.
    7. Steven Pilloff, 1999. "Multimarket Contact in Banking," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(2), pages 163-182, March.
    8. Paul Attewell, 1992. "Technology Diffusion and Organizational Learning: The Case of Business Computing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Philip M. Parker & Lars-Hendrik Roller, 1997. "Collusive Conduct in Duopolies: Multimarket Contact and Cross-Ownership in the Mobile Telephone Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 304-322, Summer.
    10. Bruce H. Clark & David B. Montgomery, 1998. "Deterrence, Reputations, and Competitive Cognition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 62-82, January.
    11. William N. Evans & Ioannis N. Kessides, 1994. "Living by the "Golden Rule": Multimarket Contact in the U. S. Airline Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(2), pages 341-366.
    12. Ramnath K. Chellappa & Nilesh Saraf, 2010. "Alliances, Rivalry, and Firm Performance in Enterprise Systems Software Markets: A Social Network Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 849-871, December.
    13. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau, 1988. ""Mix and Match": Product Compatibility without Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 221-234, Summer.
    14. Aneel Karnani & Birger Wernerfelt, 1985. "Multiple point competition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(1), pages 87-96, January.
    15. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1990. "Multimarket Contact and Collusive Behavior," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
    16. Ramnath K. Chellappa & Raymond G. Sin & S. Siddarth, 2011. "Price Formats as a Source of Price Dispersion: A Study of Online and Offline Prices in the Domestic U.S. Airline Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 83-98, March.
    17. Teece, David J., 1980. "Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 223-247, September.
    18. Tom Cottrell & Barrie R. Nault, 2004. "Product variety and firm survival in the microcomputer software industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(10), pages 1005-1025, October.
    19. Paolo Coccorese & Alfonso Pellecchia, 2009. "Multimarket Contact and Profitability in Banking: Evidence from Italy," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 35(3), pages 245-271, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Kummer & Patrick Schulte, 2019. "When Private Information Settles the Bill: Money and Privacy in Google’s Market for Smartphone Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3470-3494, August.
    2. Kocaman, Barış & Gelper, Sarah & Langerak, Fred, 2023. "Till the cloud do us part: Technological disruption and brand retention in the enterprise software industry," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 316-341.
    3. Narayan Ramasubbu & Chris F. Kemerer, 2016. "Technical Debt and the Reliability of Enterprise Software Systems: A Competing Risks Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1487-1510, May.
    4. Chang-Gyu Yang & Silvana Trimi & Sang-Gun Lee & Joon-Sun Yang, 2017. "A Survival Analysis of Business Insolvency in ICT and Automobile Industries," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1523-1548, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pham, Tho & Talavera, Oleksandr & Yang, Junhong, 2016. "Multimarket Competition and Profitability: Evidence from Ukrainian banking," MPRA Paper 72376, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Javier Coronado & Sergi Jiménez-Martín & Pedro L Marín, 2007. "Multimarket Contact in Pharmaceutical Markets," Working Papers 303, Barcelona School of Economics.
    3. Cruz-García, Paula & Fernández de Guevara, Juan & Maudos, Joaquín, 2021. "Bank competition and multimarket contact intensity," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Zhiqi Chen & Thomas Ross, 2007. "Markets Linked by Rising Marginal Costs: Implications for Multimarket Contact, Recoupment, and Retaliatory Entry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 31(1), pages 1-21, August.
    5. Coccorese, Paolo & Pellecchia, Alfonso, 2013. "Multimarket contact, competition and pricing in banking," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 187-214.
    6. Saadet Kasman & Adnan Kasman, 2016. "Multimarket contact, market power and financial stability in the Turkish banking industry," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 361-382, March.
    7. Karen Ruckman & Nilesh Saraf & Vallabh Sambamurthy, 2015. "Market Positioning by IT Service Vendors Through Imitation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 100-126, March.
    8. Silva, Rosario, 2015. "Multimarket contact, differentiation, and prices of chain hotels," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 305-315.
    9. Fu, W. Wayne, 2003. "Multimarket contact of US newspaper chains: circulation competition and market coordination," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 501-519, December.
    10. Arie, Guy & Markovich, Sarit & Varela, Mauricio, 2017. "On the competitive effects of multimarket contact," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 116-142.
    11. Kao, Tina & Menezes, Flavio, 2009. "Endogenous mergers under multi-market competition," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(12), pages 817-829, December.
    12. Balaguer, Jacint & Ripollés, Jordi, 2021. "Does multimarket contact affect prices in the retail fuel industry? First empirical evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    13. Ciliberto, Federico & Watkins, Eddie & Williams, Jonathan W., 2019. "Collusive pricing patterns in the US airline industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 136-157.
    14. Javier Coronado & Sergi Jiménez-Martín & Pedro Marín, 2014. "An empirical analysis of the multimarket contact theory in pharmaceutical markets," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(6), pages 623-643, July.
    15. Faouzi Bensebaa, 2003. "La dynamique concurrentielle:défis analytiques et méthodologiques," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 6(1), pages 5-37, March.
    16. Garcia-Gallego, Aurora & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Gil-Molto, Maria Jose & Orts, Vicente, 2006. "Game-theoretic aspects of international mergers: Theory and case studies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 395-409, September.
    17. Gediminas Adomavicius & Jesse Bockstedt & Alok Gupta, 2012. "Modeling Supply-Side Dynamics of IT Components, Products, and Infrastructure: An Empirical Analysis Using Vector Autoregression," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 397-417, June.
    18. Hans Degryse & Steven Ongena, 2004. "The Impact of Competition on Bank Orientation and Specialization (new titel: The impact of competition on bank orientation)," CESifo Working Paper Series 1119, CESifo.
    19. Cantillo, Miguel, 2016. "Villains or Heroes? Private Banks and Railroads after the Sherman Act," MPRA Paper 79354, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Paolo Coccorese & Giovanni Ferri & Punziana Lacitignola & Juan Lopez, 2016. "Market structure, outer versus inner competition: the case of Italy’s credit coop banks," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 63(3), pages 259-279, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:21:y:2010:i:3:p:614-630. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.