IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v22y2011i1p188-207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Compatibility and Proprietary Standards: The Impact of Conversion Technologies in IT Markets with Network Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Zhechao Liu

    (University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas 78249)

  • Esther Gal-Or

    (Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260)

  • Chris F. Kemerer

    (Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260)

  • Michael D. Smith

    (School of Information Systems and Management, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

Abstract

In markets that exhibit network effects, the presence of digital conversion technologies provides an alternative mechanism to achieve compatibility. This study examines the impact of conversion technologies on market equilibrium in the context of sequential duopoly competition and proprietary technology standards. We analyze this question by departing from the extant literature to endogenize the decision to provide a converter and incorporate explicit negotiations between firms concerning the extent of conversion. We argue that these choices better reflect the environment facing firms in digital goods industries and find that these decisions change some of the established results in the literature. Specifically, we find that unless network effects are very large, the subgame-perfect equilibrium (SPNE) involves firms' agreeing to provide digital converters at a sufficiently low price to all consumers. At this equilibrium, both the entrant and the incumbent are better off because the provision of converters alleviates price competition in the market and leads to both higher product revenues and higher proceeds from the sale of converters. Moreover, under some circumstances, the provision of converters is welfare enhancing. These findings have important implications for research and practice in the adoption of new digital goods as the introduction of conversion technologies can reduce the social costs of standardization without compromising the benefits of network effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Zhechao Liu & Esther Gal-Or & Chris F. Kemerer & Michael D. Smith, 2011. "Compatibility and Proprietary Standards: The Impact of Conversion Technologies in IT Markets with Network Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 188-207, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:22:y:2011:i:1:p:188-207
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1090.0255
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0255
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1090.0255?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. Kathleen R. Conner, 1995. "Obtaining Strategic Advantage from Being Imitated: When Can Encouraging "Clones" Pay?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 209-225, February.
    2. Jay Pil Choi, 1997. "The Provision of (Two‐way) Converters in the Transition Process to a New Incompatible Technology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 139-153, June.
    3. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    4. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1992. "Converters, Compatibility, and the Control of Interfaces," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 9-35, March.
    5. Erik Brynjolfsson & Chris F. Kemerer, 1996. "Network Externalities in Microcomputer Software: An Econometric Analysis of the Spreadsheet Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1627-1647, December.
    6. Neil Gandal, 1994. "Hedonic Price Indexes for Spreadsheets and an Empirical Test for Network Externalities," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 160-170, Spring.
    7. Choi, Jay Pil, 1997. "The Provision of (Two-Way) Converters in the Transition Process to a New Incompatible Technology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 139-153, June.
    8. Charles Z. Liu & Chris F. Kemerer & Michael D. Smith, 2007. "Standards Competition In The Presence Of Digital Conversion Technology: An Empirical Analysis Of The Flash Memory Card Market," Working Papers 07-17, NET Institute, revised Sep 2007.
    9. Cusumano, Michael A. & Mylonadis, Yiorgos & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1992. "Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 51-94, April.
    10. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 940-955, December.
    11. Sundararajan, Arun, 2004. "Nonlinear pricing and type-dependent network effects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 107-113, April.
    12. S. J. Liebowitz & Stephen E. Margolis, 1994. "Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, Spring.
    13. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 1992. "Standard Setting in High-Definition Television," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 23(1992 Micr), pages 1-93.
    14. 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.
    15. Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Desirability of Compatibility in the Absence of Network Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1165-1181, December.
    16. David, Paul A. & Bunn, Julie Ann, 1988. "The economics of gateway technologies and network evolution: Lessons from electricity supply history," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 165-202.
    17. Choi, Jay Pil, 1996. "Do converters facilitate the transition to a new incompatible technology? A dynamic analysis of converters," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 825-835, October.
    18. Nancy L. Stokey, 1979. "Intertemporal Price Discrimination," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(3), pages 355-371.
    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. Xinxin Li & Yuxin Chen, 2012. "Corporate IT Standardization: Product Compatibility, Exclusive Purchase Commitment, and Competition Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1158-1174, December.
    2. Ron Adner & Jianqing Chen & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Frenemies in Platform Markets: Heterogeneous Profit Foci as Drivers of Compatibility Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2432-2451, June.
    3. Jing Wu & He Li & Zhangxi Lin & Haichao Zheng, 2017. "Competition in wearable device market: the effect of network externality and product compatibility," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 335-359, September.
    4. Qiu-Hong Wang & Kai-Lung Hui, 2017. "Technology Mergers and Acquisitions in the Presence of an Installed Base: A Strategic Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 46-63, March.

    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. Charles Z. Liu & Chris F. Kemerer & Michael D. Smith, 2007. "Standards Competition In The Presence Of Digital Conversion Technology: An Empirical Analysis Of The Flash Memory Card Market," Working Papers 07-17, NET Institute, revised Sep 2007.
    2. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    3. Ron Adner & Jianqing Chen & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Frenemies in Platform Markets: Heterogeneous Profit Foci as Drivers of Compatibility Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2432-2451, June.
    4. Ewald Scherm & Christian Maaß, 2006. "Zum Stellenwert der Netzwerkökonomik in der Strategie-/Marketingforschung —Eine Analyse empirischer Untersuchungen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 27-46, March.
    5. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    6. Knittel Christopher R. & Stango Victor, 2008. "Incompatibility, Product Attributes and Consumer Welfare: Evidence from ATMs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-42, January.
    7. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Collusive Investments in Technological Compatibility: Lessons from U.S. Railroads in the Late 19th Century," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5683-5700, December.
    8. Deishin Lee & Haim Mendelson, 2007. "Adoption of Information Technology Under Network Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 395-413, December.
    9. Nahm, Jae, 2008. "The effects of one-way compatibility on technology adoption in systems markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 269-278, September.
    10. Stremersch, S. & Tellis, G.J. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Binken, J.L.G., 2007. "Indirect Network Effects in New Product Growth," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-019-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Sachin Gupta & Dipak C. Jain & Mohanbir S. Sawhney, 1999. "Modeling the Evolution of Markets with Indirect Network Externalities: An Application to Digital Television," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 396-416.
    12. Nicholas Economides & Brian Viard, 2003. "Pricing of Complementary Goods and Network Effects," Working Papers 03-12, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    13. Snellman, Heli, 2006. "Automated teller machine network market structure and cash usage," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2006_038.
    14. Alexei Alexandrov, 2015. "Anti-Competitive Interconnection: the effects of the elasticity of consumers' expectations and the shape of the network effects function," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 74-99, March.
    15. Robert J. Kauffman & James McAndrews & Yu-Ming Wang, 2000. "Opening the “Black Box” of Network Externalities in Network Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 61-82, March.
    16. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    17. Nicholas Economides & Lawrence J. White, 1993. "One-Way Networks, Two-Way Networks, Compatibility, and Antitrust," Working Papers 93-14, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    18. Jiawei Chen & Ulrich Doraszelski & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2009. "Avoiding market dominance: product compatibility in markets with network effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 455-485, September.
    19. Knittel, Christopher R. & Stango, Victor, 2011. "Strategic incompatibility in ATM markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2627-2636, October.
    20. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Tå̊g, Joacim, 2014. "Acquisitions, entry, and innovation in oligopolistic network industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-12.

    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:22:y:2011:i:1:p:188-207. 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.