IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/1936.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing Customer Evaluation and Revenue Consequences of Component Sharing Across Brands in the Vertical Product Line

Author

Listed:
  • Verhoef, P.C.
  • Pauwels, K.H.

Abstract

Component sharing may look great in the boardroom, but not in the showroom. Indeed, savings on R&D and production costs could be offset by a plunge in customer brand attractiveness and willingness to pay. This paper investigates the impact of component sharing on customer evaluation of luxury, volume and economy brands offered in a car manufacturer’s vertical product line and its subsequent revenue consequences. The authors consider both the harm to the higher-end brand and the benefits for the lower end brand, and analyze with a random effects model how the size of these effects depends on the brand combination, the type of component, the source of the components sharing, and customer characteristics. An experimental study shows that the harm for the higher-end brand is largest, when (1) a luxury brand shares components with a volume brand, (2) the source of the components is the higherend brand, and when (3) the customer has a high initial evaluation of the higher-end brand. For the lower-end brand, the positive effect is largest, when (1) a volume brand shares with an economy brand, (2) the lower-end brand is the source of the components, and (3) customers have a high initial evaluation of the higher-end brand. Components that have a strong impact on evaluation are interior, wheels, chassis and the engine. Simulations show that sharing components typically translates in negative revenue consequences for both analyzed manufacturers. An interesting exception emerges for the Japanese manufacturer, which obtains a boost in total revenue when its small luxury brand shares components with its large volume brand.

Suggested Citation

  • Verhoef, P.C. & Pauwels, K.H., 2005. "Assessing Customer Evaluation and Revenue Consequences of Component Sharing Across Brands in the Vertical Product Line," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-007-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.
  • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:1936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/1936/ERS%202005%20007%20MKT.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. V. Krishnan & Saurabh Gupta, 2001. "Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-Based Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 52-68, January.
    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. van Bruggen, G.H. & Wierenga, B., 2005. "When are CRM Systems Successful? The Perspective of the User and of the Organization," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-048-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.
    2. Lamey, L. & Deleersnyder, B. & Dekimpe, M.G. & Steenkamp, J-B.E.M., 2005. "The Impact of Business-Cycle Fluctuations on Private-Label Share," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-061-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.
    3. Fok, D. & Horváth, C. & Paap, R. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2004. "A hierarchical Bayes error correction model to explain dynamic effects," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2004-27, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.

    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. Peter E. Harland & Zakir Uddin & Sven Laudien, 2020. "Product platforms as a lever of competitive advantage on a company-wide level: a resource management perspective," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 137-158, February.
    2. Thyssen, Jesper & Israelsen, Poul & Jorgensen, Brian, 2006. "Activity-based costing as a method for assessing the economics of modularization--A case study and beyond," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 252-270, September.
    3. Johnson, Michael D. & Kirchain, Randolph E., 2009. "Quantifying the effects of product family decisions on material selection: A process-based costing approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 653-668, August.
    4. Inoue, Yuki & Tsujimoto, Masaharu, 2018. "New market development of platform ecosystems: A case study of the Nintendo Wii," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 235-253.
    5. Lyons, Andrew Charles & Um, Juneho & Sharifi, Hossein, 2020. "Product variety, customisation and business process performance: A mixed-methods approach to understanding their relationships," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    6. Kai-Lung Hui, 2004. "Product Variety Under Brand Influence: An Empirical Investigation of Personal Computer Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 686-700, May.
    7. Robert N. Boute & Maud M. Van den Broeke & Kristof A. Deneire, 2017. "Barco Implements Platform-Based Product Development in Its Healthcare Division," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 48(01), pages 35-44, February.
    8. Lee, Amy H.I. & Chen, Hsing Hung & Kang, He-Yau, 2011. "A model to analyze strategic products for photovoltaic silicon thin-film solar cell power industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 1271-1283, February.
    9. Chand, Pushpendu & Thakkar, Jitesh J. & Ghosh, Kunal Kanti, 2020. "Analysis of supply chain sustainability with supply chain complexity, inter-relationship study using delphi and interpretive structural modeling for Indian mining and earthmoving machinery industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    10. Ghosh, Arghya & Morita, Hodaka, 2008. "An economic analysis of platform sharing," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 164-186, June.
    11. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    12. Van den Broeke, Maud & Boute, Robert & Cardoen, Brecht & Samii, Behzad, 2017. "An efficient solution method to design the cost-minimizing platform portfolio," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 236-250.
    13. Yuki Inoue & Takeshi Takenaka & Takami Kasasaku & Tadafumi Tamegai & Ryohei Arai, 2023. "How to design platform ecosystems by intrapreneurs: Implications from action design research on IoT-based platform," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-26, December.
    14. Herbert Dawid & Reinhold Decker & Thomas Hermann & Hermann Jahnke & Wilhelm Klat & Rolf König & Christian Stummer, 2017. "Management science in the era of smart consumer products: challenges and research perspectives," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(1), pages 203-230, March.
    15. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    16. Ioannis Bellos & Stylianos Kavadias, 2019. "When Should Customers Control Service Delivery? Implications for Service Design," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 28(4), pages 890-907, April.
    17. Wong, Hartanto & Lesmono, Dharma & Chhajed, Dilip & Kim, Kilsun, 2019. "On the evaluation of commonality strategy in product line design: The effect of valuation change and distribution channel structure," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 14-25.
    18. Suryakant, & Tyagi, Satish, 2015. "Optimization of a platform configuration with generational changes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 299-309.
    19. Jing-Sheng Song & Yao Zhao, 2009. "The Value of Component Commonality in a Dynamic Inventory System with Lead Times," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 493-508, March.
    20. Ryan Boas & Bruce G. Cameron & Edward F. Crawley, 2013. "Divergence and lifecycle offsets in product families with commonality," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 175-192, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Component sharing; branding; customer evaluation; firm; interface marketing and production;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ems:eureri:1936. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.