This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Kesten C. Green
J. Scott Armstrong

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Competitor-oriented objectives, such as market-share targets, are promoted by academics and are common in business. A 1996 review of the evidence indicated that this violation of economic theory led to reduced profitability. We summarize the evidence as of 1996 then describe evidence from 12 new studies. All of the evidence supports the conclusion that competitor-oriented objectives are harmful. However, this evidence has had only a modest impact on academic research and it seems to be largely ignored by managers. Until this situation changes, we expect that many firms will continue to use competitor-oriented objectives to the detriment of their profitability.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/pubs/wpapers/2005/wp17-05.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics in its series Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers with number 17/05.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 21 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:msh:ebswps:2005-17

Contact details of provider:
Postal: PO Box 11E, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia
Phone: +61-3-9905-2489
Fax: +61-3-9905-5474
Email:
Web page: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Email:
Web: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/pubs/wpapers/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Simone Grose).

Related research
Keywords: Competition; Market Share; Objectives; Profitability.;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics
M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Mueller, Dennis C., 1992. "The corporation and the economist," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 147-170, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. JS Armstrong & Fred Collopy, 2004. "Effects of Objectives and Information on Managerial Decisions and Profitability," General Economics and Teaching 0412014, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
  3. JS Armstrong & Roderick J. Brodie, 2004. "Effects of Portfolio Planning Methods on Decision Making: Experimental Results," General Economics and Teaching 0412016, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
  4. Anterasian, Cathy & Graham, John L., 1989. "When it's good management to sacrifice market share," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 187-213, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. JS Armstrong, 2004. "Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation," General Economics and Teaching 0412027, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
  6. Buzzell, Robert D., 2004. "The PIMS program of strategy research: A retrospective appraisal," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 478-483, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Ulf G. Marks & Sönke Albers, 2001. "Experiments In Competitive Product Positioning : Actual Behavior Compared To Nash Solutions," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 53(3), pages 150-174, July. [Downloadable!]
  8. JS Armstrong & Raymond Hubbard, 2005. "Does the Need for Agreement Among Reviewers Inhibit the Publication of Controversial Findings?," General Economics and Teaching 0502052, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over 80% of the top 1000 economists are registered on RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.