IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/itsp11/52308.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bitpipe vs. service: Why do pure service providers outperform fully integrated operators?

Author

Listed:
  • Grove, Nico
  • Baumann, Oliver

Abstract

With the emergence of pure internet-based service providers, the business landscape of fully integrated telecommunications providers - industry incumbents that provide services on their own infrastructure - has changed massively. While various pure service providers exhibit successful business models and high performance, the services offered by the integrated telecommunication firms are not able to compete on neither price nor user experience. To shed light on this issue, we build upon work that has applied a complex systems perspective on performance - how firms manage to configure a large set of interdependent activities affects the performance of the overall activity system. We develop a simulation model to illustrate the effects of a) configuring only interdependent service-related activities, while building on an existing (external) infrastructure, and b) configuring both infrastructure-related and service-related activities at the same time. Our results point to a mechanism that helps explain the underperformance of the fully integrated operators. Pure service providers can improve the performance of their services speedily, as they can focus on optimizing only the service-related activities and adapting them to an existing infrastructure. Fully integrated operators, in contrast, will likely be concerned with both infrastructure and service components, taking into account also the interdependencies between these two domains. While this approach can help reap synergy effects and yield a performance advantage in the long run, it requires more time and results in a lower performance in the short run. Put differently, the objective of the integrated operators to integrate their bitpipe and service business puts these firms at a disadvantage when compared to their specialized competitors. We illustrate this mechanism with two case studies that show how fully integrated operators adapted their infrastructure in response to their service activities, which in return triggered further adaptations and coordination effort.

Suggested Citation

  • Grove, Nico & Baumann, Oliver, 2011. "Bitpipe vs. service: Why do pure service providers outperform fully integrated operators?," 8th ITS Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Taipei 2011: Convergence in the Digital Age 52308, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:itsp11:52308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/52308/1/672958732.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, December.
    3. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    4. Baer, Walter S, 1995. "Telecommunications infrastructure competition: The costs of delay," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 351-363, July.
    5. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    6. Levinthal, Daniel & March, James G., 1981. "A model of adaptive organizational search," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 307-333, December.
    7. Rao, Bharat & Angelov, Bojan & Nov, Oded, 0. "Fusion of Disruptive Technologies:: Lessons from the Skype Case," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 174-188, April.
    8. Martin Fransman, 2001. "Analysing The Evolution Of Industry: The Relevance Of The Telecommunications Industry," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2-3), pages 109-140.
    9. Li, Feng & Whalley, Jason, 0. "Deconstruction of the telecommunications industry: from value chains to value networks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9-10), pages 451-472, October.
    10. Funk, Jeffrey L., 0. "The emerging value network in the mobile phone industry: The case of Japan and its implications for the rest of the world," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 4-18, February.
    11. Pankaj Ghemawat, 1991. "Market Incumbency and Technological Inertia," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 161-171.
    12. Lori Rosenkopf & Paul Almeida, 2003. "Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 751-766, June.
    13. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1995. "Complementarities and fit strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-208, April.
    14. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    15. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Grove, Nico & Baumann, Oliver, 2012. "Complexity in the telecommunications industry: When integrating infrastructure and services backfires," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 40-50.
    2. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    3. Karén Hovhannissian & Marco Valente, 2004. "Modeling Directed Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes: Depth and Breadth," ROCK Working Papers 028, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 17 Jun 2008.
    4. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    5. Giovanni. Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2004. "50th Anniversay Article: The Strategy Field from the Perspective of Management Science: Divergent Strands and Possible Integration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1309-1318, October.
    6. Khraisha, Tamer, 2020. "Complex economic problems and fitness landscapes: Assessment and methodological perspectives," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 390-407.
    7. Mo Chen & Aseem Kaul & Brian Wu, 2019. "Adaptation across multiple landscapes: Relatedness, complexity, and the long run effects of coordination in diversified firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(11), pages 1791-1821, November.
    8. Valente Houhannisian, 2004. "Modeling Directod Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes and Breadth," Quaderni DISA 091, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 17 Jun 2008.
    9. Myong-Hun Chang, 2009. "Industry dynamics with knowledge-based competition: a computational study of entry and exit patterns," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 4(1), pages 73-114, June.
    10. Scott F. Rockart & Nilanjana Dutt, 2015. "The rate and potential of capability development trajectories," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 53-75, January.
    11. Karén Hovhannisian & Marco Valente, 2005. "Modeling Directed Local Search Strategies on Technology," Computational Economics 0507001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2019. "Interdependence, Complementarity, and Ruggedness of Performance Landscapes," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 234-249, September.
    13. Pankaj Ghemawat & Daniel Levinthal, 2008. "Choice Interactions and Business Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1638-1651, September.
    14. Felipe A. Csaszar & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2010. "How Much to Copy? Determinants of Effective Imitation Breadth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 661-676, June.
    15. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, 2015. "Adaptive supply chains in industrial districts: A complexity science approach focused on learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 576-589.
    16. Christina Fang & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Near-Term Liability of Exploitation: Exploration and Exploitation in Multistage Problems," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 538-551, June.
    17. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    18. Dirk Martignoni & Thomas Keil & Markus Lang, 2020. "Focus in Searching Core–Periphery Structures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 266-286, March.
    19. Dongil D. Keum, 2020. "Cog in the wheel: Resource release and the scope of interdependencies in corporate adjustment activities," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 175-197, February.
    20. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Telecommunication industry; complex systems; organizational search;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:itsp11:52308. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.itsworld.org/ .

    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.