IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Customization competition between branded firms: Continuous extension of product line from core product


  • Takagoshi, Noritsugu
  • Matsubayashi, Nobuo


We study a competition of product customization between two branded firms by a game-theoretic approach. Firms produce products with two attributes: one attribute indicates a characteristic with regard to “function” or “design” of a product and the other indicates “taste” or “flavor” of the product, which reflects consumers’ brand/taste preferences. Two branded firms have their own specific core products and our customization is defined as a continuous extension of their product line from the core product only along the “function” attribute. In particular, we allow asymmetric positions of core products, which may create the position advantage/disadvantage between firms. We suppose that consumers incur their selection costs with regard to finding their most favorable item among a rich variety of products and firms incur their customizing costs with regard to extending their product lines. We first show that in the equilibrium, branded firms should fundamentally adopt their customizations to cover the center space in the market as far as possible, regardless of the position of the competitor’s core product. Therefore, the position of the core product contributes to the creation of a competitive advantage: when one firm’s core product is located more closely to the center of the market than the competitor’s, its customization can always cover more range of the center space in the market, while keeping its degree of customization smaller than the competitor’s. Furthermore, we show some implications of unit-cost improvement: in a short run, a firm is better off concentrating on the improvement of the unit selection cost rather than the unit customizing cost. In contrast, in a long run, both firms can benefit from the improvement of the unit customizing cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Takagoshi, Noritsugu & Matsubayashi, Nobuo, 2013. "Customization competition between branded firms: Continuous extension of product line from core product," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 337-352.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:225:y:2013:i:2:p:337-352 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.10.001

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Ansari, A. & Economides, N. & Steckel, J., 1996. "The Max-Min-Min Principle of product Differentiation," Working Papers 96-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    2. V. Krishnan & W. Zhu, 2006. "Designing a Family of Development-Intensive Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 813-825, June.
    3. Kelvin Lancaster, 1990. "The Economics of Product Variety: A Survey," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 189-206.
    4. Malhotra, Naresh K, 1982. " Information Load and Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 419-430, March.
    5. Niladri B. Syam & Nanda Kumar, 2006. "On Customized Goods, Standard Goods, and Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 525-537, September.
    6. Rajagopalan, S. & Xia, Nan, 2012. "Product variety, pricing and differentiation in a supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(1), pages 84-93.
    7. Alexei Alexandrov, 2008. "Fat Products," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 67-95, March.
      • Alexei Alexandrov, 2006. "Fat Products," Discussion Papers 1435, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    8. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2004. "Communication Strategies and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 304-316, January.
    9. John T. Gourville & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 382-395, July.
    10. Ayd{i}n Alptekinou{g}lu & Charles J. Corbett, 2008. "Mass Customization vs. Mass Production: Variety and Price Competition," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 204-217, August.
    11. Haim Mendelson & Ali K. Parlaktürk, 2008. "Product-Line Competition: Customization vs. Proliferation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 2039-2053, December.
    12. Barry L. Bayus & William P. Putsis, Jr., 1999. "Product Proliferation: An Empirical Analysis of Product Line Determinants and Market Outcomes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 137-153.
    13. Jacoby, Jacob & Speller, Donald E & Berning, Carol A Kohn, 1974. " Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load: Replication and Extension," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 33-42, June.
    14. Niladri B. Syam & Ranran Ruan & James D. Hess, 2005. "Customized Products: A Competitive Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 569-584, February.
    15. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    16. Bernhardt, Dan & Liu, Qihong & Serfes, Konstantinos, 2007. "Product customization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 1396-1422, August.
    17. Kilsun Kim & Dilip Chhajed, 2002. "Product Design with Multiple Quality-Type Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(11), pages 1502-1511, November.
    18. Bettman, James R & Zins, Michel A, 1979. " Information Format and Choice Task Effects in Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 141-153, Se.
    19. d'Aspremont, C & Gabszewicz, Jean Jaskold & Thisse, J-F, 1979. "On Hotelling's "Stability in Competition"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1145-1150, September.
    20. Rajiv D. Banker & Inder Khosla & Kingshuk K. Sinha, 1998. "Quality and Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1179-1192, September.
    21. Nan Xia & S. Rajagopalan, 2009. "Standard vs. Custom Products: Variety, Lead Time, and Price Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 887-900, 09-10.
    22. Rajiv Dewan & Bing Jing & Abraham Seidmann, 2003. "Product Customization and Price Competition on the Internet," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1055-1070, August.
    23. Haim Mendelson & Ali K. Parlaktürk, 2008. "Competitive Customization," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 377-390, October.
    24. Michaela Draganska & Dipak C. Jain, 2005. "Product-Line Length as a Competitive Tool," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 1-28, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Dutang, Christophe & Albrecher, Hansjoerg & Loisel, Stéphane, 2013. "Competition among non-life insurers under solvency constraints: A game-theoretic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 702-711.
    2. Heradio, Ruben & Perez-Morago, Hector & Alférez, Mauricio & Fernandez-Amoros, David & Alférez, Germán H., 2016. "Augmenting measure sensitivity to detect essential, dispensable and highly incompatible features in mass customization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 1066-1077.


    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:eee:ejores:v:225:y:2013:i:2:p:337-352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.