IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/idt/journl/cs7301.html

Entering the Economic Models of Game Console Manufacturers

Author

Listed:
  • Nabyla DAIDJ

    (Telecom & Management SudParis, Paris)

  • Thierry ISCKIA

    (Telecom & Management SudParis, Paris)

Abstract

This paper deals with the video game console market. We are not interested here in portable consoles nor in PC games. Our work focuses on the role of core competencies in console wars, analyzing the way these competencies are activated within the firms' business models. The home console market also exhibits crossed network externalities, which requires console manufacturers the ability to conciliate the interests of both developers and gamers. From a strategic point of view, core competencies are closely related with market performance. Today, Sony's and Microsoft's business models are quite similar. However, Microsoft and Sony remain far behind Nintendo and its Wii, which suggests that core competencies do not discriminate on performance as much as the positioning choices made upstream when the strategy is crafted. The link between core competencies, economic model and strategy is at the heart of this study.

Suggested Citation

  • Nabyla DAIDJ & Thierry ISCKIA, 2009. "Entering the Economic Models of Game Console Manufacturers," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(73), pages 23-42, 1st quart.
    • Handle: RePEc:idt:journl:cs7301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.idate.org/RePEc/idt/journl/CS7301/CS73_DAIDJ_ISCKIA.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, December.
    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. Thierry ISCKIA & Denis LESCOP, 2015. "Strategizing in Platform-based ecosystems: Leveraging Core Processes for Continuous Innovation," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(99), pages 91-111, 3rd quart.
    2. Hung Sun & Chìn-Chun Chen, 2021. "Well-Designed Teaching Examples Influence the Outcome of Technology Acceptance: The Example of Next-Generation Art Process Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Peters, Frank, 2018. "The business of video games is a multi-player game : Essays on governance choices and performance in a two-sided market in the cultural industries," Other publications TiSEM 886b3148-4bbb-4ea4-b666-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Marie CARPENTER & Nabyla DAIDJ & Christina MORENO, 2014. "Game Console Manufacturers: the End of Sustainable Competitive Advantage?," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(94), pages 39-60, 2nd quart.
    5. Patrycja Klimas & Wojciech Czakon, 2018. "Organizational innovativeness and coopetition: a study of video game developers," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 469-497, 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. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    2. Filippo Carlo Wezel & Gino Cattani & Johannes M. Pennings, 2006. "Competitive Implications of Interfirm Mobility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 691-709, December.
    3. Srivardhini K. Jha & E. Richard Gold & Laurette Dubé, 2021. "Modular Interorganizational Network Governance: A Conceptual Framework for Addressing Complex Social Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    5. Seppo Kuula & Harri Haapasalo & Arto Tolonen, 2018. "Cost-efficient co-creation of knowledge intensive business services," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 12(4), pages 779-808, December.
    6. Hongxu Jia, 2025. "Distributed Leadership and Strategic Agility in Xiaomi: A Dynamic Capability Perspective," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 20(4), pages 1-1, August.
    7. Gambardella, Alfonso & Conti, Raffaele & Novelli, Elena, 2018. "Specializing in Generality: Firm Strategies When Intermediate Markets Work," CEPR Discussion Papers 12782, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    9. Fei Li & Jin Chen & Ying Ying, 2019. "Innovation Search Scope, Technological Complexity, and Environmental Turbulence: A N-K Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-12, August.
    10. Bruce Fallick & Charles A. Fleischman & James B. Rebitzer, 2006. "Job-Hopping in Silicon Valley: Some Evidence Concerning the Microfoundations of a High-Technology Cluster," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(3), pages 472-481, August.
    11. Markus Menz & Sven Kunisch & Julian Birkinshaw & David J. Collis & Nicolai J. Foss & Robert E. Hoskisson & John E. Prescott, 2021. "Corporate Strategy and the Theory of the Firm in the Digital Age," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(7), pages 1695-1720, November.
    12. Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier & Jong Seok Lee & Mark Keil & Daniel Lunn & Dirk W. Bester, 2022. "The Empirical Reality of IT Project Cost Overruns: Discovering A Power-Law Distribution," Papers 2210.01573, arXiv.org.
    13. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    14. Isabel Soares & Paula Sarmento, 2012. "Unbundling in the Telecommunications and the Electricity Sectors: How Far should it Go?," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 157-194.
    15. Krafft Jackie & Quatraro Francesco & Colombelli Alessandra, 2011. "High Growth Firms and Technological Knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201114, University of Turin.
    16. Yang, Chia-Hsuan & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2016. "Gains from others’ losses: Technology trajectories and the global division of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 724-745.
    17. Sanjith Gopalakrishnan & Moksh Matta & Hasan Cavusoglu, 2022. "The Dark Side of Technological Modularity: Opportunistic Information Hiding During Interorganizational System Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 1072-1092, September.
    18. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    19. Markus Reitzig, 2022. "How to get better at flatter designs: considerations for shaping and leading organizations with less hierarchy," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 5-10, March.
    20. Willy C. Shih, 2021. "Increasing the Level of Abstraction as a Strategy for Accelerating the Adoption of Complex Technologies," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 54-61, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media

    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:idt:journl:cs7301. 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: BLAVIER Thomas The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask BLAVIER Thomas to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/idatefr.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.