IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commentary—Defensive Marketing Strategies


  • John R. Hauser

    () (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

  • Steven M. Shugan

    () (Warrington College of Business, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611)


For every new product and service entrant, there are usually many incumbents who must defend their positions in the market. Hence, defensive strategy is as least as critical as new-product strategy. Our 1983 article argued that defensive strategy critically depends on the distribution of buyer preferences and the position of the new entrant relative to the position of the incumbent in a multidimensional attribute space. Since the appearance of our 1983 article in , research in defensive strategy has progressed in both prescriptive and descriptive directions. Subsequent research on defensive strategy has also addressed empirical, methodological, theoretical, and substantive issues. Today, defensive strategy is more important than ever, with shorter new-product life cycles, persistent service innovation, remarkable technological change, global competition, and the invention of new channels of distributions.

Suggested Citation

  • John R. Hauser & Steven M. Shugan, 2008. "Commentary—Defensive Marketing Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 85-87, 01-02.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:27:y:2008:i:1:p:85-87

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Alexander Chernev, 2007. "Jack of All Trades or Master of One? Product Differentiation and Compensatory Reasoning in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 430-444, January.
    2. Jan-Benedict E. M. Steenkamp & Vincent R. Nijs & Dominique M. Hanssens & Marnik G. Dekimpe, 2005. "Competitive Reactions to Advertising and Promotion Attacks," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 35-54, September.
    3. Lancaster, Kelvin, 1980. "Competition and Product Variety," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(3), pages 79-103, July.
    4. Ajay Kalra & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 1998. "Response to Competitive Entry: A Rationale for Delayed Defensive Reaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 380-405.
    5. Wilhelm, Wilbert E. & Xu, Kaihong, 2002. "Prescribing product upgrades, prices and production levels over time in a stochastic environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(3), pages 601-621, May.
    6. Niladri B. Syam & Ranran Ruan & James D. Hess, 2005. "Customized Products: A Competitive Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 569-584, February.
    7. K. Ravi Kumar & D. Sudharshan, 1988. "Defensive Marketing Strategies: An Equilibrium Analysis Based on Decoupled Response Function Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(7), pages 805-815, July.
    8. William T. Robinson, 1988. "Marketing Mix Reactions to Entry," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 368-385.
    9. Vishal P. Singh & Karsten T. Hansen & Robert C. Blattberg, 2006. "Market Entry and Consumer Behavior: An Investigation of a Wal-Mart Supercenter," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 457-476, September.
    10. W.J. Lane, 1980. "Product Differentiation in a Market with Endogenous Sequential Entry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 237-260, Spring.
    11. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    12. Bayus Barry & Chintagunta Pradeep, 2003. "Competitive Entry and Pricing Responses to Product Innovation," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-26, August.
    13. Gregory S. Carpenter & Kent Nakamoto, 1990. "Competitive Strategies for Late Entry into a Market with a Dominant Brand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(10), pages 1268-1278, October.
    14. Thomas S. Gruca & K. Ravi Kumar & D. Sudharshan, 1992. "An Equilibrium Analysis of Defensive Response to Entry Using a Coupled Response Function Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 348-358.
    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. repec:eee:ijrema:v:29:y:2012:i:2:p:210-219 is not listed on IDEAS


    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:inm:ormksc:v:27:y:2008:i:1:p:85-87. 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: (Mirko Janc). 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.