IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v53y2007i2p192-207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Technology Choice and Capacity Investment Under Demand Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Manu Goyal

    () (Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland, 4350 Van Munching Hall, College Park, Maryland 20740)

  • Serguei Netessine

    () (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 3730 Walnut Street, Suite 500, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6340)

Abstract

This paper studies the impact of competition on a firm's choice of technology (product-flexible or product-dedicated) and capacity investment decisions. Specifically, we model two firms competing with each other in two markets characterized by price-dependent and uncertain demand. The firms make three decisions in the following sequence: choice of technology (technology game), capacity investment (capacity game), and production quantities (production game). The technology and capacity games occur while the demand curve is still uncertain, and the production game is postponed until after the demand curve is revealed. We develop best-response functions for each firm in the technology game and compare how a monopolist and a duopolist respond to a given flexibility premium. We show that the firms may respond to competition by adopting a technology which is the same as or different from what the competitor adopts. We conclude that contrary to popular belief, flexibility is not always the best response to competition--flexible and dedicated technologies may coexist in equilibrium. We demonstrate that as the difference between the two market sizes increases, a duopolist is willing to pay less for flexible technology, whereas the decision of a monopolist is not affected. Further, we find that a firm that invests in flexibility benefits from a low correlation between demands for two products, but the extent of this benefit differs depending on the competitor's technology choice. Our results indicate that higher demand substitution may or may not promote the adoption of flexibility under competition, whereas it always facilitates the adoption of flexibility without competition. Finally, we show that contrary to intuition, as the competitor's cost of capacity increases, the premium a flexible firm is willing to pay for flexibility decreases.

Suggested Citation

  • Manu Goyal & Serguei Netessine, 2007. "Strategic Technology Choice and Capacity Investment Under Demand Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 192-207, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:2:p:192-207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0611
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fine, Charles H. & Pappu, Suguna., 1990. "Flexible manufacturing technology and product-market competition," Working papers 3135-90., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Lars-Hendrik Röller & Mihkel M. Tombak, 1993. "Competition and Investment in Flexible Technologies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 107-114, January.
    3. Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Tombak, Mihkel M., 1991. "Strategic aspects of flexible production technologies: theory and evidence," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-3), pages 197-204, October.
    4. Krishnan S. Anand & Karan Girotra, 2007. "The Strategic Perils of Delayed Differentiation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 697-712, May.
    5. William C. Jordan & Stephen C. Graves, 1995. "Principles on the Benefits of Manufacturing Process Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 577-594, April.
    6. Deneckere, Raymond & Marvel, Howard P & Peck, James, 1997. "Demand Uncertainty and Price Maintenance: Markdowns as Destructive Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 619-641, September.
    7. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    8. Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Tombak, Mihkel M, 1990. "Strategic Choice of Flexible Production Technologies and Welfare Implications," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 417-431, June.
    9. Jan A. Van Mieghem, 1998. "Investment Strategies for Flexible Resources," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(8), pages 1071-1078, August.
    10. Donald Gerwin, 1993. "Manufacturing Flexibility: A Strategic Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 395-410, April.
    11. Stephen C. Graves & Brian T. Tomlin, 2003. "Process Flexibility in Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(7), pages 907-919, July.
    12. Charles H. Fine & Robert M. Freund, 1990. "Optimal Investment in Product-Flexible Manufacturing Capacity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 449-466, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:2:p:192-207. 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: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.