IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v67y2021i8p5106-5123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Complementors Benefit from Taking Competition to the System Level

Author

Listed:
  • Markus Reisinger

    (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, 60322 Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

  • Jens Schmidt

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finland)

  • Nils Stieglitz

    (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, 60322 Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

Abstract

In many industries, multiple independent complementors supply the individual components of a system. In this paper, we develop a formal model to examine the tensions and tradeoffs that result when a firm—either one of the complementors or a de novo entrant—takes competition to the system level by launching an integrated offering that combines the multiple components. A complementor who takes competition to the system level becomes a competitor to itself at the system level. As a consequence, the task of maintaining the competitiveness of the multiple-component system rests on the shoulders of the remaining complementor. We show that this allows the integrator to earn additional profits at the expense of the complementor—that is, it can raise the price of its component and thereby squeeze the margin of its complementor. We find that this squeezing effect can be so strong that offering an integrated system is profitable even if the system itself is unprofitable. Interestingly, when analyzing the possibility of entry by a de novo integrator who does not suffer from self-cannibalization, we show that an incumbent complementor may nevertheless have stronger incentives to launch an integrated offering. This is because the incumbent's ability to benefit from squeezing its complementor and earn additional profits on cannibalized sales leads to an entrant's disadvantage when taking competition to the system level. We also discuss defense strategies for complementors to shield themselves against the consequences of integration by their complementor.

Suggested Citation

  • Markus Reisinger & Jens Schmidt & Nils Stieglitz, 2021. "How Complementors Benefit from Taking Competition to the System Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5106-5123, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:67:y:2021:i:8:p:5106-5123
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2020.3771
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3771
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3771?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    2. Hagiu, Andrei & Jullien, Bruno & Wright, Julian, 2018. "Creating platforms by hosting rivals," TSE Working Papers 18-970, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2019.
    3. Jens Schmidt & Richard Makadok & Thomas Keil, 2016. "Customer-specific synergies and market convergence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 870-895, May.
    4. Joshua S. Gans & Stephen P. King, 2006. "Paying For Loyalty: Product Bundling In Oligopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 43-62, March.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Michael L. Katz, 2000. "Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 413-432, December.
    6. Andrea Mantovani & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2016. "Equilibrium Innovation Ecosystems: The Dark Side of Collaborating with Complementors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 534-549, February.
    7. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    8. Kevin Boudreau, 2010. "Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1849-1872, October.
    9. Xianjin Du & Meng Li & Brian Wu, 2019. "Incumbent repositioning with decision biases," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(12), pages 1984-2010, December.
    10. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-366, May.
    11. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    12. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    13. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    14. Annabelle Gawer & Rebecca Henderson, 2007. "Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 1-34, March.
    15. Pankaj Ghemawat, 1991. "Market Incumbency and Technological Inertia," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 161-171.
    16. Ron Adner & Peter Zemsky, 2005. "Disruptive Technologies and the Emergence of Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(2), pages 229-254, Summer.
    17. Jens Schmidt & Richard Makadok & Thomas Keil, 2016. "Customer-specific synergies and market convergence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 2003-2007, September.
    18. Nils Stieglitz, 2003. "Digital Dynamics and Types of Industry Convergence: The Evolution of the Handheld Computers Market," Chapters, in: Jens Frøslev Christensen & Peter Maskell (ed.), The Industrial Dynamics of the New Digital Economy, chapter 7, pages 179-208, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    20. Chen, Yongmin, 1997. "Equilibrium Product Bundling," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(1), pages 85-103, January.
    21. Andrei Hagiu & Bruno Jullien & Julian Wright, 2020. "Creating Platforms by Hosting Rivals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 3234-3248, July.
    22. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    23. Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Desirability of Compatibility in the Absence of Network Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1165-1181, December.
    24. Andrei Hagiu & Bruno Jullien & Julian Wright, 2020. "Creating Platforms by Hosting Rivals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 3234-3248, July.
    25. Ron Adner & Jianqing Chen & Feng Zhu, 2020. "Frenemies in Platform Markets: Heterogeneous Profit Foci as Drivers of Compatibility Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2432-2451, June.
    26. Joseph Farrell & Hunter K. Monroe & Garth Saloner, 1998. "The Vertical Organization of Industry: Systems Competition versus Component Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 143-182, June.
    27. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & David B. Yoffie, 2007. "Wintel: Cooperation and Conflict," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 584-598, April.
    28. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    29. Baojun Jiang & Kinshuk Jerath & Kannan Srinivasan, 2011. "Firm Strategies in the "Mid Tail" of Platform-Based Retailing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 757-775, September.
    30. Michael A. Cusumano & Steven J. Kahl & Fernando F. Suarez, 2015. "Services, industry evolution, and the competitive strategies of product firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 559-575, April.
    31. Wen Wen & Feng Zhu, 2019. "Threat of platform‐owner entry and complementor responses: Evidence from the mobile app market," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(9), pages 1336-1367, September.
    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. Maximilian Julius Krome & Ulrich Pidun, 2023. "Conceptualization of research themes and directions in business ecosystem strategies: a systematic literature review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 873-920, June.
    2. Feng Zhu & Qihong Liu, 2018. "Competing with complementors: An empirical look at Amazon.com," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(10), pages 2618-2642, October.
    3. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    4. Massimo Motta & Martin Peitz, 2023. "Denial of Interoperability and Future First-Party Entry," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_447, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    5. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    6. Halmenschlager, Christine & Mantovani, Andrea, 2017. "On the private and social desirability of mixed bundling in complementary markets with cost savings," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 45-59.
    7. Andrei Hagiu & Tat‐How Teh & Julian Wright, 2022. "Should platforms be allowed to sell on their own marketplaces?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(2), pages 297-327, June.
    8. Shu He & Jing Peng & Jianbin Li & Liping Xu, 2020. "Impact of Platform Owner’s Entry on Third-Party Stores," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1467-1484, December.
    9. Hyunjin Kim & Michael Luca, 2019. "Product Quality and Entering Through Tying: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 596-603, February.
    10. Mi Hyun Lee & Sang Pil Han & Sungho Park & Wonseok Oh, 2023. "Positive Demand Spillover of Popular App Adoption: Implications for Platform Owners’ Management of Complements," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 961-995, September.
    11. Jidong Zhou, 2017. "Competitive Bundling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 145-172, January.
    12. Federico Etro, 2021. "Product selection in online marketplaces," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 614-637, August.
    13. Jens Foerderer, 2020. "Interfirm Exchange and Innovation in Platform Ecosystems: Evidence from Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4772-4787, October.
    14. Andrea Mantovani, 2013. "The Strategic Effect of Bundling: A New Perspective," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(1), pages 25-43, February.
    15. Cenamor, Javier & Frishammar, Johan, 2021. "Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    16. Chi, Yunjia & Qing, Ping & Jin, Yong Jimmy & Yu, Jinjun & Dong, Maggie Chuoyan & Huang, Li, 2022. "Competition or spillover? Effects of platform-owner entry on provider commitment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 627-636.
    17. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    18. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    19. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    20. Federico Etro, 2010. "Endogenous market structures and antitrust policy," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 57(1), pages 9-45, March.

    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:67:y:2021:i:8:p:5106-5123. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.