IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ind/igiwpp/2013-016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competition, strategic delegation and delay in technology adoption

Author

Listed:
  • A. Mahati

    () (Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research)

  • Rupayan Pal

    () (Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research)

Abstract

This paper examines how strategic managerial delegation affects firms' timing of adoption of a new technology under different modes of product market competition. It demonstrates that delegation has differential impacts on adoption dates under Cournot and Bertrand competition. Delegation with 'own-performance' based incentive schemes always leads to early adoption in markets with Bertrand competition compared to that under no-delegation, but not necessarily so in markets with Cournot competition. It also shows that the ranking of Cournot and Bertrand equilibria in terms of delay in adoption depends on the type of managerial incentive schemes. Adoption occurs earlier (later) in markets with Cournot competition than in markets with Bertrand competition, if product differentiation is high (low), regardless of whether there is no-delegation or delegation with 'own-performance' based incentive schemes. In contrast, under strategic delegation with 'relative-performance' based incentive schemes, adoption dates do not differ across markets with different modes of competition.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Mahati & Rupayan Pal, 2013. "Competition, strategic delegation and delay in technology adoption," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2013-016, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
  • Handle: RePEc:ind:igiwpp:2013-016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/WP-2013-016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Choi, Jay Pil & Thum, Marcel, 1998. "Market structure and the timing of technology adoption with network externalities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 225-244, February.
    2. Sen, Debapriya & Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2010. "When an inefficient firm makes higher profit than its efficient rival," MPRA Paper 23324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Richard A. Jensen, 2004. "Multiplant Firms and Innovation Adoption and Diffusion," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 661-671, January.
    4. Balcer, Yves & Lippman, Steven A., 1984. "Technological expectations and adoption of improved technology," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 292-318, December.
    5. Stoneman, P & Ireland, N J, 1983. "The Role of Supply Factors in the Diffusion of New Process Technology," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(369a), pages 66-78, Supplemen.
    6. Vickers, John S, 1986. "The Evolution of Market Structure When There Is a Sequence of Innovations," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-12, September.
    7. Michael Kopel & Luca Lambertini, 2013. "On Price Competition with Market Share Delegation Contracts," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 40-43, January.
    8. Vickers, John, 1985. "Delegation and the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 95(380a), pages 138-147, Supplemen.
    9. Doraszelski, Ulrich, 2004. "Innovations, improvements, and the optimal adoption of new technologies," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 1461-1480, April.
    10. Pal, Rupayan, 2010. "Technology adoption in a differentiated duopoly: Cournot versus Bertrand," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 128-136, June.
    11. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2011. "Timing of technology adoption and product market competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 513-523, September.
    12. Hoppe, Heidrun C, 2002. "The Timing of New Technology Adoption: Theoretical Models and Empirical Evidence," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 70(1), pages 56-76, January.
    13. Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-940, December.
    14. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "On the Diffusion of New Technology: A Game Theoretic Approach," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 395-405.
    15. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "Market Structure and the Diffusion of New Technology," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 618-624, Autumn.
    16. Ireland, N & Stoneman, P, 1986. "Technological Diffusion, Expectations and Welfare," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 283-304, July.
    17. Thijs Jansen & Arie van Lier & Arjen van Witteloostuijn, 2009. "On the impact of managerial bonus systems on firm profit and market competition: the cases of pure profit, sales, market share and relative profits compared," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(3), pages 141-153.
    18. Miller, Nolan H & Pazgal, Amit I, 2001. "The Equivalence of Price and Quantity Competition with Delegation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 284-301, Summer.
    19. Chamley, Christophe & Gale, Douglas, 1994. "Information Revelation and Strategic Delay in a Model of Investment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(5), pages 1065-1085, September.
    20. Riordan, Michael H & Salant, David J, 1994. "Preemptive Adoptions of an Emerging Technology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 247-261, September.
    21. Herman C. Quirmbach, 1986. "The Diffusion of New Technology and the Market for an Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 33-47, Spring.
    22. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1985. "Preemption and Rent Equalization in the Adoption of New Technology," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(3), pages 383-401.
    23. John Thanassoulis, 2013. "Industry Structure, Executive Pay, and Short-Termism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 402-419, June.
    24. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    25. Rivas, Javier, 2010. "The effects of the market structure on the adoption of evolving technologies," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2485-2493, December.
    26. Harris, Milton & Raviv, Artur, 1979. "Optimal incentive contracts with imperfect information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 231-259, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology adoption; Strategic delegation; Own-performance; Relative-performance; Cournot; Bertrand;

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ind:igiwpp:2013-016. 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: (Shamprasad M. Pujar). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/igidrin.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.