Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
CDPSG3 [S3] C10-Competitor-Analysis-and-Interfirm-Rivalry (SRL), G3 (IBS…
CDPS
G3
[S3] C10-Competitor-Analysis-and-Interfirm-Rivalry (SRL)
competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry
Framework
competitor behavior
motivation
capability
attack
response
outcome
organizational performance
effects of rivalry
awareness
Proposition
MC and IR
will target rivals with high MC
high MC would be more likely to respond
RS and IR
high RS would be less likely to attack
high RS would be more likely to respod
MC vs. RS
CA and IR
illustration of Competitor Analysis
Market commonality
Example
American Airlines
Trans World Airlines
Competitive asymmetry
Resource similarity
To share comparable strategic endowments with a focal firm
Example
AA & UA
Validation
Correspond to the competitive tension imposed on each airline by its various competitors
Measures of market commonality and resource similarity
Applied to airline industry
17 U.S. airlines
Discussion
Implication
comparing the overall market profiles of firms
multiple-level
additional insights
understanding
predicting rivalry
market competitive
various analytical levels
treats the individual competitive move as the basic building block of rivalry
takes the firm as the nexus of competitor analysis
problem of resource similarity
the different ways resources may be conceived
solution:choose a focal firm as a basis
dichotomy
action&response
ex:more aggressively or less aggressively
behave in a given context
competitor mapping
allocate resources
monitor the competitor's movement
repositioning the firm
identify ideal attack targets
degree of threat
Competitive asymmetry
create competitive asymmetry
utilize it to their firm's advantage
primary purposes
new conceptualization
allow for differentiation among various players
in an industry
theoretical integration
predicting competitive attack and response
Limitations and Future Directions
step1
independent variables
resource similarity
market commonality
step2
complemented by industry structure or the context of the markets in which firms compete
step3
1 more item...
should be examined empirically
market commonality (MC)
market interdependence is the most significant factor
company's motivation is important than company's capability.
motivation is a necessary condition and prerequisite for behavior.
resource similarity (RS)
competition based on resource endowments.
whereas strategic resource endowments will be quite visible to company's strategics.
stakeholders will be more aware of any competitive challenge.
competitive asymmetrt (CA) and interfim rivalry (IR)
A is like B , not the same as B is like A
each competitive relationship in terms of both market commonality and resource similarity , is unique and directional not symmetry.
A major competitor is B, do not mean that B main competitor is A
ANY TWO FIRMS ARE UNLIKELY TO HAVE IDENTICAL DEGREES OF MARKET COMMANILITY AND OF RESOURCE SIMILITARY WITH EACH OTHER
A Framework for Competitor Analysis
definition
Day
intergrated perspective
top-down approach
bottom-up approach
mmicro-analysis
competiion
objective phennomena
subjective interpretations of reality
competitor
the study of firm-specific factors
Market Commonality
multimaket contact
aggregate property
the instance vary from relationship to relationship
mutual forbearance
competitive engagement
Resource Similarity
importance for competitive advantage
similar strategic capabilities
competitive advantage
Figure 1
Interfirm Rivalry: Competitive Action and Response
useful ideas
ist
2nd
the importance of competitive attack
first-mover advantage
competitive intiative
performance
the better
the greater number of competitive move a firm initiates
the greater a firm's tendency to respond
the worse
the more response a firm's action provoke
mutual independence
predicting response
the attack
the attacker
the defender
a competitor's strengths and weakness
G3
IBS 107212043 彭竑愷 Josha
IBS 107212013 蔡亞諠 Jasmine
FIN 106214040 朱娩賢 Megan
IBS 108212505 葉尊瑩 Clare
PHD2 108245907 少彤 Elixir