Competing against online sharing

Purpose – This paper aims to explore online sharing of copyrighted content over peer‐to‐peer (p2p) file sharing networks and its impact on the music industry, and to assess the viable business models for the industry in the future. Design/methodology/approach – The authors analyze the evolution of the online content market over the years that followed the widespread adoption of p2p. The paper is based on a teaching case, and builds on two related academic papers that provide the theoretical underpinnings for the analysis. Findings – Based on the early developments observed in this marketplace and the aforementioned theoretical work, the paper argues that it is unfeasible to fully eradicate p2p, and so the industry must embrace it by understanding how consumers derive value from the technologies that enable it. Originality/value – The developments analyzed here offer relevant insights for the online content marketplace, allow the scope of strategies available to the music industry to be understood better, and may provide lessons for other industries transitioning to online business models

Strategies for managing the privacy landscape

Firms use consumer personal information to improve their products and services. Personal information is open to misuse, however, and when exploited for undesired or unexpected purposes reduces consumer's trust in the firm and their willingness to provide personal information. How should firms manage consumer privacy? We present a framework to help firms identify their privacy impact on consumers and respond appropriately. We argue that firms should consider the full spectrum of entities they interact with and which can exploit consumer personal information, which includes: the political environment (government), the security environment (hackers), the market environment (third party firms), and the social environment (peers). Firms should pursue strategies to maximize the privacy impact consumers derive across these domains, augmenting sources of positive impact and mitigating those that generate negative impact. Successful strategies for managing privacy combine four approaches: balanced cooperation with government, heightened security against hackers, limited disclosure to third party firms, and moderated propagation with peers

From Business Model to Business Modelling: Modularity and Manipulation

The concept of modularity has gained considerable traction in technology studies as a way to conceive, describe and innovate complex systems, such as product design or organizational structures. In the recent literature, technological modularity has often been intertwined with business model innovation, and scholarship has started investigating how modularity in technology affects changes in business models, both at the cognitive and activity system levels. Yet we still lack a theoretical definition of what modularity is in the business model domain. Business model innovation also encompasses different possibilities of modeling businesses, which are not clearly understood nor classified. We ask when, how and if modularity theory can be extended to business models in order to enable effective and efficient modeling. We distinguish theoretically between modularity for technology and for business models, and investigate the key processes of modularization and manipulation. We introduce the basic operations of business modeling via modular operators adapted from the technological modularity domain, using iconic examples to develop an analogical reasoning between modularity in technology and in business models. Finally, we discuss opportunities for using modularity theory to foster the understanding of business models and modeling, and develop a challenging research agenda for future investigations

Incumbent Responses to an Entrant with a New Business Model: Resource Co-Deployment and Resource Re-Deployment Strategies

The constructs of re-deployment and co-deployment have been central to discussions of scope economies in diversified firms. We argue however that these constructs are also significant in the context of single business firms. Increasingly, changes in technology and demand preferences have provided opportunities for entrants to attack incumbents with a different business model, one that may neutralize the incumbent’s advantage for at least some set of customers (e.g. Netflix versus Blockbuster). In such a context incumbents often respond by modifying their business model. We note that several of the business model-altering responses of the incumbent can be characterized in terms of co-deployment and re-deployment benefits and costs, where co-deployment benefits/cost apply to the scope economies/diseconomies in running multiple business-models within the same firm and re-deployment benefits/costs apply to the implications of moving assets from one business model to another. We then examine the set of strategic choices faced by the incumbent in competing with an entrant with a different business model. We identify five set of factors that are likely to influence the decision to choose between these alternatives – uncertainty spawned by the new business model, market segment targeted by the new model, the within-business-across-business-model co-deployment and re-deployment benefits and costs, the across-business co-deployment and re-deployment benefits and costs, and the incumbent’s prior performance history. Although some of these choices have seen some work, most remain relatively underexplored in the strategy literature. We highlight the potential for research in this area with a set of propositions that identify key conditions that should hold true for a particular strategic choice to be picked by an incumbent

Strategy Innovation as Business Model Reconfiguration

Strategy innovation gained popularity during the 1990s as a notion applying to firms that reinvented competition in an industry. Throughout the 2000s business model innovation drew much of the spotlight. The key traits of both these concepts (and how they relate to each other) are often implicit or unclear. Through a literature review and by applying the key elements to some innovative firms for illustrative purposes, this paper discusses the emergence of the notion of strategy (and business model) innovation aiming to bridge these concepts while identifying their basic constituents. Successful firms manage to envision and implement new combinations along different routes, but always exploiting the complementarities through self-reinforcing mechanisms. Finally, the paper argues that strategy innovation triggers the need to broaden the interpretative schemes in the field of strategy, as it resembles more an art than a science

How to Develop Strategic Management Competency: Reconsidering the Learning Goals and Knowledge Requirements of the Core Strategy Course

The dominance of theory-based approaches to strategy teaching has not displaced the need for core courses in strategic management to cultivate broader management skills. Yet, limited attention has been given to explicating, first, why we need to teach these skills, second, which skills we need to teach, and third how they can to be developed in the classroom. To help answer these three questions we need to understand the linkages between theory-based and skills-based approaches to strategy teaching. We begin with the proposition that the purpose of the core strategic management is to develop the strategic management competency of our students. We then adopt a systematic approach to identifying the why, what, and how components of strategic management competency. We show why analytical tools need to be complemented by judgment, insight, intuition, creativity, and social and communicative skills. We outline what these skills are and where they come from. Finally, we derive implications for how we should design and deliver of the core strategic management course

Vertical Differentiation and a Comparison of Online Advertising Models

Designing business models that take into consideration the role of advertising support is critical to the success of online services. In this paper, we address the challenges of these business model strategies and compare different ad revenue models. We use game theory to model vertical differentiation in both monopoly and duopoly settings, in which online service providers may offer an ad-free service, an ad-supported service, or a combination of these services. Offering both ad-free and ad-supported services is the optimal strategy for a monopolist because ad revenues compensate for the cannibalistic effect of vertical differentiation. In a duopoly equilibrium, exactly one firm offers both services when the ad revenue rate is sufficiently high. Furthermore, we find that a higher ad revenue rate may lead to lower service prices. Consistently across both monopoly and duopoly settings, such price reductions are more severe in the cost-per-thousand-impressions model than in the cost-per-click model. Our findings emphasize the role of advertising revenues in vertical differentiation and offer strategic guidance for monetizing online services. © 2012 M.E. Sharpe, Inc. All rights reserved.link_to_subscribed_fulltex