IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/popmgt/v32y2023i8p2420-2437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer self‐design and brand competition

Author

Listed:
  • Zheyin (Jane) Gu
  • Giri K. Tayi

Abstract

We examine competing brands' incentive to offer a self‐designable package that consumers can modify to ensure fit, in addition to offering a standard, pre‐configured product. While “amateurs” with low self‐design capability prefer a standard, pre‐configured product and can have strong preference for a particular brand, “experts” with high self‐design capability prefer a self‐designable package and tend to be indifferent between competing brands. First, we find that asymmetric equilibrium can arise where only one brand offers a self‐designable package and the other brand offers a standard product only. That is, brands can avoid the lose–lose situation, where both offer the self‐designable package but intensified price competition makes both lose profit. This lose–lose situation can be completely avoided when the two brands offer self‐designable packages that are completely nondifferentiated, but may arise in equilibrium and cause the “prisoner's dilemma” when the packages are slightly differentiated. Second, we show that between two competing brands whose standard products have different attractions, the less powerful brand that offers the less attractive standard product is more likely to be the only provider of the self‐designable package. Finally, we find that consumer surplus can be greater when the more powerful brand is the only provider of the self‐designable package than when the less powerful brand is the only provider.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Giri K. Tayi, 2023. "Consumer self‐design and brand competition," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(8), pages 2420-2437, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:32:y:2023:i:8:p:2420-2437
    DOI: 10.1111/poms.13983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13983
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/poms.13983?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. Amit Pazgal & David Soberman, 2008. "Behavior-Based Discrimination: Is It a Winning Play, and If So, When?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 977-994, 11-12.
    2. V. Krishnan & Saurabh Gupta, 2001. "Appropriateness and Impact of Platform-Based Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 52-68, January.
    3. Aydın Alptekinoğlu & Karthik Ramachandran, 2019. "Flexible Products for Dynamic Preferences," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 28(6), pages 1558-1576, June.
    4. Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Giri K. Tayi, 2015. "Research Note—Investigating Firm Strategies on Offering Consumer-Customizable Products," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 456-468, June.
    5. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Michael Arnold & Chenguang Li & Christine Saliba & Lan Zhang, 2011. "Asymmetric Market Shares, Advertising And Pricing: Equilibrium With An Information Gatekeeper," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 63-84, March.
    7. Niladri B. Syam & Nanda Kumar, 2006. "On Customized Goods, Standard Goods, and Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 525-537, September.
    8. Gaia Rubera, 2015. "Design Innovativeness and Product Sales' Evolution," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 98-115, January.
    9. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    10. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 2000. "Customer Poaching and Brand Switching," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 634-657, Winter.
    11. Eric von Hippel & Ralph Katz, 2002. "Shifting Innovation to Users via Toolkits," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(7), pages 821-833, July.
    12. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    13. Niladri B. Syam & Ranran Ruan & James D. Hess, 2005. "Customized Products: A Competitive Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 569-584, February.
    14. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    15. Ramaswamy, Venkat & Ozcan, Kerimcan, 2018. "What is co-creation? An interactional creation framework and its implications for value creation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 196-205.
    16. Jagmohan S. Raju & V. Srinivasan & Rajiv Lal, 1990. "The Effects of Brand Loyalty on Competitive Price Promotional Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 276-304, March.
    17. Shantanu Bhattacharya & Alok Gupta & Sameer Hasija, 2014. "Joint Product Improvement by Client and Customer Support Center: The Role of Gain-Share Contracts in Coordination," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 137-151, March.
    18. Narasimhan, Chakravarthi, 1988. "Competitive Promotional Strategies," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(4), pages 427-449, October.
    19. Yuxin Chen & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2001. "Individual Marketing with Imperfect Targetability," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 23-41, November.
    20. Von Hippel, Eric A. & Katz, Ralph, 2002. "Shifting Innovation to Users Via Toolkits," Working papers 4232-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    21. Rajiv Dewan & Bing Jing & Abraham Seidmann, 2003. "Product Customization and Price Competition on the Internet," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1055-1070, August.
    22. Maxim Sinitsyn, 2008. "Technical Note--Price Promotions in Asymmetric Duopolies with Heterogeneous Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 2081-2087, December.
    23. Taylor Randall & Christian Terwiesch & Karl T. Ulrich, 2007. "Research Note—User Design of Customized Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 268-280, 03-04.
    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. Neeraj Arora & Xavier Dreze & Anindya Ghose & James Hess & Raghuram Iyengar & Bing Jing & Yogesh Joshi & V. Kumar & Nicholas Lurie & Scott Neslin & S. Sajeesh & Meng Su & Niladri Syam & Jacquelyn Thom, 2008. "Putting one-to-one marketing to work: Personalization, customization, and choice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 305-321, December.
    2. Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "The Perils of Behavior-Based Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 170-186, 01-02.
    3. Fay, Scott & Mitra, Deb & Wang, Qiong, 2009. "Ask or infer? Strategic implications of alternative learning approaches in customization," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 136-152.
    4. Amit Basu & Sreekumar Bhaskaran, 2018. "An Economic Analysis of Customer Co-design," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 787-804, December.
    5. Jost, Peter-J. & Süsser, Theresa, 2020. "Company-customer interaction in mass customization," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    6. Julian Villanueva & Pradeep Bhardwaj & Sridhar Balasubramanian & Yuxin Chen, 2007. "Customer relationship management in competitive environments: The positive implications of a short-term focus," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 99-129, June.
    7. Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Xinxin Li, 2023. "Social Sharing, Public Perception, and Brand Competition in a Horizontally Differentiated Market," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 553-569, June.
    8. Haim Mendelson & Ali K. Parlaktürk, 2008. "Competitive Customization," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 377-390, October.
    9. Didier Laussel & Joana Resende, 2022. "When Is Product Personalization Profit-Enhancing? A Behavior-Based Discrimination Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8872-8888, December.
    10. Van den Broeke, Maud & Paparoidamis, Nicholas, 2021. "Engaging in or escaping co-creation? An analytical model," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    11. Oksana Loginova, 2010. "Brand familiarity and product knowledge in customization," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 297-309, September.
    12. Esteves, Rosa-Branca, 2010. "Pricing with customer recognition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 669-681, November.
    13. Peter-J. Jost, 2024. "Market expansion and the scope of mass customization," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 73-94, March.
    14. Lin, Yuanfang & Pazgal, Amit & Soberman, David A., 2021. "Who is the winner in an industry of innovation?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 50-69.
    15. Didier Laussel & Joana Resende, 2022. "When Is Product Personalization Profit-Enhancing? A Behavior-Based Discrimination Model," Post-Print hal-03740642, HAL.
    16. Niladri B. Syam & Amit Pazgal, 2013. "Co-Creation with Production Externalities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 805-820, September.
    17. Anuj Kumar & Rahul Telang, 2011. "Product Customization and Customer Service Costs: An Empirical Analysis," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 347-360, July.
    18. Niladri B. Syam & Nanda Kumar, 2006. "On Customized Goods, Standard Goods, and Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 525-537, September.
    19. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla, 2016. "The Moderating Role of Submarket Dynamics on the Product Customization–Firm Survival Relationship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 1049-1064, August.
    20. Nan Xia & S. Rajagopalan, 2009. "Standard vs. Custom Products: Variety, Lead Time, and Price Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 887-900, 09-10.

    More about this item

    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:bla:popmgt:v:32:y:2023:i:8:p:2420-2437. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1937-5956 .

    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.