IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/qmktec/v13y2015i4p359-394.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democracy in product design: Consumer participation and differentiation strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Zsolt Katona

Abstract

An increasing number of firms use social media to allow their customers to vote on new product designs. This paper studies the implications of employing such a democratic product design (DPD). A linear city model is used with random locations to capture uncertainty about consumer preferences and to study strategic forces in monopoly and duopoly settings. The results indicate that a monopolist will use market research to resolve the demand uncertainty, unless DPD provides a cost advantage. In a duopoly, an asymmetric equilibrium emerges with exactly one firm using DPD. Commitment to following consumer votes proves to be a strategic advantage, therefore at least one firm promises not to deviate from the product design consumers voted for. A subtle way to influence the outcome of the vote for firms is to generate product candidates instead of soliciting ideas from consumers. Employing such a tactic allows firms to differentiate and they will be more likely to use DPD. Finally, the paper studies the level of consumer engagement in DPD and shows that a monopolist always benefits from a higher positive engagement and is hurt by negative engagement, although to a lesser extent. The results are reversed for a duopolist as negative sentiments can serve as an additional differentiator. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Zsolt Katona, 2015. "Democracy in product design: Consumer participation and differentiation strategies," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 359-394, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:qmktec:v:13:y:2015:i:4:p:359-394
    DOI: 10.1007/s11129-015-9164-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11129-015-9164-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11129-015-9164-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 1994. "Sleeping with the Enemy: Should Competitors Share the Same Advertising Agency?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 190-202.
    2. Richard D. McKelvey & Richard E. Wendell, 1976. "Voting Equilibria in Multidimensional Choice Spaces," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 144-158, May.
    3. Liang Guo & Ganesh Iyer, 2010. "Information Acquisition and Sharing in a Vertical Relationship," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 483-506, 05-06.
    4. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    5. Raith, Michael, 1996. "A General Model of Information Sharing in Oligopoly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 260-288, October.
    6. Kieron Meagher & Klaus Zauner, 2005. "Location-then-price competition with uncertain consumer tastes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 25(4), pages 799-818, June.
    7. Micael Castanheira, 2003. "Why Vote For Losers?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1207-1238, September.
    8. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    9. Luís M. B. Cabral & Miguel Villas-Boas, 2005. "Bertrand Supertraps," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 599-613, April.
    10. Rath, Kali P. & Zhao, Gongyun, 2001. "Two stage equilibrium and product choice with elastic demand," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(9), pages 1441-1455, November.
    11. John Morgan & Phillip C. Stocken, 2008. "Information Aggregation in Polls," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 864-896, June.
    12. Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "The Perils of Behavior-Based Personalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 170-186, 01-02.
    13. Yuxin Chen & Ganesh Iyer, 2002. "Research Note Consumer Addressability and Customized Pricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 197-208, November.
    14. repec:bla:jemstr:v:1:y:1992:i:3:p:475-505:a is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Esther Gal‐Or & Anthony Dukes, 2003. "Minimum Differentiation in Commercial Media Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 291-325, September.
    16. Meagher, Kieron J. & Zauner, Klaus G., 2004. "Product differentiation and location decisions under demand uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 201-216, August.
    17. Rhee, Byong-Duk, et al, 1992. "Restoring the Principle of Minimum Differentiation in Product Positioning," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(3), pages 475-505, Fall.
    18. Jonathan Levin & Barry Nalebuff, 1995. "An Introduction to Vote-Counting Schemes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 3-26, Winter.
    19. de Palma, A, et al, 1985. "The Principle of Minimum Differentiation Holds under Sufficient Heterogeneity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(4), pages 767-781, July.
    20. repec:ulb:ulbeco:2013/1759 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    22. Ganesh Iyer & David Soberman, 2000. "Markets for Product Modification Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 203-225, February.
    23. d'Aspremont, C & Gabszewicz, Jean Jaskold & Thisse, J-F, 1979. "On Hotelling's "Stability in Competition"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1145-1150, September.
    24. Gordon Tullock, 1959. "Problems of Majority Voting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(6), pages 571-571.
    25. Yuxin Chen & Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2001. "Individual Marketing with Imperfect Targetability," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 23-41, November.
    26. Dominique Olié Lauga & Elie Ofek, 2009. "Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 373-396, 03-04.
    27. Lode Li, 2002. "Information Sharing in a Supply Chain with Horizontal Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1196-1212, September.
    28. Economides, Nicholas, 1986. "Minimal and maximal product differentiation in Hotelling's duopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 67-71.
    29. Unknown, 1986. "Letters," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 1(4), pages 1-9.
    30. Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Spatial Models of Party Competition," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(2), pages 368-377, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeffrey D. Shulman & Zheyin (Jane) Gu, 2024. "Making Inclusive Product Design a Reality: How Company Culture and Research Bias Impact Investment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 73-91, January.
    2. Onesun Steve Yoo & Tingliang Huang & Kenan Arifoğlu, 2021. "A Theoretical Analysis of the Lean Start-up Method," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 395-412, May.

    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. Zsolt Katona, 2015. "Democracy in product design: Consumer participation and differentiation strategies," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 359-394, December.
    2. Buechel, Berno & Roehl, Nils, 2015. "Robust equilibria in location games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(2), pages 505-517.
    3. Matteo Bassi & Marco Pagnozzi & Salvatore Piccolo, 2015. "Product Differentiation by Competing Vertical Hierarchies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 904-933, October.
    4. Aurélie Bonein & Stéphane Turolla, 2023. "Spatial competition with demand uncertainty: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 906-939, October.
    5. Xu Guan & Ying‐Ju Chen, 2016. "Timing of information acquisition in a competitive environment," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(1), pages 3-22, February.
    6. Fournier, Gaëtan & Van Der Straeten, Karine & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2020. "Spatial competition with unit-demand functions," TSE Working Papers 20-1072, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Manfred Stadler, 2019. "Location in a Disk City with Consumer Concentration Around the Center," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 71(1), pages 35-50, February.
    8. Krol Michal, 2011. "On the Existence and Social Optimality of Equilibria in a Hotelling Game with Uncertain Demand and Linear-Quadratic Costs," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-22, March.
    9. Buechel, Berno & Klein, Jan, 2014. "Do Consumers' Preferences Really Matter? - A Note on Spatial Competition with Restricted Strategies," MPRA Paper 55288, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Kerkhof, Anna, 2019. "Advertising and Content Differentiation: Evidence from YouTube," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 204468, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Król, Michał, 2012. "Product differentiation decisions under ambiguous consumer demand and pessimistic expectations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 593-604.
    12. Wei-Shiun Chang & Daniel A. Sanchez-Loor, 2020. "Downstream Information Leaking and Information Sharing Between Partially Informed Retailers," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 733-760, December.
    13. Giat, Yahel, 2019. "A location model for boycotting with an application to kosher certification," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1109-1118.
    14. Carlos Gutiérrez-Hita & Martin Peitz, 2001. "Retailer Locations, Local Supply And Price Policies," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-26, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    15. Choe, Chongwoo & Matsushima, Noriaki & Tremblay, Mark J., 2022. "Behavior-based personalized pricing: When firms can share customer information," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    16. Chongwoo Choe & Noriaki Matsushima & Mark J. Tremblay, 2020. "Behavior-Based Personalized Pricing: When Firms Can Share Customer Information," ISER Discussion Paper 1083, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    17. Lambertini, Luca, 2002. "Equilibrium locations in a spatial model with sequential entry in real time," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 47-58, January.
    18. Aguirre, Inaki & Paz Espinosa, Maria, 2004. "Product differentiation with consumer arbitrage," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 219-239, February.
    19. Jianhu Zhang & Changying Li, 2013. "Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly under demand uncertainty," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 273-289, April.
    20. Bonein, Aurélie & Turolla, Stéphane, 2009. "Sequential location under one-sided demand uncertainty," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 145-159, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Co-creation; Consumer voting; New products; Strategic differentiation; D72; L11; M31;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    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:kap:qmktec:v:13:y:2015:i:4:p:359-394. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.