IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qmw/qmwecw/412.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coordination on Formal vs. de facto Standards: A Dynamic Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Belleflamme

    (Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London)

Abstract

Formal standards arise out of deliberations of standards-writing organizations, while de facto standards result from unfettered market processes. Therefore, the formers are of a higher quality and legitimacy, but are slower to develop than the latters. To address this trade-off, we analyze a dynamic game where two players choose between one evolving formal standard and one mature de facto standard. The outcome of the game relies on the coordination mechanism used by the players, on the relative value they attach to successful coordination, and on the formal standard's performance at the end of the game.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Belleflamme, 2000. "Coordination on Formal vs. de facto Standards: A Dynamic Approach," Working Papers 412, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:qmw:qmwecw:412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.qmul.ac.uk/sef/media/econ/research/workingpapers/2000/items/wp412.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. Harsanyi John C., 1995. "A New Theory of Equilibrium Selection for Games with Incomplete Information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 318-332, August.
    3. Cabrales, Antonio & Garcia-Fontes, Walter & Motta, Massimo, 2000. "Risk dominance selects the leader: An experimental analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 137-162, January.
    4. Swann, Peter & Shurmer, Mark, 1994. "The emergence of standards in PC software: who would benefit from institutional intervention?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 295-318, December.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 235-252, Summer.
    6. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    7. Martin Weiss & Carl Cargill, 1992. "Consortia in the standards development process," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(8), pages 559-565, September.
    8. Russell Cooper & Douglas V. DeJong & Robert Forsythe & Thomas W. Ross, 1992. "Communication in Coordination Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 739-771.
    9. Cooper, Russell & Douglas V. DeJong & Robert Forsythe & Thomas W. Ross, 1993. "Forward Induction in the Battle-of-the-Sexes Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1303-1316, December.
    10. Foray, Dominique, 1994. "Users, standards and the economics of coalitions and committees," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 269-293, December.
    11. Goerke, Laszlo & Holler, Manfred J, 1995. "Voting on Standardization: Reply," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 84(1-2), pages 185-186, July.
    12. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    13. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    14. William Lehr, 1992. "Standardization: Understanding the process," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(8), pages 550-555, September.
    15. Shane M. Greenstein, 1992. "Invisible hands and visible advisors: An economic interpretation of standardization," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(8), pages 538-549, September.
    16. David, Paul A & Shurmer, Mark, 1996. "Formal standards-setting for global telecommunications and information services. Towards an institutional regime transformation?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 789-815, December.
    17. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    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. Hong Jiang & Shukuan Zhao & Kaiqi Yin & Yue Yuan & Zhuming Bi, 2014. "An Analogical Induction Approach to Technology Standardization and Technology Development," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 366-382, May.
    2. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    3. Teubner, Lisa K. & Henkel, Joachim & Bekkers, Rudi, 2021. "Industry consortia in mobile telecommunications standards setting: Purpose, organization and diversity," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3).
    4. Hu, Yefei & Liu, Dayong, 2022. "Government as a non-financial participant in innovation: How standardization led by government promotes regional innovation performance in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    6. Gamarra, Yanis & Friedl, Gunther, 2022. "Firms' Involvement in Standardization and Average Total Costs per Patent Family," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265630, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    7. Rainer Alt, 2022. "Electronic Markets on AI and standardization," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 1795-1805, December.
    8. Hong Jiang & Shukuan Zhao & Zhi Li & Yong Chen, 2016. "Interaction between technology standardization and technology development: a coupling effect study," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 229-243, September.
    9. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    10. Gauch, Stephan & Blind, Knut, 2015. "Technological convergence and the absorptive capacity of standardisation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 236-249.
    11. Gamarra, Yanis Luca & Friedl, Gunther, 2023. "Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).

    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. Ewald Scherm & Christian Maaß, 2006. "Zum Stellenwert der Netzwerkökonomik in der Strategie-/Marketingforschung —Eine Analyse empirischer Untersuchungen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 27-46, March.
    2. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    3. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    4. Belleflamme, Paul, 1998. "Adoption of network technologies in oligopolies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 415-444, July.
    5. Frank Borowicz & Ewald Scherm, 2001. "Standardisierungsstrategien: Eine erweiterte Betrachtung des Wettbewerbs auf Netzeffektmärkten," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 391-416, June.
    6. van de Kaa, Geerten & Janssen, Marijn & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Standards battles for business-to-government data exchange: Identifying success factors for standard dominance using the Best Worst Method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 182-189.
    7. Kerstan, Sven & Kretschmer, Tobias & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2012. "The dynamics of pre-market standardization," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 105-119.
    8. G. Kaa & M. J. Greeven, 2017. "Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 181-192, May.
    9. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    10. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Collusive Investments in Technological Compatibility: Lessons from U.S. Railroads in the Late 19th Century," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5683-5700, December.
    11. Vitor Trindade & Johannes Moenius, 2007. "Networks, Standards and Intellectual Property Rights," Working Papers 0705, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    12. Netsanet Haile & Jorn Altmann, 2013. "Estimating the Value Obtained from Using a Software Service Platform," TEMEP Discussion Papers 2013105, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Aug 2013.
    13. Conrad, Klaus, 2004. "Network effects, Compatibility and the Environment : The Case of Hydrogen Powered Cars," Discussion Papers 613, Institut fuer Volkswirtschaftslehre und Statistik, Abteilung fuer Volkswirtschaftslehre.
    14. Navarro, Noemí, 2012. "Price and quality decisions under network effects," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 263-270.
    15. Ingo Hofacker, 2000. "Unternehmensnetzwerke zur Durchsetzung eines Standards," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 52(7), pages 643-660, November.
    16. Klaus CONRAD, 2005. "Price Competition and Product Differentiation when Goods have Network Effects," Industrial Organization 0502002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Kretschmer, Tobias & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2006. "Co-opetition and prelaunch in standard-setting for developing technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19843, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Laura Baraldi, 2004. "Esternalita' Di Rete: Una Rassegna," Working Papers 12_2004, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    19. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Torremans, H., 1998. "Organizational structure in process-based organizations," Research Memorandum 005, Maastricht University, Netherlands Institute of Business Organization and Strategy Research (NIBOR).
    20. Johansson, Magnus & Kärreman, Matts & Foukaki, Amalia, 2019. "Research and development resources, coopetitive performance and cooperation: The case of standardization in 3GPP, 2004–2013," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Standardization; Negotiation; Bandwagon;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    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:qmw:qmwecw:412. 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: Nicholas Owen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deqmwuk.html .

    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.