This paper’s purpose is to evaluate an overview on input sources on the innovation process and effects of the innovation process as innovation outputs in the hotel industry as a supporting tool for hotel management. The paper defines current different influences and effects of innovation in hotel industry and future modern approaches in the hotel innovation management. It analyses the role of innovation knowledge among the hotel managers in Slovenia. The paper provides a better knowledge of hospitality innovation, especially of the influences and effects of innovation in hotel industry in general and it presents the evaluation report of hotel managers in Slovenia about influences on and effects of innovation process from literature and it gives particular reference to modern approaches (such as open innovation) about upcoming trends in innovation activities in hotel industry.
{"title":"Evaluation of the Innovation Influences and Effects in Hotel Industry","authors":"Nataša Arti�?","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2860078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2860078","url":null,"abstract":"This paper’s purpose is to evaluate an overview on input sources on the innovation process and effects of the innovation process as innovation outputs in the hotel industry as a supporting tool for hotel management. The paper defines current different influences and effects of innovation in hotel industry and future modern approaches in the hotel innovation management. It analyses the role of innovation knowledge among the hotel managers in Slovenia. The paper provides a better knowledge of hospitality innovation, especially of the influences and effects of innovation in hotel industry in general and it presents the evaluation report of hotel managers in Slovenia about influences on and effects of innovation process from literature and it gives particular reference to modern approaches (such as open innovation) about upcoming trends in innovation activities in hotel industry.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90460419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Crypto currencies like Bitcoin are gaining prominence as a medium of exchange. They have several benefits like very low transaction cost, fungibility etc. But Crypto currencies are also identified with their use in crimes, illegal activities and speculation. Part of the reason for their prominence as well as notoriety is the fact that they have no Sovereign Backing whatsoever and also because they are decentralized. To make Crypto currencies acceptable by the people and also curb their misuse, the authors have proposed a protocol containing a set of standards and procedures. By using this procedure, any nation can create its own Sovereign Backed crypto currency called NationCoin. A commission will be established which will hold a certain quantum of money loaned by the Government. This loaned money will provide the Sovereign backing to the Crypto Currency. A Controlled Block Chain Protocol is used. The Genesis Block of several NationCoins is then provided to the banks in the country to use them for interbank settlements. These Interbank transactions will lead to the mining (generation) of additional NationCoins by the commission which will hold it without releasing it to the public. Once there are sufficient numbers of NationCoins so as to be equal to the loaned amount unit-for-unit, it shall be released to the public for use.
{"title":"The K-Y Protocol: The First Protocol for the Regulation of Crypto Currencies (E.G.-Bitcoin)","authors":"Kartik Hegadekatti, Yatish S G","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2735267","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2735267","url":null,"abstract":"Crypto currencies like Bitcoin are gaining prominence as a medium of exchange. \u0000They have several benefits like very low transaction cost, fungibility etc. But Crypto \u0000currencies are also identified with their use in crimes, illegal activities and speculation. Part \u0000of the reason for their prominence as well as notoriety is the fact that they have no \u0000Sovereign Backing whatsoever and also because they are decentralized. To make Crypto \u0000currencies acceptable by the people and also curb their misuse, the authors have proposed \u0000a protocol containing a set of standards and procedures. By using this procedure, any nation \u0000can create its own Sovereign Backed crypto currency called NationCoin. A commission will \u0000be established which will hold a certain quantum of money loaned by the Government. This \u0000loaned money will provide the Sovereign backing to the Crypto Currency. A Controlled Block \u0000Chain Protocol is used. The Genesis Block of several NationCoins is then provided to the \u0000banks in the country to use them for interbank settlements. These Interbank transactions \u0000will lead to the mining (generation) of additional NationCoins by the commission which will \u0000hold it without releasing it to the public. Once there are sufficient numbers of NationCoins \u0000so as to be equal to the loaned amount unit-for-unit, it shall be released to the public for \u0000use.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89468029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The term social innovation has become popular as an umbrella concept describing an array of social programs and initiatives deserving attention. Unfortunately, this flurry of social innovation activity has, as of yet, not led to the development of a comprehensive theory of social innovation. This is a critical missing step if our aim is to enact public and private policies to develop, stimulate, and maximize social innovation. Tellingly, we have yet to agree on a definition: there is no unified sense of what social innovation is and what is it not. Without a clearer idea of cause and effects in social innovation, it will remain difficult to develop desirable interventions and scale them up. This paper is a first step to close this gap; our aim is to offer a theoretical framework which can easily be used in practice. We start by proposing a new definition of social innovation, characterizing it as a process encompassing the emergence and adoption of socially creative strategies, which reconfigure social relations in order to actualize a given social goal. This definition offers several advantages. First, by defining social innovation as a process aiming to bring about social change we avoid two main deficiencies of current definitions. First, we do not tautologically define social innovation as its own outcome. Second, we refrain from making it normative, which is important because we can easily envision a successful implementation of a social creative strategy that aims to improve social conditions and has successfully brought significant social chance, only to find that the outcome leaves the target population worse off. A second advantage of defining social innovation as a process is that it enables us to easily delineate between the main actors, their institutional environment, and the interactions between them. This foundational framework will enable researchers to develop hypotheses and test them while simultaneously providing a basis for policy makers to develop policies rooted in an understanding of cause and effect, analysis of bottlenecks, and a deepened appreciation as to where policy can or cannot have a positive impact. Our framework is built so as to integrate several components of existing research on social innovation, extending their utility for both research and practice. The socially creative strategy is a key reactant in the process of social innovation; the invention of a socially creative strategy initiates social innovation, yet the transformation of a socially creative strategy occurs throughout the social innovation process. While a socially creative strategy may not, for a variety of reasons, complete the social innovation process by arriving at the end state of adoption, a completed social innovation process will always result in social change. This outcome occurs due to the interaction of the two driving forces of social innovation. We call these driving forces of social innovation the agentic engine and the structural
{"title":"Toward a Theory of Social Innovation","authors":"Kristen Pue, Christian Vandergeest, Dan Breznitz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2701477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2701477","url":null,"abstract":"The term social innovation has become popular as an umbrella concept describing an array of social programs and initiatives deserving attention. Unfortunately, this flurry of social innovation activity has, as of yet, not led to the development of a comprehensive theory of social innovation. This is a critical missing step if our aim is to enact public and private policies to develop, stimulate, and maximize social innovation. Tellingly, we have yet to agree on a definition: there is no unified sense of what social innovation is and what is it not. Without a clearer idea of cause and effects in social innovation, it will remain difficult to develop desirable interventions and scale them up. This paper is a first step to close this gap; our aim is to offer a theoretical framework which can easily be used in practice. We start by proposing a new definition of social innovation, characterizing it as a process encompassing the emergence and adoption of socially creative strategies, which reconfigure social relations in order to actualize a given social goal. This definition offers several advantages. First, by defining social innovation as a process aiming to bring about social change we avoid two main deficiencies of current definitions. First, we do not tautologically define social innovation as its own outcome. Second, we refrain from making it normative, which is important because we can easily envision a successful implementation of a social creative strategy that aims to improve social conditions and has successfully brought significant social chance, only to find that the outcome leaves the target population worse off. A second advantage of defining social innovation as a process is that it enables us to easily delineate between the main actors, their institutional environment, and the interactions between them. This foundational framework will enable researchers to develop hypotheses and test them while simultaneously providing a basis for policy makers to develop policies rooted in an understanding of cause and effect, analysis of bottlenecks, and a deepened appreciation as to where policy can or cannot have a positive impact. Our framework is built so as to integrate several components of existing research on social innovation, extending their utility for both research and practice. The socially creative strategy is a key reactant in the process of social innovation; the invention of a socially creative strategy initiates social innovation, yet the transformation of a socially creative strategy occurs throughout the social innovation process. While a socially creative strategy may not, for a variety of reasons, complete the social innovation process by arriving at the end state of adoption, a completed social innovation process will always result in social change. This outcome occurs due to the interaction of the two driving forces of social innovation. We call these driving forces of social innovation the agentic engine and the structural ","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"317 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76354255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
U. Dholakia, Vikas Mittal, Kyuhong Han, Ankur Dayal
We report results for the Midstream Oil & Gas sector from the Strategy and Performance in the Energy Industry (SCOPE) Survey conducted among professionals in the energy industry (so called “insiders”) to measure their perceptions about specific companies on multiple dimensions of strategic performance. The study includes nine of the most prominent midstream oil & gas companies: 1) Buckeye Partners, 2) Enbridge Energy Partners, 3) Enterprise Products Partners, 4) Genesis Energy, 5) Kinder Morgan, 6) Plains All American Pipeline, 7) Spectra Energy, 8) Sunoco, and 9) Targa Resources. This report includes analysis based on a total of 828 individual company evaluations provided by 665 O&G industry insiders. Using indexed scores, we report the relative performance of the nine companies on ten different dimensions of strategic performance: leadership and strategy, financial management, customer focus, corporate social responsibility, innovation, human resources, safety, global focus, crisis handling, and vendor satisfaction. The results of each company’s overall reputation among O&G industry insiders are also reported.
我们从能源行业战略与绩效(SCOPE)调查中报告中游油气行业的结果，该调查对能源行业的专业人士(所谓的“内部人士”)进行了调查，以衡量他们对特定公司战略绩效的多个维度的看法。该研究包括九家最著名的中游油气公司:1)Buckeye Partners, 2) Enbridge Energy Partners, 3) Enterprise Products Partners, 4) Genesis Energy, 5) Kinder Morgan, 6) Plains All American Pipeline, 7) Spectra Energy, 8) Sunoco和9)Targa Resources。该报告基于665名油气行业内部人士提供的828份个别公司评估进行了分析。使用索引分数，我们报告了九家公司在十个不同战略绩效维度上的相对表现:领导力和战略、财务管理、客户关注、企业社会责任、创新、人力资源、安全、全球关注、危机处理和供应商满意度。每家公司在油气行业内部的整体声誉结果也被报告。
{"title":"Results from the Integrated Oil & Gas Sector: The 2015 Strategy and Corporate Performance in the Energy Industry (SCOPE) Study","authors":"U. Dholakia, Vikas Mittal, Kyuhong Han, Ankur Dayal","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2697673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2697673","url":null,"abstract":"We report results for the Midstream Oil & Gas sector from the Strategy and Performance in the Energy Industry (SCOPE) Survey conducted among professionals in the energy industry (so called “insiders”) to measure their perceptions about specific companies on multiple dimensions of strategic performance. The study includes nine of the most prominent midstream oil & gas companies: 1) Buckeye Partners, 2) Enbridge Energy Partners, 3) Enterprise Products Partners, 4) Genesis Energy, 5) Kinder Morgan, 6) Plains All American Pipeline, 7) Spectra Energy, 8) Sunoco, and 9) Targa Resources. This report includes analysis based on a total of 828 individual company evaluations provided by 665 O&G industry insiders. Using indexed scores, we report the relative performance of the nine companies on ten different dimensions of strategic performance: leadership and strategy, financial management, customer focus, corporate social responsibility, innovation, human resources, safety, global focus, crisis handling, and vendor satisfaction. The results of each company’s overall reputation among O&G industry insiders are also reported.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82126152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stronger trade secrets law affects patenting in conflicting ways. It raises the return to commercialization and increases the exploitation of inventions, and so, increases patenting. However, for each particular invention, businesses may substitute secrecy for patents. Here, I exploit differences in the timing of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) in U.S. states and the impact on manufacturers with different geographic distribution of R&D to study the effect of stronger trade secrets law on patenting. The UTSA was associated with 19.5 percent fewer patents in complex technology industries but no significant effect in discrete technology industries. Further, the UTSA was associated with relatively greater reduction of patenting of larger inventions, among larger companies which are technology laggards, and in less competitive industries.
{"title":"Secrecy and Patents: Theory and Evidence from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act","authors":"I. Png","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2617266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2617266","url":null,"abstract":"Stronger trade secrets law affects patenting in conflicting ways. It raises the return to commercialization and increases the exploitation of inventions, and so, increases patenting. However, for each particular invention, businesses may substitute secrecy for patents. Here, I exploit differences in the timing of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) in U.S. states and the impact on manufacturers with different geographic distribution of R&D to study the effect of stronger trade secrets law on patenting. The UTSA was associated with 19.5 percent fewer patents in complex technology industries but no significant effect in discrete technology industries. Further, the UTSA was associated with relatively greater reduction of patenting of larger inventions, among larger companies which are technology laggards, and in less competitive industries.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"131 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79627375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper provides evidence on the migration from an “old” technology to a “new” technology, taking into account the impact that regulatory interventions on the old one might have on the incentives to invest and adopt the new one. This analysis has been applied to a sample of EU27 countries using panel data from 2004 to 2014 on the adoption, coverage and take-up rate of ultra-fast broadband infrastructures, whose development is one of the flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 programmes. Results show that a 1% increase in the regulated price to access the old technology increases the adoption and the investment on the new broadband technology by ~0.45% and ~0.47%. These effects are not homogeneous across countries and are weakened in Eastern European countries, where the existing old broadband infrastructures are less developed than in the rest of Europe. It has also been shown that the access price to old networks negatively affects the take-up rate of the new technology-based services, thus calling for the need of more specific and complementary demand side policy incentives to enhance service adoption
{"title":"How to Fill the Digital Gap? The (Limited) Role of Regulation","authors":"Wolfgang Briglauer, C. Cambini, Sauro Melani","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2712308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2712308","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides evidence on the migration from an “old” technology to a “new” technology, taking into account the impact that regulatory interventions on the old one might have on the incentives to invest and adopt the new one. This analysis has been applied to a sample of EU27 countries using panel data from 2004 to 2014 on the adoption, coverage and take-up rate of ultra-fast broadband infrastructures, whose development is one of the flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 programmes. Results show that a 1% increase in the regulated price to access the old technology increases the adoption and the investment on the new broadband technology by ~0.45% and ~0.47%. These effects are not homogeneous across countries and are weakened in Eastern European countries, where the existing old broadband infrastructures are less developed than in the rest of Europe. It has also been shown that the access price to old networks negatively affects the take-up rate of the new technology-based services, thus calling for the need of more specific and complementary demand side policy incentives to enhance service adoption","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"613 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80429749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Innovation – the development of new products and services as well as the application of new technologies – is widely assumed to be an important strategy for securing or improving competitiveness, growth and welfare. Usually, it is expected that rising competitiveness leads to positive effects on employment, particularly through product innovation. Comparing the innovation activity in the sectors of the Austrian economy which is covered by the European innovation survey CIS in the period 2008-2010 with the employment trends in the years of recovery from the crisis in 2009 until 2012 shows that the situation at sector level is more diverse. Regarding product innovation, the sector-level correlation analysis tends to confirm the often stated positive relation between product innovation and employment growth, but there is also a considerable number of opposite cases. Interestingly, there is almost no difference between general product innovations and products which are new to the market. Regarding the employment effects of process innovation, the group of sectors where there is a relation between process innovation and a reduction of employment and the group where such a relation cannot be found are of similar size. However, the results look very different when focusing on explicitly labour saving process innovations. Here the group of sectors with a negative relation between innovation intensity and employment growth is considerably bigger than in the case of process innovation in general.
{"title":"Are Micro-Analyses of Employment Effects of Innovation Too Optimistic? A Sector-Level Analysis of the Austrian Economy between 2008 and 2012","authors":"A. Kaufmann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2693630","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2693630","url":null,"abstract":"Innovation – the development of new products and services as well as the application of new technologies – is widely assumed to be an important strategy for securing or improving competitiveness, growth and welfare. Usually, it is expected that rising competitiveness leads to positive effects on employment, particularly through product innovation. Comparing the innovation activity in the sectors of the Austrian economy which is covered by the European innovation survey CIS in the period 2008-2010 with the employment trends in the years of recovery from the crisis in 2009 until 2012 shows that the situation at sector level is more diverse. Regarding product innovation, the sector-level correlation analysis tends to confirm the often stated positive relation between product innovation and employment growth, but there is also a considerable number of opposite cases. Interestingly, there is almost no difference between general product innovations and products which are new to the market. Regarding the employment effects of process innovation, the group of sectors where there is a relation between process innovation and a reduction of employment and the group where such a relation cannot be found are of similar size. However, the results look very different when focusing on explicitly labour saving process innovations. Here the group of sectors with a negative relation between innovation intensity and employment growth is considerably bigger than in the case of process innovation in general.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77819938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The modern digital economy is characterized by high data volumes and the necessity for reliable high speed data exchange. Businesses such as Netflix, providing video on-demand, social and messaging networks that enable text, photo and video communications such as WhatsApp, Snapchat and YouTube, location based mobile applications such as Foursquare, cloud computing providers such as Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure, or search providers such as Google and Microsoft Bing all rely on high performance data transmission and data exchange between their own networks and the networks used to reach their customers or partners in order to provide services. The same is true for other industries e.g. high frequency trading that relies on an extremely fast exchange of trading data from stock exchanges to traders or brokers and online advertising which relies on high speed exchange of data from content and service providers such as search engines and publishers to advertising platforms. High speed and high quality data exchange between the networks of different companies can be technically achieved by direct physical connections via fibre optic or copper cables over short distances between the servers of two networks. Such physical connections are referred to as Direct Circuit Interconnections or Cross-Connects and take place in Interconnection Data Centers (IDCs). Enabling high-performance interconnection through Cross-Connects is the core value adding service offered by the IDC industry. Cross-Connect services are related to but distinct from the services of Internet Exchanges (“IXs”). IXs offer interconnection not via dedicated physical cables between two networks, but via a Network Switch that operates as an open exchange platform where many networks can simultaneously interconnect to many others. While interconnection via such a Network Switch has cost advantages when an organisation seeks interconnection with many networks, each of which generates only limited traffic, it cannot provide the same performance in data exchange in terms of quality of service (“QoS”) and security as Cross-Connects. The IDC industry provides essential infrastructure and services to organisations seeking to interconnect their networks and computing resources. The availability of high quality IDC services in sufficient quantities and on competitive terms is critical to the present and future increasingly interconnected digital economy. Interconnection is required to deliver digital content and applications and a large number of other services to users across Europe and the world. Given the importance of the IDC industry, this paper takes a closer look at the economic features of the industry that affect the dynamics and functioning of IDC markets. The paper discusses (horizontal) competition between IDC providers within the same IDC market and analyzes the (vertical) relationship between the IDC market and the IX market.
{"title":"Economics of the Interconnection Data Centre (IDC) Industry","authors":"F. Maier-Rigaud, Christopher Milde, André Selke","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2680186","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2680186","url":null,"abstract":"The modern digital economy is characterized by high data volumes and the necessity for reliable high speed data exchange. Businesses such as Netflix, providing video on-demand, social and messaging networks that enable text, photo and video communications such as WhatsApp, Snapchat and YouTube, location based mobile applications such as Foursquare, cloud computing providers such as Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure, or search providers such as Google and Microsoft Bing all rely on high performance data transmission and data exchange between their own networks and the networks used to reach their customers or partners in order to provide services. The same is true for other industries e.g. high frequency trading that relies on an extremely fast exchange of trading data from stock exchanges to traders or brokers and online advertising which relies on high speed exchange of data from content and service providers such as search engines and publishers to advertising platforms. High speed and high quality data exchange between the networks of different companies can be technically achieved by direct physical connections via fibre optic or copper cables over short distances between the servers of two networks. Such physical connections are referred to as Direct Circuit Interconnections or Cross-Connects and take place in Interconnection Data Centers (IDCs). Enabling high-performance interconnection through Cross-Connects is the core value adding service offered by the IDC industry. Cross-Connect services are related to but distinct from the services of Internet Exchanges (“IXs”). IXs offer interconnection not via dedicated physical cables between two networks, but via a Network Switch that operates as an open exchange platform where many networks can simultaneously interconnect to many others. While interconnection via such a Network Switch has cost advantages when an organisation seeks interconnection with many networks, each of which generates only limited traffic, it cannot provide the same performance in data exchange in terms of quality of service (“QoS”) and security as Cross-Connects. The IDC industry provides essential infrastructure and services to organisations seeking to interconnect their networks and computing resources. The availability of high quality IDC services in sufficient quantities and on competitive terms is critical to the present and future increasingly interconnected digital economy. Interconnection is required to deliver digital content and applications and a large number of other services to users across Europe and the world. Given the importance of the IDC industry, this paper takes a closer look at the economic features of the industry that affect the dynamics and functioning of IDC markets. The paper discusses (horizontal) competition between IDC providers within the same IDC market and analyzes the (vertical) relationship between the IDC market and the IX market.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85883810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cisco is an internet pioneer in partnering, value creation to face technological change. Cisco has partnered with a who is who of companies including Apple, Google and delivered their dreams as well as consumer dreams in a smart and sustainable way. The internet is also famous for many millions of content makers, billions of internet of things and promoting the digital enterprise for thousands of companies, all possible due to large scale promotion of dreaming in the planet.
{"title":"Cisco, Chief Dreamer, Internet Revolution","authors":"S. Rajan","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2675450","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2675450","url":null,"abstract":"Cisco is an internet pioneer in partnering, value creation to face technological change. Cisco has partnered with a who is who of companies including Apple, Google and delivered their dreams as well as consumer dreams in a smart and sustainable way. The internet is also famous for many millions of content makers, billions of internet of things and promoting the digital enterprise for thousands of companies, all possible due to large scale promotion of dreaming in the planet.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73191730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Original design manufacturers (ODM) is a new form of global outsourcing. Traditional outsourcing only transfers the production of a product from brands to manufacturers. An ODM, in contrast, not only manufactures the product for a brand, but also designs the product. Using an analytical model, we investigate strategic design outsourcing decisions of firms. Two firms competing in a horizontally differentiated market decide whether to design the products by themselves or to outsource product design to an ODM. We consider two different channel structures – one in which each firm partners with an exclusive ODM and the other in which both firms partner with a common ODM. We find that both symmetric and asymmetric outsourcing outcomes can arise in the equilibrium, even though competing firms are assumed to be completely symmetric. Surprisingly, firms’ outsourcing incentive can be inversely related to the cost of designing a product, i.e., neither firm outsources product design when the cost is high, one firm outsources product design and the other insources when the cost is in an intermediate range, and both firms outsource product design when the cost is low. We also find that firms are more likely to outsource product design when there is a common ODM in the channel than when there are exclusive ODMs.
{"title":"Product Design Outsourcing in Competitive Markets","authors":"Kangkang Wang, Chunhua Wu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2693939","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2693939","url":null,"abstract":"Original design manufacturers (ODM) is a new form of global outsourcing. Traditional outsourcing only transfers the production of a product from brands to manufacturers. An ODM, in contrast, not only manufactures the product for a brand, but also designs the product. Using an analytical model, we investigate strategic design outsourcing decisions of firms. Two firms competing in a horizontally differentiated market decide whether to design the products by themselves or to outsource product design to an ODM. We consider two different channel structures – one in which each firm partners with an exclusive ODM and the other in which both firms partner with a common ODM. We find that both symmetric and asymmetric outsourcing outcomes can arise in the equilibrium, even though competing firms are assumed to be completely symmetric. Surprisingly, firms’ outsourcing incentive can be inversely related to the cost of designing a product, i.e., neither firm outsources product design when the cost is high, one firm outsources product design and the other insources when the cost is in an intermediate range, and both firms outsource product design when the cost is low. We also find that firms are more likely to outsource product design when there is a common ODM in the channel than when there are exclusive ODMs.","PeriodicalId":11062,"journal":{"name":"Development of Innovation eJournal","volume":"133 4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79621419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：