赢家通吃还是竞争共存?平台所有者与补充者之间的合作竞争关系研究

IF 1.9 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Chinese Management Studies Pub Date : 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1108/cms-03-2023-0102
Lijuan Pei
{"title":"赢家通吃还是竞争共存?平台所有者与补充者之间的合作竞争关系研究","authors":"Lijuan Pei","doi":"10.1108/cms-03-2023-0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The purpose of this study is to explore the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors in complementary product markets. Drawing on the coopetition theory, the authors examined the evolutionary trends of the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors and explore the main influence factors.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The authors used Lotka–Volterra model to analyze the coopetition relationship between platform owners and complementors, including the evolutionary trends as well as the results. Considering the feasibility of sample data collection, simulation is used to verify the effects of different factors on the evolution of coopetition relationships.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The results show that there are four possible results of the competition in the complementary products market. That comprises “winner-take-all for platform owners,” “winner-take-all for complementors,” “stable competitive coexistence” and “unstable competitive coexistence,” where “stable competitive coexistence” is the optimal evolutionary state. Moreover, the results of competitive evolution are determined by innovation subjects’ interaction parameters. However, the natural growth rate, the initial market benefits of the two innovators and the overall benefits of the complementary product markets influence the time to reach a steady state.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>The study provides new insights into the entry of platform owners into complementary markets, and the findings highlight the fact that in complementary product markets, platform owners and complementors should seek “competitive coexistence” rather than “winner-takes-all.” Moreover, the authors also enrich the coopetition theory by revealing the core factors that influence the evolution of coopetition relationships, which further enhance the analysis of the evolutionary process of coopetition relationships.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":51675,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Management Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Winner-takes-all or competitive coexistence? Research on the co-opetition relationships between platform owners and complementors\",\"authors\":\"Lijuan Pei\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/cms-03-2023-0102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The purpose of this study is to explore the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors in complementary product markets. Drawing on the coopetition theory, the authors examined the evolutionary trends of the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors and explore the main influence factors.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>The authors used Lotka–Volterra model to analyze the coopetition relationship between platform owners and complementors, including the evolutionary trends as well as the results. Considering the feasibility of sample data collection, simulation is used to verify the effects of different factors on the evolution of coopetition relationships.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The results show that there are four possible results of the competition in the complementary products market. That comprises “winner-take-all for platform owners,” “winner-take-all for complementors,” “stable competitive coexistence” and “unstable competitive coexistence,” where “stable competitive coexistence” is the optimal evolutionary state. Moreover, the results of competitive evolution are determined by innovation subjects’ interaction parameters. However, the natural growth rate, the initial market benefits of the two innovators and the overall benefits of the complementary product markets influence the time to reach a steady state.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>The study provides new insights into the entry of platform owners into complementary markets, and the findings highlight the fact that in complementary product markets, platform owners and complementors should seek “competitive coexistence” rather than “winner-takes-all.” Moreover, the authors also enrich the coopetition theory by revealing the core factors that influence the evolution of coopetition relationships, which further enhance the analysis of the evolutionary process of coopetition relationships.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":51675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese Management Studies\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese Management Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-03-2023-0102\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-03-2023-0102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究旨在探讨互补产品市场中平台所有者与互补者之间的合作竞争关系。作者借鉴合作竞争理论,研究了平台所有者与互补者之间合作竞争关系的演变趋势,并探讨了主要影响因素。设计/方法/途径作者使用 Lotka-Volterra 模型分析了平台所有者与互补者之间的合作竞争关系,包括演变趋势和结果。考虑到样本数据收集的可行性,作者采用了模拟的方法来验证不同因素对合作竞争关系演变的影响。结果表明,互补产品市场的竞争存在四种可能结果,即 "平台所有者赢者通吃"、"互补者赢者通吃"、"稳定竞争共存 "和 "不稳定竞争共存",其中 "稳定竞争共存 "是最优的演化状态。此外,竞争进化的结果由创新主体的交互参数决定。然而,自然增长率、两个创新主体的初始市场利益以及互补产品市场的整体利益都会影响达到稳定状态的时间。原创性/价值该研究为平台所有者进入互补市场提供了新的见解,研究结果强调了在互补产品市场中,平台所有者和互补者应寻求 "竞争共存 "而非 "赢家通吃"。此外,作者还通过揭示影响合作竞争关系演变的核心因素丰富了合作竞争理论,进一步加强了对合作竞争关系演变过程的分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Winner-takes-all or competitive coexistence? Research on the co-opetition relationships between platform owners and complementors

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to explore the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors in complementary product markets. Drawing on the coopetition theory, the authors examined the evolutionary trends of the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors and explore the main influence factors.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors used Lotka–Volterra model to analyze the coopetition relationship between platform owners and complementors, including the evolutionary trends as well as the results. Considering the feasibility of sample data collection, simulation is used to verify the effects of different factors on the evolution of coopetition relationships.

Findings

The results show that there are four possible results of the competition in the complementary products market. That comprises “winner-take-all for platform owners,” “winner-take-all for complementors,” “stable competitive coexistence” and “unstable competitive coexistence,” where “stable competitive coexistence” is the optimal evolutionary state. Moreover, the results of competitive evolution are determined by innovation subjects’ interaction parameters. However, the natural growth rate, the initial market benefits of the two innovators and the overall benefits of the complementary product markets influence the time to reach a steady state.

Originality/value

The study provides new insights into the entry of platform owners into complementary markets, and the findings highlight the fact that in complementary product markets, platform owners and complementors should seek “competitive coexistence” rather than “winner-takes-all.” Moreover, the authors also enrich the coopetition theory by revealing the core factors that influence the evolution of coopetition relationships, which further enhance the analysis of the evolutionary process of coopetition relationships.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
13.60%
发文量
63
期刊最新文献
Voluntary overqualification: conceptualization, scale development and validation Friend or foe in the eyes of the beholder? How and when LMX increases and decreases workplace ostracism Cautious or confident? Directors’ and officers’ liability insurance and enterprise strategic change: a model of mediating effect and joint moderating effects Does perceived overqualification lead to cyberloafing? A moderated-mediation model based on social cognitive theory How can firms achieve sustainable high growth? A case study based on the integrating orchestration of digital elements and traditional resources
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1