消费者偏好与企业技术选择

IF 5.9 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS International Journal of Research in Marketing Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2023.06.008
Yi Liu , Pinar Yildirim , Z. John Zhang
{"title":"消费者偏好与企业技术选择","authors":"Yi Liu ,&nbsp;Pinar Yildirim ,&nbsp;Z. John Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.ijresmar.2023.06.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Advances in technology change the way consumers search and shop for products. Emerging is the trend of home-shopping devices such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home, which allow consumers to search or order products. We investigate how consumer brand and technology preferences may interact with the functionalities of technology-enabled shopping (TES) devices to determine the channel structure and market competition.</p><p>In specific, we break the functionalities of the TES devices into two: (1) the shopping support functionality (SSF), and (2) the ordering convenience functionality (OCF). Via a series of experiments, we document that stronger brand preferences are negatively correlated with the willingness to use a TES device that offers SSF. However, there is no association with brand preferences and desire to use a TES device when it offers OCF.</p><p>We build an analytical model integrating the findings from these experiments, and then derive the equilibrium channel and pricing strategies for two competing retailers. Our findings show that the functionality of TES devices results in vastly different distribution and pricing strategies in retail markets. In particular, consumers’ heterogeneous valuation of the SSF results in a monopolistic adoption of TES devices by the retailers in equilibrium, and generates Pareto improvements for both. In contrast, when the TES devices offer OCF, in equilibrium, retailers adopt TES channels competitively, resulting in a prisoners' dilemma outcome. In the extensions, studying a third-party technology developer's decision to invest in OCF and SSF technologies, we show that the contrast between the channel strategies under the OCF and the SSF also impact the incentives to develop TES. We show that in some cases, in an effort to mitigate downstream retail competition, the provider may prefer <em>not</em> to offer the best possible OCF technology to consumers. These findings shed light on the future adoption and the functionalities of shopping technologies offered by retailers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Research in Marketing","volume":"41 1","pages":"Pages 41-55"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consumer preferences and firm technology choice\",\"authors\":\"Yi Liu ,&nbsp;Pinar Yildirim ,&nbsp;Z. John Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijresmar.2023.06.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Advances in technology change the way consumers search and shop for products. Emerging is the trend of home-shopping devices such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home, which allow consumers to search or order products. We investigate how consumer brand and technology preferences may interact with the functionalities of technology-enabled shopping (TES) devices to determine the channel structure and market competition.</p><p>In specific, we break the functionalities of the TES devices into two: (1) the shopping support functionality (SSF), and (2) the ordering convenience functionality (OCF). Via a series of experiments, we document that stronger brand preferences are negatively correlated with the willingness to use a TES device that offers SSF. However, there is no association with brand preferences and desire to use a TES device when it offers OCF.</p><p>We build an analytical model integrating the findings from these experiments, and then derive the equilibrium channel and pricing strategies for two competing retailers. Our findings show that the functionality of TES devices results in vastly different distribution and pricing strategies in retail markets. In particular, consumers’ heterogeneous valuation of the SSF results in a monopolistic adoption of TES devices by the retailers in equilibrium, and generates Pareto improvements for both. In contrast, when the TES devices offer OCF, in equilibrium, retailers adopt TES channels competitively, resulting in a prisoners' dilemma outcome. In the extensions, studying a third-party technology developer's decision to invest in OCF and SSF technologies, we show that the contrast between the channel strategies under the OCF and the SSF also impact the incentives to develop TES. We show that in some cases, in an effort to mitigate downstream retail competition, the provider may prefer <em>not</em> to offer the best possible OCF technology to consumers. These findings shed light on the future adoption and the functionalities of shopping technologies offered by retailers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Research in Marketing\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 41-55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Research in Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811623000447\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Research in Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811623000447","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

技术的进步改变了消费者搜索和选购产品的方式。亚马逊的 Alexa 和 Google Home 等家庭购物设备让消费者可以搜索或订购产品,这种趋势正在兴起。我们研究了消费者的品牌和技术偏好如何与科技购物(TES)设备的功能相互作用,从而决定渠道结构和市场竞争。具体而言,我们将科技购物设备的功能分为两部分:(1)购物支持功能(SSF)和(2)订购便利功能(OCF)。通过一系列实验,我们发现较强的品牌偏好与使用提供购物支持功能的 TES 设备的意愿呈负相关。我们结合这些实验结果建立了一个分析模型,然后推导出两个相互竞争的零售商的均衡渠道和定价策略。我们的研究结果表明,TES 设备的功能导致零售市场的分销和定价策略大相径庭。特别是,消费者对 SSF 的异质性评价导致零售商在均衡情况下垄断性地采用 TES 设备,并为双方带来帕累托改进。相反,当 TES 设备提供 OCF 时,在均衡状态下,零售商会竞争性地采用 TES 渠道,从而导致囚徒困境的结果。在扩展部分,通过研究第三方技术开发商投资 OCF 和 SSF 技术的决策,我们发现 OCF 和 SSF 下渠道策略的对比也会影响开发 TES 的动机。我们发现,在某些情况下,为了缓解下游零售业的竞争,供应商可能宁愿不向消费者提供最好的OCF技术。这些发现为零售商未来采用购物技术及其功能提供了启示。
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
Consumer preferences and firm technology choice

Advances in technology change the way consumers search and shop for products. Emerging is the trend of home-shopping devices such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home, which allow consumers to search or order products. We investigate how consumer brand and technology preferences may interact with the functionalities of technology-enabled shopping (TES) devices to determine the channel structure and market competition.

In specific, we break the functionalities of the TES devices into two: (1) the shopping support functionality (SSF), and (2) the ordering convenience functionality (OCF). Via a series of experiments, we document that stronger brand preferences are negatively correlated with the willingness to use a TES device that offers SSF. However, there is no association with brand preferences and desire to use a TES device when it offers OCF.

We build an analytical model integrating the findings from these experiments, and then derive the equilibrium channel and pricing strategies for two competing retailers. Our findings show that the functionality of TES devices results in vastly different distribution and pricing strategies in retail markets. In particular, consumers’ heterogeneous valuation of the SSF results in a monopolistic adoption of TES devices by the retailers in equilibrium, and generates Pareto improvements for both. In contrast, when the TES devices offer OCF, in equilibrium, retailers adopt TES channels competitively, resulting in a prisoners' dilemma outcome. In the extensions, studying a third-party technology developer's decision to invest in OCF and SSF technologies, we show that the contrast between the channel strategies under the OCF and the SSF also impact the incentives to develop TES. We show that in some cases, in an effort to mitigate downstream retail competition, the provider may prefer not to offer the best possible OCF technology to consumers. These findings shed light on the future adoption and the functionalities of shopping technologies offered by retailers.

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
11.80
自引率
4.30%
发文量
77
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Research in Marketing is an international, double-blind peer-reviewed journal for marketing academics and practitioners. Building on a great tradition of global marketing scholarship, IJRM aims to contribute substantially to the field of marketing research by providing a high-quality medium for the dissemination of new marketing knowledge and methods. Among IJRM targeted audience are marketing scholars, practitioners (e.g., marketing research and consulting professionals) and other interested groups and individuals.
期刊最新文献
Gender and racial price disparities in the NFT marketplace Online reviews: A literature review and roadmap for future research A method for measuring consumer confusion due to lookalike labels Editorial Board Strange Case of Dr. Bidder and Mr. Entrant: Consumer Preference Inconsistencies in Costly Price Offers
×
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