Flexible capacity strategy in an asymmetric oligopoly market with competition and demand uncertainty
Flexible capacity strategy in an asymmetric oligopoly market with competition and demand uncertainty
复制标题
具有竞争和需求不确定性的不对称寡头垄断市场中的灵活产能策略
DOI：
10.1002/nav.21736
复制
发表时间：
2017-03
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Ni Yaodong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yang Liu;Ng Chi To;Ni Yaodong
研究了需求不确定条件下寡头竞争下的柔性容量策略问题。每一个公司都采用了框架战略框架或不灵活的能力战略（化安战略框架）。灵活的企业可以推迟生产，直到观察到实际的需求，而不灵活的企业不能。我们建立了一个新的非对称寡头垄断模型，并得到了纳什均衡时厂商的产能和产量决策。有趣的是，验证跨组竞争决定了两组公司之间的能力分配，而组间竞争决定了每个组内的市场份额。此外，我们表明，这两种战略共存的企业只有当成本差异是中等。与直觉相反，当非柔性竞争强度足够高时，柔性企业从增加的生产成本中获益。这是因为不灵活的企业撤退，灵活性效应，以及相应的高价格。我们确定的条件下，FCS上级IFCS。我们还表明，灵活的公司受益于需求的不确定性增加。然而，当需求差异不是很大时，柔性企业可能处于不利地位。我们进一步研究了跨群体和群体间竞争对企业个体绩效的影响。我们发现，随着柔性竞争强度的增加，非柔性企业主要受到跨集团竞争的影响，然后是集团间竞争，而柔性企业主要受到集团间竞争的影响。最后，我们研究了内生灵活性，并确定了其三个驱动因素：成本参数，跨集团竞争和集团间竞争。© 2017 Wiley Periodicals，Inc.海军研究后勤64：117-138，2017
This article studies flexible capacity strategy (FCS) under oligopoly competition with uncertain demand. Each firm utilizes either the FCS or inflexible capacity strategy (IFCS). Flexible firms can postpone their productions until observing the actual demand, whereas inflexible firms cannot. We formulate a new asymmetrical oligopoly model for the problem, and obtain capacity and production decisions of the firms at Nash equilibrium. It is interesting to verify that cross‐group competition determines the capacity allocation between the two groups of firms, while intergroup competition determines the market share within each group. Moreover, we show that the two strategies coexist among firms only when cost differentiation is medium. Counterintuitively, flexible firms benefit from increasing production cost when the inflexible competition intensity is sufficiently high. This is because of retreat of inflexible firms, flexibility effect, and the corresponding high price. We identify conditions under which FCS is superior than IFCS. We also demonstrate that flexible firms benefit from increasing demand uncertainty. However, when demand variance is not very large, flexible firms may be disadvantaged. We further investigate the effects of cross‐group and intergroup competition on individual performance of the firms. We show that as flexible competition intensity increases, inflexible firms are mainly affected by the cross‐group competition first and then by the intergroup competition, whereas flexible firms are mainly affected by the intergroup competition. Finally, we examine endogenous flexibility and identify its three drivers: cost parameters, cross‐group competition, and intergroup competition. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics 64: 117–138, 2017
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1287/mnsc.47.4.512.9829
发表时间：
2001-04
期刊：
Manag. Sci.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Yossi Aviv;A. Federgruen
通讯作者：
Yossi Aviv;A. Federgruen
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2004-04
期刊：
Supply Chain Management Review
影响因子：
--
作者：
P. Matthews;N. Syed
通讯作者：
P. Matthews;N. Syed
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-35950-7_16746-1
发表时间：
2019-03
期刊：
CCSP (ISC)2 Certified Cloud Security Professional Official Study Guide, 2nd Edition
影响因子：
--
作者：
Christian Terwiesch;Gérard P. Cachon
通讯作者：
Christian Terwiesch;Gérard P. Cachon
DOI：
10.1287/mnsc.1080.0940
发表时间：
2008-11
期刊：
Manag. Sci.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Ravi Anupindi;Li Jiang
通讯作者：
Ravi Anupindi;Li Jiang
DOI：
10.1287/opre.49.4.578.11229
发表时间：
2001-07
期刊：
Oper. Res.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Yossi Aviv;A. Federgruen
通讯作者：
Yossi Aviv;A. Federgruen