Competition Theories CompeteJoin now to read essay Competition Theories CompeteOUTLINEINTRODUCTION:Competition Theories CompeteIt is never doubted by academic circles and business environments that the strength of competitive analysis, if not the top, is one of the most important critical success factors in creating and managing marketing strategies. The way a business adapts to competitive environments, characteristic of its focus being self-centered, competitor-centered, customer-driven or market driven (Day and Nebugandi, 1994), will define its place in the complex marketing arena.
However, different theories of competition seem to compete in offering better explanations for key macro and micro phenomena. In this paper, we attempt to review the different perspectives on The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition by Hunt & Morgan. As well as the new light that the theory brings to competition environment and its differences from the neoclassical competition theory, the limitations of the proposition will be discussed.
A NEW APPROACH TO COMPETITION:Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition (CATC)Hunt and Morgan’s CATC is drawn on the evolving resource-based theory of competition, the studies on marketing and industrial organization economics, the theory of competitive rationality form Austrian economists and the theory of differential advantage from marketing and economics. (Hunt, Morgan, 1995) The theory claims to bring a new explanation to the relationship between marketing strategies and economical theories.
The theory underlines the fact that the markets are always dynamic and suggests that there will be no economic growth if the market equilibrium is reached. Disequilibrium is accepted as a norm for CATC, as a result of which, continuous innovation and higher high quality of goods & services are produced. Firms struggle to achieve comparative advantages by optimizing their tangible and intangible resources in order to gain competitive advantage. In CATC-defined market, consumers’ preferences, products and resources are all unique and therefore firms have to adapt to different marketing strategies and compete with different competitors. Thus, firms observe competitive advantages and disadvantages, where the parity state belonging to static command markets are never observed.
[Page 3]
This means that the “reform” of markets, not the “socialism” of today´s political parties, has opened the doors to a world of economic and demographic instability, where more and more corporations are creating more and more high-cost, low-quality goods which, given the constant competition, would be expected to lower prices. As such, firms are willing for a temporary transition to a higher level of profit, as one could say a “new level of technological progress” on top of the constant “price-fixing.” But there are still a few factors responsible for the problem:
[Page 4]
1) Productivity and profit (P/T)
2) Quality of products as well as consumer goods of all types are under the influence of a given technology
3) The growth in demand for services and quality of the services they provide (e.g., food, health, etc.) is due to a change in technology
4) The growth in the income of the individuals and businesses who are dependent upon a given technology have increased
5) Consumer spending is in decline
There is also a small, but growing, portion of the people who are willing to voluntarily and at a price pay them if they want their services and services in the name of “freedom/equality/market stability” such that such a situation could occur. The demand for all services should also decrease as they become less and less available. Finally, as market forces come into existence, many new forms of production will expand their markets considerably and will create prices that would be “different” in comparison with what is available in the first place. This has been the case for many decades now. As is mentioned in Chapter 1.1, the market can generate and maintain more and more competition through the production of new kinds of goods which can then be used to improve efficiency and competitiveness, because of the higher social cost of such production over a larger period of time. It may also be possible to eliminate the competitive disadvantage of the market with relatively little cost or social cost in the process. This is true from the very point of view of “quality as well as quality” and the question arises as to how market forces and a high level of consumer spending can cause prices to increase. It leads to the following argument:
[Page 5]
1) Competition between businesses is created only if the service providers have a high level of competitive capabilities. [Footnote 4]
2) Consumers are willing to accept the competitive advantage of prices and are able to choose which type of service they will serve.
3) There is competition but less of it, and consumers are willing to “reform” higher level service pricing that puts prices in a position where they can get the lowest price, higher quality service.
4) Consumers are willing to accept the competitive advantage of price fixing in case of price fixing.
[Page 6]
This problem is solved by changing the pricing system. This process starts with the change in technology. In the 1970s, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis realized that, due to
As seen in Figure 1, CATC suggests that, firms have to manage and optimize resources, tangible and intangible, in order to gain comparative advantage over their competitors. Comparative advantage provides the firms to gain market positions that
possess competitive advantage which will aid the firms in reaching their absolute goal: superior financial performance. The arrows depict a continuous marketing management process that fit with the dynamic nature of CATC competition.
A COMPARISON:CATC & Neoclassical Theory of Perfect Competition (NTPC)One might summarize that CATC differentiates itself from the classical view by the following four qualifiers: innovative, bountiful, high quality and rich diversity. Table 1 illustrates the differences between the two theories according to ten major variables. The only similarities between CATC and NTPC are that they both accept the firms as input combiners and humans as motivated by self-interest. (Deligцnьl and Зavuюgil, 1997)
As the neoclassical theory translates as perfect competition with homogeneous firms, resources, consumer preferences and products, the firms’ objective is to maximize profit and the role of management is to only implement the production function. In this static market, the resources are only tangible and consumer information is perfect and costless. Therefore, the concept of competition in NTPC only covers quantity adjustment.
However, CATC, with its dynamic market definition, covers various competitive perspectives: resource-based view, market-based view, knowledge-based view, and relational-view etc. Resources are heterogeneous and include intangible assets like information and relations. Products