We investigate a monopolist retailer's category management strategy where the main strategic decisions are how to horizontally
position a store brand relative to the incumbent national brands and how to price the store and national brands for retail
category profit maximization. We analyze a market composed of two consumer segments with differing tastes and heterogeneity
with respect to willingness to pay and a product category consisting of two competing national brands and one store brand.
We find that contrary to the existing literature, it is not always optimal for a retailer to position its store brand against
the leading national brand; instead there are many situations where it is best to position the store brand close to the weaker
national brand or to position it in the “middle” so it appeals to both national brands' target segments. In the process we
identify four distinct category management strategies that a retailer can use with a store brand. In three of these the optimal
store brand price is the brand's monopoly price, while in the remaining one strategy the price is lower. We also suggest an
easy to implement means for a retailer to determine which strategy is best to use, depending on the particular competitive
environment present before the introduction of the store brand and the relative quality of the store brand. We find that the
store brand entry is most beneficial to the retailer when the national brands are moderately differentiated. Finally we show
that introducing a store brand not only allows the retailer to garner a higher share of the channel profits through higher
retail margins, but also often provides the retailer the benefit of increases in national brand unit sales as well as incremental
sales from the store brand.
JEL Classification: M310 相似文献
Resource extraction companies worldwide are involved with Indigenous peoples. Historically these interactions have been antagonistic, yet there is a growing public expectation for improved ethical performance of resource industries to engage with Indigenous peoples. (Crawley and Sinclair, Journal of Business Ethics 45, 361–373 (2003)) proposed an ethical model for human resource practices with Indigenous peoples in Australian mining companies. This paper expands on this work by re-framing the discussion within the context of sustainable development, extending it to Canada, and generalizing to other resource industries. We argue that it is unethical to sacrifice the viability of Indigenous cultures for industrial resource extraction; it is ethical to engage with indigenous peoples in a manner consistent with their wishes and needs as they perceive them. We apply these ideas to a case study in the coastal temperate rainforest of Clayoquot Sound, British Columbia, Canada. In this case a scientific panel comprised of Nuu-Chah-Nulth elders, forest scientists and management professionals, achieved full consensus on developing sustainable forest practice standards by drawing equally on Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge and Western science in the context of one of the most heated and protracted environmental conflicts in Canadian history. The resulting sustainable forest practice standards were later adopted by leading forestry firms operating on the coast. Our analysis of this scientific panels success provides the basis for advancing an ethical approach to sustainable development with Indigenous peoples. This ethical approach is applicable to companies working in natural resource industries where the territories of Indigenous peoples are involved.David Lertzman Ph.D. is Adjunct Assistant Professor of Environmental Management and Sustainable Development and Senior Associate with the TransCanada International Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability Studies at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary. He teaches courses on Sustainable Development With Indigenous Peoples at the Graduate and Undergraduate levels, and in the MSc Program in Sustainable Energy Development for Latin America and the Caribbean. Dr. Lertzman also teaches a Wilderness Retreat on Leadership for Sustainable Development in the MBA program. He is a private consultant and has worked in many Indigenous communities, mostly in Western Canada.Harrie Vredenburg Ph.D. is Professor and Suncor Energy Chair in Competitive Strategy and Sustainable Development at the Haskayne School of Business at the University of Calgary where he is also Director of the TransCanada International Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability Studies. He teaches in Haskaynes MBA and PhD programs. He is also Academic Chair of the MSc program in Sustainable Energy Development for Latin America and the Caribbean offered by the Haskayne School of Business at the Quito Ecuador campus of regional partner, the Latin American Energy Organization (OLADE). He regularly teaches in the Latin American program. 相似文献
Purpose: This article aims to integrate consumers into a channel dependence framework and explores the influence of consumers’ brand loyalty and store loyalty on the dependence structure within the supplier–retailer relationship. It also examines effects of the dependence structure on perceived conflict.
Methodology/approach: The authors test the proposed triadic relationship model among department store, supplier, and consumer by collecting matched data from both retailers and consumers in a Chinese retailing channel of sports and leisure apparel. Polynomial regression in conjunction with a response surface analysis (RSA) approach is used to test the hypotheses.
Findings: The results indicate that consumers’ brand loyalty positively affects retailer’s dependence on supplier, while consumers’ store loyalty positively affects supplier’s dependence on retailer. In addition, the retailer’s dependence is higher when consumers’ brand loyalty is higher than store loyalty; the supplier’s dependence is higher when consumers’ store loyalty is higher than brand loyalty; and the retailer’s dependence increases with the increase of both consumers’ brand and store loyalty when consumers’ brand and store loyalty are equal. Moreover, supplier’s dependence has a negative linear effect on retailer’s perceived conflict, whereas retailer’s dependence has an inverted U-shape effect on perceived conflict. A retailer would perceive more conflict when the retailer is relatively more dependent on the supplier; but the symmetrical interdependence has no significant effect on retailer perceived conflict.
Research implications: Researchers are encouraged to explore channel behaviors from a network perspective. Consumers, in particular, should be included in research frameworks related to channel dependence and behaviors. Suggestions for further research on the effects of dependence on the conflict are also proposed.
Originality/value/contribution: This study goes beyond the dyadic paradigm by integrating consumers into the framework of the channel dependence structure. It develops and tests a mechanism of consumers’ brand and store loyalty influencing dependence structure within a supplier–retailer dyad. It also enriches the literature of channel conflict by exploring the effects of retailer and supplier unilateral dependence on retailer perceived conflict with RSA methods.
Practical implications: The article provides several insightful implications for managers in understanding and managing interdependence structure in business-to-business marketing, especially in supplier–retailer relationships. 相似文献