1 / 18

Topic 8: Strategic Use of Standards and lock-in

Topic 8: Strategic Use of Standards and lock-in. A. The new phenomenon New concepts: compatibility & installed base Stories, stories, stories B. Understanding lock-in to an installed base Strategic use of… C. Understanding standards Development of communities around….

brooklyn
Download Presentation

Topic 8: Strategic Use of Standards and lock-in

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Topic 8: Strategic Use of Standards and lock-in • A. The new phenomenon • New concepts: compatibility & installed base • Stories, stories, stories • B. Understanding lock-in to an installed base • Strategic use of… • C. Understanding standards • Development of communities around… Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  2. A. Mix and match markets give rise to new paradigm • The emergence of consumer/business electronics & issues over dominant design for interconnection • Compete as a full-service firm • Compete as a component manufacturer • Stereo equipment, recording formats • The strategic manipulation of interconnection • Telephones hand-sets, fax machines • What frameworks understand these occurrences? • Lock-in to an installed base • Standardization of inter-operability Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  3. A. Phenomenon arising in M&M markets that motivate closer look • Splintering of key standards • Unix operating systems, 56K • Some formats “launch” while others stall • DVD, Laser disk, HDTV (?) • “Wrong” (?) standard shapes conduct/performance • QWERTY; DOS/Apple/Windows • Orphaning investment • CP/M, Beta, 8-track • Fight for control of installed base • Netscape, Java, Real Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  4. B. The new language of lock-in:Endemic to information goods • Different ways of generating installed base of users who all face similar switching cost • Mostly linking past behavior to present situation • Contractual commitments • Length of time, exit clauses • What else? • Durable purchases and investments • It is still there and still useful • Brand-specific investments or training • User habit or memory Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  5. B. More new language of lock-in:Endemic to information goods • Conversion of databases • Calendars, accounts receivables • Why is this so hard? • Specialized supplier with unique service • Lack of user choice • Search costs • Long processes w/technically complex goods • Loyalty programs & accumulated use • Frequent flier programs are the canonical examples • What else? Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  6. B. New language: managing installed base & compatibility • Installed base as a valuable asset • Selling complementary products/upgrades (cross-selling) • Selling access to those customers (e.g., to advertisers) • E.g., The portal approach (but just because people come to the site, doesn’t mean the eyeballs look at the ads) • Installed base as a constraint on strategy • De facto (Intel) or mandated (FCC)standard? • The optimal time to abandon the installed base? • Example: Windows3.1  Windows95, It cost a ton to embed the DOS window. Why did they bother??? Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  7. B. Starting installed base is hard • And hard to stop (due to lock-in), once started. • And valuable to seller  users should get price break early • During the early phases concerns about orphaning • The fear of locking into wrong focal point & losing it all • Example: 8-track tapes, beta titles • When more than one party needs lock-in  possible Chicken/egg dilemmas • Someone has to move first, but everyone is wary • Not valuable unless all parties “join same club” or coordinate on same point of lock-in • Example: 56K modem standards for first year (there were competing consortium) Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  8. B. McAfee Associates, prototype for the new business model • Solve chicken/egg problems using all means • By giving it away • Users voluntarily lock-in • There simply is not room for many duplicates • Advantages to being early, being known • Source of sustainable competitive advantage? Updates. • Charge for the upgrade (but not much) • Stay near/ahead of nearest competitor • Do not appear to exploit position of lock-in • Limits to the value-chain put limits on McAfee revenue Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  9. C. Standardization as an answer to chicken/egg • Establishing focal point when installed base is growing • What determines a focal point? Types of actions/events • Attention: E.g., Buzz at COMDEX • Celebrity/authority/history: E.g, The cult of Linus Torvald • Endorsement: E.g., ITU settling the 56K fight • Sponsorship: E.g., IBM/Microsoft inviting in complementors • Mandates: E.g., FCC endorsement of color TV standard • Why focal points sometimes work or fail • Getting everyone to coordinate against orphaning • Expectations may become self-fulfilling & self-reinforcing • Beware fleeting foundations. . . E.g., the death of CP/M, 8-track tape, the shallowness of Lotus 123 loyalty, etc… Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  10. C. Standardization as strategy • Standards fights b/w almost “equal” alternatives • Develop own network around standard & diminish other • E.g., 56k, ISP preferences v. consumer brand recognition • Use FUD to slow down rival’s focal point • Exaggerated importance of small events, earning reports, mkt share, ratings in magazines, & assessment of the “big mo” • Enormous firm energy spent on such activity. • It can set expectations: Ignore at your peril • Old v. new sometimes looks like chicken/egg problem • Coordinating move off old “inferior” norm, e.g., metric system? • But often has more to it, because migrating old installed base becomes central strategic focus for all firms (more below). • Need to understand role of ownership first Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  11. C. To own or not to own, that is the question • What is actually owned? • The discretion to change the standard • Right to see those changes before others do • Choosing proprietary standards as a commitment • To after-sale service – e.g., own revenue tied to it (The IBM model for large systems) • To guide development: Windows & APIs, developer tools • Choosing non-proprietary standards as a commitment • Not to manipulate the standard for selfish gain • To give all complementors same technical innovation easily • E.g., 3-COM, Ethernet adopted by an IEEE committee • Open source variant: for “communal” benefit (??) Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  12. C. Economic communities grow around standards. Why? • B/c market will support few standards/platforms • R&D by firms, by users is platform/standard-specific • Commercialization expenses are sunk assets, fear orphaning • Usually cheaper to make platform valuable for many users • The inexorable accumulation of a wide scope of features • Result: “Standard bundles” emerge & resist change • The platform is “compatible” across apps • A limitation: moving further from technical frontiers • E.g., The IBM system 370 adopted enough of the frontier to keep many old users from switching to new standards • E.g., The persistence of DOS’s useful & market life, even though the technical frontier had moved far beyond it Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  13. C. The birth of new communities • The supporters for the old will resist • Usually profitable to sell to late majority • Old community will try to expand scope for new use • Old standard supporters will try to migrate it to new use • New uses/users tends to support new platforms • a capability that escapes grasp/scope of old platform • Examples: VAX 11-780, the PC, the TCP/IP browser • Divided technical leadership encourages birth of new • many firms on the frontier  who’s in charge of next leap? • entry from unexpected areas • Example: The putsch against IBM 386 Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  14. C. The role of migration in developing communities • Easy migration enables orphaning of old • E.g., 78  33.3 & 45, bridges & players w/multiple speeds • Helpful but not sufficient: E.g., Why DVD but not Videodisk? • Strategy: Dominant firms resist migration • In anticipation will try to lock users into proprietary format • E.g., IBM and EBCDIC/ASCII • Standard stealing, if you can (e.g., Excel v Lotus 123) • How to grow a new community off the old • Leverage strength in one area, grow community later (IBM PC) • Entry into complements, grow the community later (Netscape) Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  15. C. Standard strategy recently • The long shadow of the IBM PC  Intel, MS & Cisco? • Competing: Technical frontier as strategic enabler • Add new capabilities • Render rivals’ capabilities obsolete • Extend proprietary features • Long run platform always in shadows (e.g., MS v. everyone) • Competing and cooperating at same time • Everyone needs interoperability, but how is it controlled? • Failed recent attempts at growing new communities • Fat clients/thin servers vs thin clients/fat servers & all that • Radical change, but no way to get from here to there. Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  16. C. Microsoft & Windows, prototype for the new model? • Develop unique assets that have value • Use trade secrets, IP & any other strategy to keep proprietary information about standards out of public domain • Accept public standards of value to users & try to layer on top • Nurture a community of complementors • Encourage w/developer tools & other support • Discourage complementors from other platforms • Achieve market share thresholds (30%, 60%) • Be a fast-second for assets of value to community • “Identify market leader, emulate the market leader, steal the vision, provide a migration path” • “Integrate, leverage and erode” Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  17. Why lock-in & standardization complicates analysis • Forecasting diffusion: Getting over the “chasm” linked to chicken/egg dilemmas • Videodisk, DVD, 56k • Migrating old users with old/new platform leaders • Forecasting industry evolution: Dominant design linked to installed base • Orphaning of installed base a concern: CP/M, • Strategies for Imitator/innovator: Imitate a component or an entire system? • Or capture value by develop assets that enable bargaining power? Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

  18. Learning points • “Lock-in” has many dimensions • Installed base, coordination problems, orphaning, difficulty growing • Standardization as a basis for strategy • Coordination, chicken/egg, migration • The birth of communities around standards • The rise of standard bundles, fight for control • Most known examples mix several elements • Stories, stories, stories Standards and lock-in, M&S 463

More Related