Why firms should care for consumers: Complementary goods

Ohnishi, Kazuhiro (2023): Why firms should care for consumers: Complementary goods.

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a business approach that cares about social and environmental issues, and customer orientation (CO) is a business strategy that centres on the needs and wishes of customers in all decision-making. This paper examines two games of Cournot duopoly where two profit-maximizing firms produce complementary goods. The first game is that both firms consider the surplus of all consumers (CSR) as corporate culture, and the second game is that both firms care only for their own customers (CO). This paper presents the respective optimal levels of CSR and CO. Furthermore, the paper shows that all the profits in these optimal levels are equal.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Complementary goods; Consumer surplus; Cournot model; Customer surplus
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games; D - Microeconomics > D2 - Production and Organizations > D21 - Firm Behavior: Theory

References

Baron, D. P., 2001. Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy. Journal of Economic Management and Strategy 10, 7-45.

Baron, D. P., 2008. Managerial contracting and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Public Economics 92, 268-288.

Besley, T., Ghatak, M., 2007. Retailing public goods: The economics of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Public Economics 91, 1645-1663.

Cracau, D., 2015. The effect of strategic firm objectives on competition. In: Ohnishi, K. (Ed.), Firms' Strategic Decisions: Theoretical and Empirical Findings, Volume 1 (pp. 170-181). Sharjah, UAE: Bentham Science Publishers.

Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., Serafeim, G., 2014. The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management Science 60, 2835-2857.

Fanti, L., Buccella, D., 2016. Network externalities and corporate social responsibility. Economics Bulletin 36, 2043-2050.

Fanti, L., Buccella, D., 2018a. Profitability of corporate social responsibility in network industries. International Review of Economics 65, 271-289.

Fanti, L., Buccella, D., 2018b. Corporate Social Responsibility and Managerial Bonus Systems. Italian Economic Journal 4, 349-365.

Flammer, C., 2015. Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach. Management Science 61, 2549-2568.

Flores, D., García, A., 2016. On the output and welfare effects of a non-profit firm in a mixed duopoly: A generalization. Economic Systems 40, 631-637.

García, A., Leal, M., Lee, S.-H., 2019. Endogenous timing with a socially responsible firm. Korean Economic Review 35, 345-370.

Goering, G. E., 2007. The strategic use of managerial incentives in a non-profit firm mixed duopoly. Managerial and Decision Economics 28, 83-91.

Goering, G. E., 2008. Socially concerned firms and the provision of durable goods. Economic Modelling 25, 575-583.

Han, L., 2019. Partial ownership for a public firm and corporate social responsibility. Theoretical Economics Letters 9, 2447-2455.

Kitzmueller, M., Shimshack, J., 2012. Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economic Literature 50, 51-84.

Kohli, A. K., Jaworski, B. J., 1990. Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing 54, 1-18.

Königstein, M., Müller, W., 2001. Why firms should care for customers. Economics Letters 72, 47-52.

Kopel, M., 2015. Price and quantity contracts in a mixed duopoly with a socially concerned firm. Managerial and Decision Economics 36, 559-566.

Kopel, M., Brand, B., 2012. Socially responsible firms and endogenous choice of strategic incentives. Economic Modelling 29, 982-989.

Kopel, M., Lamantia, F., Szidarovszky, F., 2014. Evolutionary competition in a mixed market with socially concerned firms. Journal of Economic Dynamic & Control 48, 394-409.

KPMG, 2015. Currents of change: KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2015. KPMG International Cooperative. Retrieved from http://www.kpmg.com/cn/en/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/pages/kpmg-survey-of-corporate-responsibility-reporting-2015-o-201511.aspx

Lambertini, L., Tampieri, A., 2012. Corporate social responsibility and firms’ ability to collude. In: Boubaker, S., Nguyen, D. K. (Eds.), Board Directors and Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 167-178). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Manasakis, C., Mitrokostas, E., Petrakis, E., 2014. Strategic corporate social responsibility activities and corporate governance in imperfectly competitive markets. Managerial and Decision Economics 35, 460-473.

Matsumura, T., Ogawa, A., 2016. Corporate social responsibility and endogenous competition structure. Economics Bulletin 36, 2117-2127.

Nakamura, Y., 2013. Quantity competition and price competition with a duopoly in a consumer-friendly firm: A welfare analysis. Modern Economy 4, 776-782.

Ohnishi, K., 2003. A model of a price-setting duopoly with a wage-rise contract. Australian Economic Papers 42, 149-157.

Ohnishi, K., 2022. Wage-rise contract and mixed Cournot duopoly competition with profit-maximizing and socially concerned firms. Journal of Business and Economic Analysis 5, 139-148.

Ouattara, K. S., 2017. Strategic privatization in a mixed duopoly with a socially responsible firm. Economics Bulletin 37, 2067-2075.

Planer-Friedrich, L., Sahm, M., 2018. Why firms should care for all consumers. Economics Bulletin 38, 1603-1612.

Wang, X., Wang, L. F. S., 2022. Corporate social responsibility, vertical product differentiation, and privatization policy. Japanese Economic Review 73, 403-425.

Xu, Y., 2014. CSR impact on hospital duopoly with price and quality competition. Journal of Applied Mathematics 2014, 152060.