Outsourcing versus technology transfer: Hotelling meets Stackelberg

Pierce, Andrea and Sen, Debapriya (2009): Outsourcing versus technology transfer: Hotelling meets Stackelberg.

Abstract

This paper considers a Hotelling duopoly with two firms A and B in the final good market. Both A and $B$ can produce the required intermediate good, firm B having a lower cost due to a superior technology. We compare two contracts: outsourcing (A orders the intermediate good from B) and technology transfer (B transfers its technology to A). First we show that an outsourcing order acts as a credible commitment on part of A to maintain a certain market share in the final good market. This generates an indirect Stackelberg leadership effect, which is absent in a technology transfer contract. We show that compared to the situation of no contracts, there are always Pareto improving outsourcing contracts but no Pareto improving technology transfer contracts. Finally, it is shown that whenever both firms prefer one of the two contracts, all consumers prefer the other contract.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Outsourcing; Technology transfer; Hotelling duopoly; Stackelberg effect; Pareto improving contracts
• Subjects: L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance > L11 - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure ; Size Distribution of Firms; L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance > L13 - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets; D - Microeconomics > D4 - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design > D43 - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection

References

Anderson, S.P., de Palma, A. and Thisse, J-F. 1992. Discrete Choice Theory of Product Differentiation. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Arya, A., Mittendorf, B. and Sappington, D. 2007. Outsourcing, vertical integration, and price vs. quantity competition. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 26, 1-16.

Baake, P., Oechssler, J. and Schenk, C., 1999. Explaining cross-supplies. Journal of Economics, 70, 37-60.

Chen, Y., Dubey, P. and Sen, D. 2009. Outsourcing induced by strategic competition. MPRA Paper 14899, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Chen, Y., Ishikawa, J. and Yu, Z., 2004. Trade liberalization and strategic outsourcing. Journal of International Economics, 63, 419-436.

Domberger, S., 1998. The Contracting Organization: A Strategic Guide to Outsourcing. Oxford University Press.

Gabszewicz, J.J. and Thisse, J-F. 1992. Location. In: Aumann, R.J. & Hart, S. (Eds), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Vol. 1, North Holland, Amsterdam.

Jarillo, J.C., 1993. Strategic Networks: Creating Borderless Organization. Butterworth-Heinmann.

Kreps, D.M. and Scheinkman, J.A. 1983. Quantity precommitment and Bertrand competition yield Cournot outcomes. Bell Journal of Economics, 14, 326-333.

Mendi, P. 2005. The structure of payments in technology transfer contracts: evidence from Spain. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 14, 403-429.

Nagaoka, S. 2005. Determinants of high-royalty contracts and the impact of stronger protection of intellectual property rights in Japan. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 19, 233-254.

Robinson, M., Kalakota, R. 2004. Offshore Outsourcing: Business Models, ROI and Best Practices, Mivar Press, Inc.

Shy, O. and Stenbacka, R., 2003. Strategic outsourcing. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 50, 203-224.

Vagadia, B. 2007. Outsourcing to India-A Legal Handbook, Springer.

Vishwasrao, S. 2007. Royalties vs. fees: How do firms pay for foreign technology? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25, 741-759.