Search results

This paper aims to underscore how the digitization of content and the convergence in the telecommunications sector has prompted a wave of consolidation between telecom and content players.

Using interdisciplinary insights from competition policy and business strategy, the paper draws attention to the interplay between business model innovation and merger control in the converged telecoms sector.

Technological innovation and business model innovation led to the emergence of over-the-top (OTT) services. This innovation in turn led to two key effects, first, successful commercialization of content and the emergence of the “smart pipes” that in turn has led to the second effect, which is increased mergers and acquisitions (M&As) in the converged telecommunications sector. Emergence of OTT with big data as a key advantage challenged the strategy and business models of the more established players, such as the AT&T, Time Warner, Liberty Global and Fox, which in turn led to the current trend of M&As in the sector.

This paper makes the following key contributions to the literature on M&As between the fixed/mobile and content players. First, it elucidates how the existing market players can benefit from competition policy, such as merger remedies to enter new and related markets. Second, it advocates that the US and the European competition authorities while assessing these M&As, take due account of innovation in business models, as business model innovation not only promotes innovation in the market but also enhances consumer welfare, considering that it offers the merged firm economies of scale and scope to offer better-quality goods and services at subsidized prices.

The purpose of this paper is to show that fixed‐mobile convergence (FMC) has gathered much interest in the telecommunications industry lately. Integrated operators (who own both fixed and mobile networks), are keen to exploit FMC benefits in order to save costs and generate new revenues. This paper aims to analyze the effects of converged network and service environment on the business of existing telecommunication operators.

After an introduction to the regulatory, market, and technology related issues of convergence, the authors focus on analyzing the role of FMC technologies and services in their businesses of an integrated operator with existing fixed and mobile operations in a large Western European country.

Results reveal that an integrated operator can benefit from cost savings, customer retention and prevent revenue erosion by migrating to FMC.

This paper examines the effects of fixed‐mobile convergence to an integrated operator.

Identifies the fixed/mobile communications convergence phenomenon, which characterizes the telecommunications market technologically and commercially, and analyses the regulatory consequences of convergence. Pinpoints the task of the regulator as being to be simultaneously defending the interests of the consumer and the industry. Concludes regulation should exceed its current tripartite role to enable the policy to be carried out.

This paper seeks to propose a technology classification model for mobile content and service delivery platforms (MCSDPs), the core of mobile middleware technology providers' (MMTPs) value proposition.

The proposed model is grounded on existing literature and empirical research consisting of 40 in‐depth case studies with MMTPs and 102 semi‐structured interviews with top management from firms operating in the mobile content environment that already own or are interested in purchasing a MCSDP. Theoretical sampling was employed. The quality function deployment (QFD) technique was used to create the final technology classification schema.

The MCSDP technology classification model has three components: a MCSDP functional architecture, which describes platform structure in terms of its endowment of functionalities and capabilities; a MCSD classification schema, which allows the identification of a set of platform categories classified according to the range of functionalities usually possessed; and a technology classification schema consisting of a set of technology dimensions that directly influence platform efficiency and effectiveness.

The proposed model can be used for mapping existing and future MCSDP offer in terms of technological strengths and weaknesses and thus support decision‐making by platform vendors and buyers.

The main contribution is the creation of a reference framework capable of rigorously modelling the emergent phenomenon related to the rise of middleware platform providers within the mobile content environment. The paper also contributes to extending the existing QFD literature, since it demonstrates the house of quality tool's usefulness in a new context of application.

This paper aims to provide a first overview of important implications of payment models for next‐generation mobile service platforms (NextGen MSPs).

The starting point of the paper is an existing set of mobile payment models. These models are modified and expanded on in order to be able to highlight implications for NextGen MSPs.

The paper identifies two different types of payment models for mobile environments: carrier centric models and payment service provider (PSP)‐centric models. Instantiations of both categories are already being applied, although not necessarily always in the mobile environment. Both types come with a number of advantages as well as disadvantages. This paper argues that combining different models or introducing intermediaries yields solutions that satisfy the requirements of NextGen MSPs for offering a compelling value proposition to their users.

This paper is the first to analyse the suitability of existing mobile payment models in the specific context of NextGen MSPs. It also proposes alternative models that provide a better fit with the potential business models for such platforms.

In order to achieve a desirable level of market efficiency, regulators need to identify the strategic groups within an industry and understand the way the constituent groups relate to one another. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

In the current study, factors that may lead to strategic group formation were developed and used as clustering variables in a k-means cluster statistical analysis to categorize the firms into strategic groups. The factors used are entry costs, timing of entry, technology type and scope of operations. In addition, the number and type of competitive actions employed by the firms in the industry were identified by structured content analysis of a public source. The competitive actions were used to examine the dynamics of the resulting groups within the context of competitive behavior, resource and scope commitments and corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions. In addition, χ2 analysis was employed to ascertain the likelihood that actions of a firm will be responded to by firms from the same group or from outside the group.

License fees was found to be the most significant clustering variable. The study also showed that groups with significantly higher license fees carried out considerably more competitive actions, had higher resource and scope commitments and executed more CSR actions. In addition, the study revealed significantly more competition within strategic groups than between groups.

The absence of financial records for firms in the sample necessitated the use of CSR activity as a measure of firm performance. Some empirical studies have shown strong links between CSR and firm performance.

The study revealed high mobility barriers which prevent ease of movement of firms in the industry from one strategic group to the other. Therefore regulators who wish to promote competition must do so by identifying the strategic groups with significant market power and permitting entry not by lowering entry barriers but by allowing the entry of firms with proven resources similar to the firms in those groups and to stipulate similar commitments in entry conditions. The results also offer management practitioners an insight into competitive behavior in the industry.

The study utilized a unique data set (competitive actions of firms in the Nigerian Telecommunications industry as reported in the media) in contributing to empirical studies on competitive dynamics and strategic group literature.

This study aims to recognize the growing importance of Open Innovation (OI) theory and practice in the broader fields of Management and Information Systems, and focuse on the relationship existing between OI and a firm’s Business Strategy. Hence, the study aims at investigating the multifaceted OI – Strategy nexus at a business level, assessing how OI initiatives influence Strategy within the Mobile Telecommunications Industry and thus contributing to framing and classifying such inherent relationship.

A data-driven research approach is used, based on 45 qualitative interviews on firms operating in the Mobile Industry and involved in OI initiatives.

Six cross-themes the OI–Strategy relationship in the Mobile Industry revolves around are identified, i.e. OI and Competitive Advantage; OI and Strategic Positioning; OI and Business Models; OI in Networks; OI and Co-opetition; and OI and Resilient Business Advantages. For each theme, examples from the sample of interviewed Mobile firms are organized and reported. The key managerial issues emerging in the attempt to relate OI initiatives and the firm’s overarching Strategy are also underscored and organized in three streams, namely, designing an open business model; achieving competitive advantage through value capture; and nurturing OI as a dynamic capability.

The proposed reorganization of real-world OI and strategic initiatives in the Mobile Industry, together with the underscoring of key managerial issues, constitutes a comprehensive research agenda or roadmap, with value for both academics and practitioners.

This paper seeks to support and extend other scholars’ examinations of the evolution of technological modularity, vertical specialization and the concepts of the drivers of change in the basis of competition through an analysis of the evolution of the mobile phone industry.

A two‐year research project was undertaken and in‐depth interviews took place with managers at companies that were responsible for developing the value chain approaches of their firms. Companies were identified from the existing body of literature, observation and personal contact. Additionally, data were collected from developing case studies.

The paper finds that the mobile phone industry value chain is in the process of deconstructing towards more horizontally stratified structures for some device segments. But, unlike the PC industry, an industry which many analysts suggest provides a precedent for likely evolution of the mobile phone value chain, this trend will not be uniform or consistent across different product types. This will require mobile phone manufacturers to adapt their organizational structures and value chain approaches accordingly, and to rethink the basis for future competitive advantage.

As the research is based on interviews with a limited number of firms within the extended mobile handset industry value chain, it cannot be suggested that the impact of trends identified has equal impact for all firms.

Mobile handset vendors should learn from the PC industry and make sure that their future strategies are not made simply on the basis of cost optimization or speed to market.

The paper fulfils an identified need to understand how industry structures are evolving in one of the most dynamic sectors in the world.

The initial debate on mobile commerce (m‐commerce) was characterized by a high level of optimism, followed by a more nuanced and realistic approach. Still, m‐commerce is expected to constitute a significant future market worldwide. It is a new concept and is emerging in a context of few or no established norms, rules and standards. This article explores the move toward global rules and strategies for m‐commerce and the creation of a viable marketplace. In particular, it focuses on the relationship between initiatives to elaborate a coordinated strategy for m‐commerce in line with European regulatory requirements, on the one hand, and ambitions to promote technology and build global alliances in the world marketplace, on the other. These objectives, however, are often difficult to combine due to the variation in preferences among the corporate and standards organizations involved as a result of global competition and corporate activities in information and communications technology markets.