Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly

Dominique  Lauga; Elie  Ofek

Article | Marketing Science | March – April 2009

Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly

by Dominique Lauga and Elie Ofek

Abstract

We model a duopoly in which ex-ante identical firms must decide where to direct their innovation efforts. The firms face market uncertainty about consumers' preferences for innovation on two product attributes and technology uncertainty about the success of their R&D investments. Firms can conduct costly market research before setting R&D strategy. We find that the value of market information to a firm depends on whether its rival is expected to obtain this information in equilibrium. Consequently, one firm may forgo market research even though its rival conducts such research and learns the true state of demand. We examine both vertical and horizontal demand structures. With vertical preferences, firms are a priori uncertain which attribute all consumers will value more. In this case, a firm that conducts market research always attempts innovation on the attribute it discovers that consumers prefer and expends more on R&D than a rival that has not conducted market research. With horizontal preferences, distinct segments exist—each caring about innovation on only one attribute—and firms are a priori uncertain how many consumers each segment contains. In this case, a firm that conducts market research may follow a "niche" strategy and attempt innovation to serve the smaller segment to avoid intense price competition for the larger segment. A firm that conducts market research may therefore invest less in R&D and earn lower post-launch profits than a rival that has forgone such research.

Keywords: Profit; Innovation and Management; Demand and Consumers; Duopoly and Oligopoly; Research and Development; Competitive Strategy;

Format: Print

24 pages

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Lauga, Dominique, and Elie Ofek. "Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly." Marketing Science 28, no. 2 (March–April 2009): 373–396.

Since its launch in 1998 as “the Amazon.com of DVDs,” Netflix had evolved from a DVD rental company to a video streaming platform and producer of original films and television shows. As the company matured, it regularly increased prices and adjusted its product offerings while continuing to add new subscribers. However, between late 2019 and mid-2020, competition within the streaming industry intensified with the launch of new entrants such as Disney+, Apple TV+, and HBO Max, jeopardizing Netflix’s position as the industry leader. In spite of the heightened competition in the streaming industry, some analysts and customer willingness-to-pay surveys suggested that Netflix had the opportunity to implement another rate hike in the near future. By May 2020, Netflix must decide whether to increase prices again, or whether it should consider a different pricing model altogether.

Case | HBS Case Collection | July 2020

Pattern Brands

Sunil Gupta, Elie Ofek and Julia Kelley

In March 2020, direct-to-consumer (DTC) company Pattern Brands needed to decide how to allocate resources across its different brands. Pattern Co-Founders Nick Ling and Emmett Shine hoped to avoid the pitfalls faced by some DTC companies—such as inability to scale and lack of competitive differentiation—by relying on their previous experience running a successful branding and marketing agency. Rather than focusing on a single brand, they conceived Pattern as a “DTC 2.0” model—a portfolio of 5 to 10 brands that shared a common theme of activities related to the home and a common mission of helping millennials enjoy daily life. Since its founding in August 2019, Pattern had launched cookware brand Equal Parts and home organization brand Open Spaces. Although Pattern’s team still believed strongly in the benefits of a multi-brand strategy, Open Spaces’ sales and unit economics had significantly outperformed Equal Parts’ to date. Pattern’s leadership wanted to build on Open Spaces’ early momentum with new product colors and product lines, but they debated whether to act on the results of a recent customer survey indicating a positive response to an Equal Parts product redesign. Ling and Shine now had several decisions to consider. How should they allocate resources between repositioning Equal Parts and continuing to grow Open Spaces? How and when should they continue building Pattern’s portfolio by developing a third brand? How much should they invest in marketing parent brand Pattern? More broadly, did Pattern’s model represent the future of DTC brands?

Keywords: Brands and Branding; Marketing Channels; Marketing Strategy; Product Marketing; Product Launch; Product Positioning; Business Model; Business Startups; Growth and Development Strategy; Demand and Consumers; Business Strategy; Diversification; Competitive Advantage; Consumer Products Industry; Retail Industry; North and Central America; United States; New York (city, NY); New York (state, US);

Citation:

Gupta, Sunil, Elie Ofek, and Julia Kelley. "Pattern Brands." Harvard Business School Case 521-009, July 2020. View Details

Cite View Details Educators

The digital revolution has allowed companies to amass considerable amounts of data on their customers. Using this information to generate actionable insights is fast becoming a critical skill that firms must master if they wish to effectively compete and win in today’s data-driven marketplace. This note explains the value of examining customer metrics, such as retention rate, revenues, and social influence (k-factor), on an ongoing basis by conducting a cohort analysis. Such an analysis segments customers using one or more criteria, and tracks the behavior and performance of each of these segments over time. Using several instructive examples, the presentation highlights the benefits of running a cohort analysis for deriving a deep understanding of customer trends. Moreover, the examples expose the pitfalls that arise from not accounting for segment characteristics (such as when a customer joined, from what media vehicle they were acquired, how heavily they use the product, etc.) and not paying attention to the evolution of customer metrics over time. The implications of conducting a cohort analysis for firm strategy and for determining customer lifetime value (CLV) are discussed.

Faculty & Research

Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author