A game-theoretic model of e-marketplace participation growth

Journal of Management Information Systems

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 295-319

  Galbreth, Michael R ^a,b   March, Salvatore T ^a   Scudder, Gary D ^a   Shor, Mikhael ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b KPMG LLP   (United States)

Author keywords

Business to business e commerce; E marketplace; Game theory; Network effect

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; GAME THEORY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS;

BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS E-COMMERCE; E-MARKETPLACE; NETWORK EFFECT;

ELECTRONIC COMMERCE;

EID: 23744455066     PISSN: 07421222     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045837     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Atkinson, B. Earning the return. Purchasing, 130, 13 (2001), 22-26.
2. Bloch, F. Group and network formation in industrial organization: A survey. In G. Demange and M. Wooders (eds.), Group Formation in Economics: Networks, Clubs and Coalitions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 335-353.
3. Boyer, K., and Olson, J. Drivers of Internet purchasing success. Production and Operations Management, 11, 4 (2000), 480-498.
4. Brynjolfsson, E. Information assets, technology, and organization. Management Science, 40, 12 (1994), 1645-1662.
5. Carabello, L. E-procurement can reduce expenses. Healthcare Financial Management (December 2001), 82-83.
6. Clemons, E.; Reddi, S.; and Row, M. The impact of information technology on the organization of economic activity: The "move to the middle" hypothesis. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10, 2 (Fall 1993), 9-35.
7. Croom, S. Restructuring supply chains through information channel innovation. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 21, 4 (2001), 504-515.
8. Dai, Q., and Kauffman, R. To be or not to B2B? An evaluative model for e-procurement channel adoption. Working paper 00-09, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 2000.
9. Dai, Q., and Kauffman, R. Business models for Internet-based B2B electronic models. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6, 4 (Summer 2002), 41-72.
10. Gonsalves, A. Health system lays out benefits, shortcomings of e-marketplaces. Internetweek.com (January 17, 2003) (available at www.internetweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=6400032).
11. Gurbaxani, V., and Whang, S. The impact of information systems on organizations and markets. Communications of the ACM, 34, 1 (1991), 59-73.
12. Guth, P. Purchase order contents, receiving, and accounts payable. Hospital Materiel Management Quarterly, 10, 2 (1988), 29-34.
13. Helper, S., and MacDuffie, J.P. Suppliers and Intermediaries. In B. Kogut (ed.), The Global Internet Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003, 331-380.
14. Kaplan, S., and Sawhney, M. E-hubs: The new marketplaces. Harvard Business Review, 78, 3 (2000), 97-103.
15. Kauffman, R., and Mohtadi, H. Open versus proprietary systems in B2B e-procurement: A risk-adjusted transactions cost perspective. Working paper 03-05, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 2003.
16. Katz, M., and Shapiro, C. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. American Economic Review, 75, 3 (1985), 424-440.
17. Keskinocak, P., and Tayur, S. Quantitative analysis for Internet-enabled supply chains. Interfaces, 31, 2 (2001), 70-89.
18. Malone, T.; Yates, J.; and Benjamin, R. Electronic markets and electronic hierarchies: Effects of information technology on market structure and corporate strategies. Communications of the ACM, 30, 6 (1987), 484-497.
19. McKinsey & Company and CAPS Research. Coming in to focus: Using the lens of economic value to clarify the impact of B2B e-marketplaces. Tempe, AZ, 2000.
20. Mukhopadhyay, T.; Kekre, S.; and Kalathur, S. Business value of information technology: A study of electronic data interchange. MIS Quarterly, 19, 2 (1995), 137-156.
21. Ovans, A. E-procurement at Schlumberger. Harvard Business Review, 78, 3 (2000), 20-21.
22. Perez, K. E-procurement for hospitals. Health Management Technology, 21, 8 (2000), 28.
23. Riggins, F., and Mukhopadhyay, T. Interdependent benefits from interorganizational systems: Opportunities for business partner reengineering, Journal of Management Information Systems, 11, 2 (Fall 1994), 37-57.
24. Riggins, F.; Kriebel, C.; and Mukhopadhyay, T. The growth of interorganizational systems in the presence of network externalities. Management Science, 40, 8 (1994), 984-998.
25. Stone age thrives in many purchasing organizations. Purchasing, 120, 8 (1996), 27.
26. Subramaniam, C., and Shaw, M. A study of the value and impact of B2B e-commerce: The case of Web-based procurement. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6, 4 (Summer 2002), 19-40.
27. Wang, E., and Seidmann, A. Electronic data interchange: Competitive externalities and strategic implementation policies. Management Science, 41, 3 (1995), 401-418.
28. Yi, S-.S. Endogenous formation of joint ventures with efficiency gains. RAND Journal of Economics, 29, 3 (1998), 610-631.
29. Yoo, B.; Choudhary, V., and Mukhopadhyay, T. A model of neutral B2B intermediaries. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 3 (Winter 2002-3), 43-68.