The Experts below are selected from a list of 78069 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Mumin Kurtulus - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the role of store brand spillover in a retailer s Category Management strategy
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2019Co-Authors: Yasin Alan, Mumin Kurtulus, Chunlin WangAbstract:Problem definition: We study a retailer’s Category Management strategy and interactions with its supply chain partners in a setting in which increasing the store brand (SB) market share in a focal ...
-
the role of store brand spillover in a retailer s Category Management strategy
2017Co-Authors: Yasin Alan, Mumin Kurtulus, Chunlin WangAbstract:Problem Definition: We study a retailer’s Category Management strategy and interactions with its supply chain partners in a setting in which increasing the store brand (SB) market share in a focal Category improves the retailer’s overall profitability by creating demand spillover to other categories. Academic/Practical Relevance: Unlike most Category Management research, which focuses on Category profit maximization, our research incorporates SB spillover observed in practice into the retailer’s decision making. Methodology: We analyze a game-theoretic model with one retailer, one high-quality national brand (NB) manufacturer, and one low-quality NB manufacturer. The retailer selects the assortment and sets the retail prices, while the NB manufacturers set their wholesale prices. We formulate the retailer’s objective function as a weighted sum of Category profit and SB market share, where the weight assigned to the SB market share captures the degree of SB spillover. Results: First, overlooking SB spillover can result in suboptimal assortment and pricing decisions, leading to financial losses for the retailer. The retailer incurs the largest losses when it fails to adjust its assortment to take SB spillover into account, whereas its losses are relatively small when it carries the right assortment but fails to adjust its prices. Second, taking SB spillover into account decreases the retailer’s Category profit when the degree of SB spillover is high. However, a low degree of SB spillover may enable the retailer to simultaneously increase its Category profit and SB market share. Third, SB spillover is never beneficial for the low-quality NB, but may increase the high-quality NB’s profit when the retailer removes the low-quality NB from its assortment. Managerial Implications: Our study sheds light on how SB spillover affects the retailer’s assortment and pricing decisions and demonstrates the impact of such decisions on the retailer, the focal Category, and the NBs.
-
Category captainship vs retailer Category Management under limited retail shelf space
Production and Operations Management, 2011Co-Authors: Mumin Kurtulus, Beril L ToktayAbstract:Shelf-space scarcity is a predominant aspect of the consumer goods industry. This paper analyzes its implications for Category Management. We consider a model where two competing manufacturers sell their differentiated products through a single retailer who determines the shelf space allocated to the Category. The scope of Category Management is pricing. We consider two Category Management mechanisms: retailer Category Management (RCM), where the retailer determines product prices and Category captainship (CC), where a manufacturer in the Category determines them. Our analysis reveals that the retailer can use the form of Category Management and the Category shelf space to control the intensity of competition between manufacturers to his benefit. We also show that the emergence of CC depends on the degree of product differentiation, the opportunity cost of shelf space, and the profit sharing arrangement in the alliance. The equilibrium Category shelf space under CC may be higher than under RCM if the value to the retailer of eliminating double marginalization and putting price pressure on the non-captain manufacturer dominates the loss from sharing the profit with the Category captain. CC has been criticized for disadvantaging non-captain manufacturers. While we provide some support for this claim, we also find that CC may benefit non-captain manufacturers when implemented by a powerful retailer in categories with sufficiently differentiated products, because the shelf space allocated to the Category increases in this case.
-
Category captainship outsourcing retail Category Management
Social Science Research Network, 2005Co-Authors: Mumin Kurtulus, Beril L ToktayAbstract:Retailers in the consumer goods industry often rely on a leading manufacturer for Category Management, a form of manufacturer-retailer collaboration referred to as Category captainship. There are reported success stories about Category captainship, but also a growing debate about its potential for anti-competitive practices by Category captains. Motivated by conflicting viewpoints, the goal of our research is to deepen our understanding of the consequences of such collaboration initiatives between the retailer and only one of its manufacturers. To this end, we develop a game theoretic model of two competing manufacturers selling through one retailer that captures the basic tradeoffs of using Category captains for Category Management. We consider two scenarios that are in line with traditional retail Category Management and Category captainship. In the first scenario, the retailer is responsible for managing the Category and determines retail prices and assortment. In the second scenario, we assume that the retailer delegates part or all retail Category Management decisions to one of the manufacturers in return for a target Category profit, and implements its recommendations. We compare these two scenarios to investigate the impact of the transition on all stakeholders in the supply chain. We conclude with design recommendations on the scope and structure of Category captainship.
Rami Olkkonen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
suppliers roles in Category Management a study of supplier retailer relationships in finland and sweden
Industrial Marketing Management, 2009Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami Olkkonen, Petri Ollila, Saara HyvonenAbstract:Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze suppliers' roles in Category Management (CM) in the context of Finnish and Swedish supplier–retailer relationships. Using data from a survey of a sample of Finnish and Swedish suppliers, the study shows that the concept of CM is well known among both Finnish and Swedish suppliers, and that most of them have experience of CM as a key operational business process. The study also shows that, in general, larger suppliers in both Finland and Sweden have a relatively strong role in CM collaboration, whereas smaller suppliers (especially in Finland) are more likely to have a lesser role in CM collaboration. Suppliers with a strong role in CM collaboration are generally more capable of influencing individual CM tactics than suppliers with an equal role to competitors or those with no role (both in Finland and in Sweden). The study also finds that the effects of CM are perceived more positively among suppliers who have influence in decision-making regarding CM collaboration than among those who have no role in such decision-making. However, the opinions of suppliers who have no role in CM collaboration are neutral, rather than being especially negative. Qualitative studies, including face-to-face discussions with managers representing manufacturers who are more or less excluded from CM collaboration, might provide a more thorough understanding of CM from their perspective.
-
an analysis of suppliers roles in Category Management collaboration
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2008Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami OlkkonenAbstract:Abstract Category Management (CM) seems to bring many positive elements to supplier–retailer interaction, e.g., continuous collaboration instead of repeated competitive biddings and knowledge sharing instead of knowledge withholding. However, its nature cannot be understood without understanding the roles of the collaborating suppliers. Hence, the purpose of this article is to address the following research questions: (i) in the Finnish context, how suppliers perceive their role (i.e., their ability to provide input on CM tactics) related to their competitors in CM collaboration; and (ii) whether the effects of CM are perceived differently in groups of suppliers. The sample consisted of 89 representatives of fast-moving consumer-goods categories in the Finnish grocery industry. The study revealed that the large suppliers had a relatively strong role in CM collaboration, while the small suppliers had a weak role in CM decision-making and were easily excluded. ANOVAs indicated that suppliers with stronger or equal roles compared with their competitors were also more capable of influencing the most CM tactics. Furthermore, the effects of CM were perceived more positively among suppliers who were more capable of providing tactical input than among those with a weak collaborative role. This article offers new information about the different roles of suppliers in CM collaboration. However, more theoretical as well as quantitative and qualitative empirical studies are needed in order to increase knowledge about the nature and consequences of this topical Management practice.
-
Category Management tactics an analysis of manufacturers control
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 2006Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami OlkkonenAbstract:Purpose – To assess the weight and extent of control possessed by manufacturers over Category Management (CM) tactics in contemporary distribution channels for fast‐moving consumer goods; and to analyse the origins of this control.Design/methodology/approach – A survey study conducted among Finnish manufacturers of fast‐moving consumer goods. A total of 420 questionnaires were sent out. Of these, 84 questionnaires were returned, of which 83 were satisfactorily completed for use in the analysis.Findings – The study reveals that manufacturers believe that retailers are clearly in charge of CM tactics. However, large manufacturers seem to possess a relatively strong weight of control in CM decision making, whereas small manufacturers possess little weight of control. The origins of manufacturers' control are mostly non‐coercive in nature.Research limitations/implications – This study has approached CM from the perspective of manufacturing organisations. The phenomenon could also be approached from the retail...
Joshua D Wright - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
antitrust analysis of Category Management conwood v united states tobacco co
Supreme Court Economic Review, 2009Co-Authors: Joshua D WrightAbstract:Category Management refers generally to the process by which retailers select products to stock, display, promote, advertise, and price within a product Category. Category Management contracts involve a retailer designating a particular manufacturer as the “Category captain”, who has influence over which products in a product Category are stocked, as well as how they are displayed, promoted, and priced. Category Management contracts have attracted antitrust scrutiny in recent years, exemplified by the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco Co., which held that United States Tobacco’s abuse of its position as Category captain, exclusionary arrangements, misleading statements and destruction of rivals’ products violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Conwood is an especially important candidate for detailed economic and legal analysis for two reasons. The first is that antitrust commentators have almost universally agreed that Conwood is an example of “cheap exclusion” or mor...
-
antitrust analysis of Category Management conwood v united states tobacco co
Social Science Research Network, 2006Co-Authors: Joshua D WrightAbstract:Category Management refers generally to the process by which retailers select products to stock, display, promote, advertise, and price within a product Category. Category Management contracts involve a retailer designating a particular manufacturer as the “Category captain”, who has influence over which products in a product Category are stocked, as well as how they are displayed, promoted, and priced. Category Management contracts have attracted antitrust scrutiny in recent years, exemplified by the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco Co., which held that United States Tobacco’s abuse of its position as Category captain, exclusionary arrangements, misleading statements and destruction of rivals’ products violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Conwood is an especially important candidate for detailed economic and legal analysis for two reasons. The first is that antitrust commentators have almost universally agreed that Conwood is an example of “cheap exclusion” or more generally, a monopolization enforcement action that belongs to an identifiable Category of cases involving significant threats to competitive harm without plausible efficiency justifications. The second reason is that Conwood can be viewed as part of a broader trend toward increased scrutiny of distribution contracts that explicitly or implicitly restrict the display, promotion, or sale of rival products by retailers.Our analysis of the facts in Conwood challenges the conventional wisdom that it is an example of “cheap exclusion” and concludes that competitive harm was unlikely. Further, we provide a pro- competitive justification for Category Management contracts delegating shelf space decisions to the manufacturer as a form of partial exclusive dealing contract which grant a manufacturer access to preferred shelf space but do not completely exclude rivals.
Arto Lindblom - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
suppliers roles in Category Management a study of supplier retailer relationships in finland and sweden
Industrial Marketing Management, 2009Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami Olkkonen, Petri Ollila, Saara HyvonenAbstract:Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyze suppliers' roles in Category Management (CM) in the context of Finnish and Swedish supplier–retailer relationships. Using data from a survey of a sample of Finnish and Swedish suppliers, the study shows that the concept of CM is well known among both Finnish and Swedish suppliers, and that most of them have experience of CM as a key operational business process. The study also shows that, in general, larger suppliers in both Finland and Sweden have a relatively strong role in CM collaboration, whereas smaller suppliers (especially in Finland) are more likely to have a lesser role in CM collaboration. Suppliers with a strong role in CM collaboration are generally more capable of influencing individual CM tactics than suppliers with an equal role to competitors or those with no role (both in Finland and in Sweden). The study also finds that the effects of CM are perceived more positively among suppliers who have influence in decision-making regarding CM collaboration than among those who have no role in such decision-making. However, the opinions of suppliers who have no role in CM collaboration are neutral, rather than being especially negative. Qualitative studies, including face-to-face discussions with managers representing manufacturers who are more or less excluded from CM collaboration, might provide a more thorough understanding of CM from their perspective.
-
an analysis of suppliers roles in Category Management collaboration
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2008Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami OlkkonenAbstract:Abstract Category Management (CM) seems to bring many positive elements to supplier–retailer interaction, e.g., continuous collaboration instead of repeated competitive biddings and knowledge sharing instead of knowledge withholding. However, its nature cannot be understood without understanding the roles of the collaborating suppliers. Hence, the purpose of this article is to address the following research questions: (i) in the Finnish context, how suppliers perceive their role (i.e., their ability to provide input on CM tactics) related to their competitors in CM collaboration; and (ii) whether the effects of CM are perceived differently in groups of suppliers. The sample consisted of 89 representatives of fast-moving consumer-goods categories in the Finnish grocery industry. The study revealed that the large suppliers had a relatively strong role in CM collaboration, while the small suppliers had a weak role in CM decision-making and were easily excluded. ANOVAs indicated that suppliers with stronger or equal roles compared with their competitors were also more capable of influencing the most CM tactics. Furthermore, the effects of CM were perceived more positively among suppliers who were more capable of providing tactical input than among those with a weak collaborative role. This article offers new information about the different roles of suppliers in CM collaboration. However, more theoretical as well as quantitative and qualitative empirical studies are needed in order to increase knowledge about the nature and consequences of this topical Management practice.
-
Category Management tactics an analysis of manufacturers control
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 2006Co-Authors: Arto Lindblom, Rami OlkkonenAbstract:Purpose – To assess the weight and extent of control possessed by manufacturers over Category Management (CM) tactics in contemporary distribution channels for fast‐moving consumer goods; and to analyse the origins of this control.Design/methodology/approach – A survey study conducted among Finnish manufacturers of fast‐moving consumer goods. A total of 420 questionnaires were sent out. Of these, 84 questionnaires were returned, of which 83 were satisfactorily completed for use in the analysis.Findings – The study reveals that manufacturers believe that retailers are clearly in charge of CM tactics. However, large manufacturers seem to possess a relatively strong weight of control in CM decision making, whereas small manufacturers possess little weight of control. The origins of manufacturers' control are mostly non‐coercive in nature.Research limitations/implications – This study has approached CM from the perspective of manufacturing organisations. The phenomenon could also be approached from the retail...
Beril L Toktay - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Category captainship vs retailer Category Management under limited retail shelf space
Production and Operations Management, 2011Co-Authors: Mumin Kurtulus, Beril L ToktayAbstract:Shelf-space scarcity is a predominant aspect of the consumer goods industry. This paper analyzes its implications for Category Management. We consider a model where two competing manufacturers sell their differentiated products through a single retailer who determines the shelf space allocated to the Category. The scope of Category Management is pricing. We consider two Category Management mechanisms: retailer Category Management (RCM), where the retailer determines product prices and Category captainship (CC), where a manufacturer in the Category determines them. Our analysis reveals that the retailer can use the form of Category Management and the Category shelf space to control the intensity of competition between manufacturers to his benefit. We also show that the emergence of CC depends on the degree of product differentiation, the opportunity cost of shelf space, and the profit sharing arrangement in the alliance. The equilibrium Category shelf space under CC may be higher than under RCM if the value to the retailer of eliminating double marginalization and putting price pressure on the non-captain manufacturer dominates the loss from sharing the profit with the Category captain. CC has been criticized for disadvantaging non-captain manufacturers. While we provide some support for this claim, we also find that CC may benefit non-captain manufacturers when implemented by a powerful retailer in categories with sufficiently differentiated products, because the shelf space allocated to the Category increases in this case.
-
Category captainship outsourcing retail Category Management
Social Science Research Network, 2005Co-Authors: Mumin Kurtulus, Beril L ToktayAbstract:Retailers in the consumer goods industry often rely on a leading manufacturer for Category Management, a form of manufacturer-retailer collaboration referred to as Category captainship. There are reported success stories about Category captainship, but also a growing debate about its potential for anti-competitive practices by Category captains. Motivated by conflicting viewpoints, the goal of our research is to deepen our understanding of the consequences of such collaboration initiatives between the retailer and only one of its manufacturers. To this end, we develop a game theoretic model of two competing manufacturers selling through one retailer that captures the basic tradeoffs of using Category captains for Category Management. We consider two scenarios that are in line with traditional retail Category Management and Category captainship. In the first scenario, the retailer is responsible for managing the Category and determines retail prices and assortment. In the second scenario, we assume that the retailer delegates part or all retail Category Management decisions to one of the manufacturers in return for a target Category profit, and implements its recommendations. We compare these two scenarios to investigate the impact of the transition on all stakeholders in the supply chain. We conclude with design recommendations on the scope and structure of Category captainship.