Organization Science
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


ORGANIZATION SCIENCE
Vol. 19, No. 2, March-April 2008, pp. 306-326
DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0312
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jacobides, M. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content

How Capability Differences, Transaction Costs, and Learning Curves Interact to Shape Vertical Scope

Michael G. Jacobides

London Business School, Sussex Place, Regent's Park, London NW1 4SA, United Kingdom
mjacobides{at}london.edu

This paper provides an integrative analysis of the drivers of vertical scope, using analytical and computational methods. I propose a model with two vertical segments (upstream and downstream), firm populations with heterogeneous capabilities, and an intermediate market subject to transaction costs in which firms can choose whether to be integrated or vertically specialized. By varying the level of transaction costs and changing the structure of the correlation between upstream and downstream capabilities in the industry, learning curves, and the way in which profitability leads to capability improvement in the upstream and downstream segments, I generate numerical results to explain how vertical integration evolves over time. The results suggest that (a) with no capability differences, even if transaction costs are nil, firms remain integrated; (b) transaction costs catalyze the underlying capability differences to drive scope; (c) dynamic factors, such as learning curves, returns to investment in capabilities, or limits to expansion, exacerbate small, random capability differences and as such promote specialization. These dynamic factors can by themselves lead to substantial specialization when they differ between the upstream and downstream segments. The model also provides a rationale for mixed governance (i.e., concurrent use of both the market and integration), as well as for the initial period of vertical integration, followed by specialization.

Key Words: vertical scope; productive capabilities; transaction costs; learning curves; industry evolution






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by INFORMS.