Promover a assimetria

"If possession of a positive added value is the key to value appropriation, we must next determine how a player comes to have a positive added value. In particular, how can a firm come to have a positive added value? The answer is that the firm must enjoy a favorable asymmetry between itself and other firms. We identify four routes that lead to the creation of such asymmetries, terming each a ”value-based’ strategy for the firm.
...
it is evident that for a firm to have a positive added value it must be “different” from its competitors. That is, it must enjoy a favorable asymmetry between itself and other firms.
...
Favorable asymmetries can also arise on the supplier side. Specifically, suppliers may have a lower opportunity cost of providing resources to one firm than of providing them to other firms. Notice that each of these asymmetries can come about in either of two ways. An asymmetry in willingness-to-pay may arise because the firm finds a way to raise the willingness-to-pay of buyers for its product. Or it may arise because buyers end up with a lower willingness-to-pay for other firms’ products. A favorable asymmetry results in either case. Similarly, an asymmetry in opportunity cost may arise because the firm finds a way to lower the opportunity cost of suppliers of providing resources to it. Or it may arise because suppliers end up with a higher opportunity cost of providing resources to other firms. Again, a favorable asymmetry results in either case.
We call each of these routes to enjoying a favorable asymmetry a ”value-based’’ strategy for the firm.
...
In the top left box is the strategy of raising the willingness-to- pay of buyers for the firm’s product. This is the classic differentiation strategy. It involves the firm’s finding ways to meet the needs of buyers better than do other firms. This strategy is well known and well understood, and so we do not dwell on it here.

In the bottom left box is the strategy of lowering the opportunity cost to suppliers of providing resources to the firm. One way the firm can do this is by reducing a supplier’s costs of doing business with it. This type of value-based strategy, the existence of which follows logically from our analytical approach, thus has close connections with the sorts of ideas that have been emphasized recently in writings on supplier relations. It is also closely related to the consulting prescription, currently in vogue, that firms should establish ”value-managed partnerships” with their suppliers.
Other ways in which the firm can lower suppliers’ opportunity costs are found in the area of human resource management. An example is offering employees nonsalary benefits which other firms cannot readily match.
In the top right box is the strategy of lowering the willingness- to-pay of buyers for other firms’ products. In its most literal form, this strategy might include negative advertising (“bad-mouthing” competitors). A more subtle variant involves the creation of switching costs for buyers. These are present if existing buyers of a firm find buying from a competitor in the future less attractive than buying from the same firm again-say, because of retraining costs associated with switching to use of a competitor’s product. This says exactly that buyers have a lower willingness-to-pay for the products of competi- tors than for those of the original firm.
Finally, in the bottom right box is the strategy of raising the opportunity cost to suppliers of providing resources to other firms. This largely mirrors the previous strategy. Influencing suppliers’ perceptions of other firms fits in here, as does the creation of switching costs for suppliers."

Trechos retirados de "Value-Based Business Strategy" de Adam Brandenburger e Harborwne Stuart