{"title":"金字塔底部市场的最优定价和广告策略:一种分析方法","authors":"S. Swami, D. Tirupati","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2123238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We propose a model for developing optimal decisions and normative policies for pricing and advertising of products/services to markets at the ‘bottom of pyramid (BOP).’ This concept has been popularized in the recent times by Prahalad (The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid, 2006). Our model considers two types of market segments. The first type is the BOP market, which is large in size, but has limited ability to pay. The second type of the market is smaller in size, but can pay higher prices. The product/service offered to the two markets is differentiated in such a way that the base product (of appropriate quality) is available to the BOP market, while the premium product at a higher price is available to the higher-end market. The two markets are linked to each other such that there is a positive effect of customer base in the BOP market on the diffusion of product in the Premium market. Successful practices of such kind of models have been reported in widely documented healthcare case studies such as Aravind Eye Care (Kasturi Rangan, Service for sight, 1993). The product diffusion in the two markets is modeled using a pure innovation model by Fourt and Woodlock (J Mark, 25:31–38, 1960). Using optimal control methodology, we derive pricing and advertising policies for two types of organizations—for-profit organization (FPO) and non-profit organization (NPO). Thus, our analytical research design follows a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 (markets—BOP vs. Premium, strategies—pricing and advertising, organizations—FPO vs. NPO, and modeling—static vs. dynamic) design. Our optimal normative policy results can be summarized as follows: (i) A NPO charges lesser price per unit in both BOP and Premium markets, as compared to the FPO, (ii) A NPO spends equal amount of money in advertising or promoting the product/service as that spent by a FPO, (iii) A FPO charges lesser price per unit in the BOP markets as compared to the Premium market, (iv) The FPO receives lesser contribution margin per unit in the BOP market, as compared to the Premium market, (v) For the FPO, the ratio of advertising/promotion done in BOP market to that in the Premium market is governed by the parameters such as relative advertising effectiveness, cost of advertising, and contribution margin per unit in the two markets, (vi) Our dynamic pricing policy results for a FPO show that the prices are gradually increasing in the Premium market, and gradually decreasing in the BOP market, albeit after a threshold level of sales. The dynamic advertising policy results for a FPO show that advertising should gradually be decreased in the BOP market, but should remain stable in the Premium market. The NPO dynamic pricing and advertising results are similar to their static counterparts, though at much lower price levels.","PeriodicalId":303783,"journal":{"name":"Technology Operation Management","volume":"44 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Pricing and Advertising Policies for Bottom of Pyramid Markets: An Analytical Approach\",\"authors\":\"S. Swami, D. Tirupati\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2123238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We propose a model for developing optimal decisions and normative policies for pricing and advertising of products/services to markets at the ‘bottom of pyramid (BOP).’ This concept has been popularized in the recent times by Prahalad (The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid, 2006). Our model considers two types of market segments. The first type is the BOP market, which is large in size, but has limited ability to pay. The second type of the market is smaller in size, but can pay higher prices. The product/service offered to the two markets is differentiated in such a way that the base product (of appropriate quality) is available to the BOP market, while the premium product at a higher price is available to the higher-end market. The two markets are linked to each other such that there is a positive effect of customer base in the BOP market on the diffusion of product in the Premium market. Successful practices of such kind of models have been reported in widely documented healthcare case studies such as Aravind Eye Care (Kasturi Rangan, Service for sight, 1993). The product diffusion in the two markets is modeled using a pure innovation model by Fourt and Woodlock (J Mark, 25:31–38, 1960). Using optimal control methodology, we derive pricing and advertising policies for two types of organizations—for-profit organization (FPO) and non-profit organization (NPO). Thus, our analytical research design follows a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 (markets—BOP vs. Premium, strategies—pricing and advertising, organizations—FPO vs. NPO, and modeling—static vs. dynamic) design. Our optimal normative policy results can be summarized as follows: (i) A NPO charges lesser price per unit in both BOP and Premium markets, as compared to the FPO, (ii) A NPO spends equal amount of money in advertising or promoting the product/service as that spent by a FPO, (iii) A FPO charges lesser price per unit in the BOP markets as compared to the Premium market, (iv) The FPO receives lesser contribution margin per unit in the BOP market, as compared to the Premium market, (v) For the FPO, the ratio of advertising/promotion done in BOP market to that in the Premium market is governed by the parameters such as relative advertising effectiveness, cost of advertising, and contribution margin per unit in the two markets, (vi) Our dynamic pricing policy results for a FPO show that the prices are gradually increasing in the Premium market, and gradually decreasing in the BOP market, albeit after a threshold level of sales. The dynamic advertising policy results for a FPO show that advertising should gradually be decreased in the BOP market, but should remain stable in the Premium market. The NPO dynamic pricing and advertising results are similar to their static counterparts, though at much lower price levels.\",\"PeriodicalId\":303783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology Operation Management\",\"volume\":\"44 1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology Operation Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2123238\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology Operation Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2123238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
摘要
我们提出了一个模型,用于开发金字塔底部市场的产品/服务的定价和广告的最佳决策和规范政策。普拉哈拉德(the fortune at the bottom of the pyramid, 2006)最近推广了这一概念。我们的模型考虑了两种类型的细分市场。第一类是防喷器市场,规模很大,但支付能力有限。第二类市场规模较小,但价格较高。提供给这两个市场的产品/服务是有区别的,即向防喷器市场提供基础产品(质量适当),而向高端市场提供价格较高的优质产品。这两个市场是相互联系的,因此防喷器市场的客户群对产品在溢价市场的扩散有积极影响。此类模式的成功实践已在广泛记录的医疗保健案例研究中得到报道,如Aravind眼科护理(Kasturi Rangan,视力服务,1993年)。Fourt和Woodlock (J Mark, 25:31 - 38,1960)使用纯创新模型对两个市场中的产品扩散进行了建模。利用最优控制方法,我们推导出两种类型的组织——营利组织(FPO)和非营利组织(NPO)的定价和广告策略。因此,我们的分析研究设计遵循2x2 × 2x2(市场- bop vs. Premium,策略-定价和广告,组织- fpo vs. NPO,建模-静态vs.动态)设计。我们的最优规范政策结果可以总结如下:(我)一个非营利组织指控较小的单位价格在防喷器和高端市场,FPO相比,(ii)禁食相等数量的钱花在广告或推广的产品/服务,FPO花,(iii) FPO费用较小的单位价格在防喷器市场溢价市场相比,(iv) FPO接收较小的单位边际贡献在防喷器市场,高端市场相比,FPO (v),BOP市场与Premium市场的广告/促销比例是由两个市场的相对广告效果、广告成本和单位贡献率等参数决定的。(vi)我们对FPO的动态定价政策结果表明,尽管在销售额达到阈值后,Premium市场的价格逐渐上升,而BOP市场的价格逐渐下降。FPO的动态广告政策结果表明,BOP市场的广告应逐渐减少,而Premium市场的广告应保持稳定。NPO动态定价和广告效果与静态定价和广告效果相似,但价格水平要低得多。
Optimal Pricing and Advertising Policies for Bottom of Pyramid Markets: An Analytical Approach
We propose a model for developing optimal decisions and normative policies for pricing and advertising of products/services to markets at the ‘bottom of pyramid (BOP).’ This concept has been popularized in the recent times by Prahalad (The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid, 2006). Our model considers two types of market segments. The first type is the BOP market, which is large in size, but has limited ability to pay. The second type of the market is smaller in size, but can pay higher prices. The product/service offered to the two markets is differentiated in such a way that the base product (of appropriate quality) is available to the BOP market, while the premium product at a higher price is available to the higher-end market. The two markets are linked to each other such that there is a positive effect of customer base in the BOP market on the diffusion of product in the Premium market. Successful practices of such kind of models have been reported in widely documented healthcare case studies such as Aravind Eye Care (Kasturi Rangan, Service for sight, 1993). The product diffusion in the two markets is modeled using a pure innovation model by Fourt and Woodlock (J Mark, 25:31–38, 1960). Using optimal control methodology, we derive pricing and advertising policies for two types of organizations—for-profit organization (FPO) and non-profit organization (NPO). Thus, our analytical research design follows a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 (markets—BOP vs. Premium, strategies—pricing and advertising, organizations—FPO vs. NPO, and modeling—static vs. dynamic) design. Our optimal normative policy results can be summarized as follows: (i) A NPO charges lesser price per unit in both BOP and Premium markets, as compared to the FPO, (ii) A NPO spends equal amount of money in advertising or promoting the product/service as that spent by a FPO, (iii) A FPO charges lesser price per unit in the BOP markets as compared to the Premium market, (iv) The FPO receives lesser contribution margin per unit in the BOP market, as compared to the Premium market, (v) For the FPO, the ratio of advertising/promotion done in BOP market to that in the Premium market is governed by the parameters such as relative advertising effectiveness, cost of advertising, and contribution margin per unit in the two markets, (vi) Our dynamic pricing policy results for a FPO show that the prices are gradually increasing in the Premium market, and gradually decreasing in the BOP market, albeit after a threshold level of sales. The dynamic advertising policy results for a FPO show that advertising should gradually be decreased in the BOP market, but should remain stable in the Premium market. The NPO dynamic pricing and advertising results are similar to their static counterparts, though at much lower price levels.