网上购买,实体提货服务:一个不稳定的竞争策略

IF 8.3 1区 工程技术 Q1 ECONOMICS
Lina Zhang , Yumeng Zhang
{"title":"网上购买,实体提货服务:一个不稳定的竞争策略","authors":"Lina Zhang ,&nbsp;Yumeng Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.tre.2025.104050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The widespread adoption of buy-online-pickup-in-store (BOPS) services has attracted significant research attention, particularly regarding when an online retailer should deploy BOPS service for last-mile delivery (LMD). This study examines the efficiency of BOPS adoption in a competing environment. Using a game-theoretical model within a duopoly framework, we investigate the pricing and BOPS service design decisions between competing retailers with varying home delivery (HD) service qualities. The results reveal how a retailer responds to its competitor’s different BOPS adoption strategies. When it is not yet available in the market, BOPS service provides a competitive advantage as the only BOPS-offering retailer enjoys increased profits. We identify distinctive profit mechanisms for retailers with a higher or lower level of HD service quality: enhanced competitive differentiation effect for the former and quality perception improvement effect for the latter. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that when both retailers adopt BOPS service, they reach an equilibrium where at least one retailer is worse off. The prisoner’s dilemma may occur where both retailers end up in a suboptimal position, and the likelihood of this dilemma is influenced by their HD service quality differentiation. Ultimately, while seemingly beneficial, BOPS service is a precarious competitive strategy that may trap retailers. Our findings contribute to the expanding BOPS literature and offer valuable practical implications for online retailing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49418,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review","volume":"197 ","pages":"Article 104050"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Buy-online-pickup-in-store service: A precarious competing strategy\",\"authors\":\"Lina Zhang ,&nbsp;Yumeng Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tre.2025.104050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The widespread adoption of buy-online-pickup-in-store (BOPS) services has attracted significant research attention, particularly regarding when an online retailer should deploy BOPS service for last-mile delivery (LMD). This study examines the efficiency of BOPS adoption in a competing environment. Using a game-theoretical model within a duopoly framework, we investigate the pricing and BOPS service design decisions between competing retailers with varying home delivery (HD) service qualities. The results reveal how a retailer responds to its competitor’s different BOPS adoption strategies. When it is not yet available in the market, BOPS service provides a competitive advantage as the only BOPS-offering retailer enjoys increased profits. We identify distinctive profit mechanisms for retailers with a higher or lower level of HD service quality: enhanced competitive differentiation effect for the former and quality perception improvement effect for the latter. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that when both retailers adopt BOPS service, they reach an equilibrium where at least one retailer is worse off. The prisoner’s dilemma may occur where both retailers end up in a suboptimal position, and the likelihood of this dilemma is influenced by their HD service quality differentiation. Ultimately, while seemingly beneficial, BOPS service is a precarious competitive strategy that may trap retailers. Our findings contribute to the expanding BOPS literature and offer valuable practical implications for online retailing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review\",\"volume\":\"197 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104050\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1366554525000912\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1366554525000912","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

网上购买到店提货(BOPS)服务的广泛采用吸引了大量的研究关注,特别是关于在线零售商何时应该为最后一英里送货(LMD)部署BOPS服务。本研究考察了在竞争环境中采用防喷器的效率。本文运用双寡头框架下的博弈论模型,研究了具有不同送货上门服务质量的竞争零售商之间的定价和BOPS服务设计决策。结果揭示了零售商如何回应其竞争对手不同的BOPS采用策略。在市场上还没有提供BOPS服务的情况下,BOPS服务提供了竞争优势,因为只有提供BOPS服务的零售商才能获得更高的利润。我们确定了HD服务质量高低对零售商的不同盈利机制:前者的竞争差异化效应增强,后者的质量感知改善效应增强。然而,我们的分析表明,当两个零售商都采用BOPS服务时,它们达到了至少一个零售商更差的平衡。当两家零售商最终都处于次优位置时,可能会出现囚徒困境,而这种困境的可能性受其HD服务质量差异的影响。最终,尽管BOPS服务看似有益,但它是一种不稳定的竞争策略,可能会让零售商陷入困境。我们的研究结果有助于扩展BOPS文献,并为在线零售提供有价值的实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Buy-online-pickup-in-store service: A precarious competing strategy
The widespread adoption of buy-online-pickup-in-store (BOPS) services has attracted significant research attention, particularly regarding when an online retailer should deploy BOPS service for last-mile delivery (LMD). This study examines the efficiency of BOPS adoption in a competing environment. Using a game-theoretical model within a duopoly framework, we investigate the pricing and BOPS service design decisions between competing retailers with varying home delivery (HD) service qualities. The results reveal how a retailer responds to its competitor’s different BOPS adoption strategies. When it is not yet available in the market, BOPS service provides a competitive advantage as the only BOPS-offering retailer enjoys increased profits. We identify distinctive profit mechanisms for retailers with a higher or lower level of HD service quality: enhanced competitive differentiation effect for the former and quality perception improvement effect for the latter. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that when both retailers adopt BOPS service, they reach an equilibrium where at least one retailer is worse off. The prisoner’s dilemma may occur where both retailers end up in a suboptimal position, and the likelihood of this dilemma is influenced by their HD service quality differentiation. Ultimately, while seemingly beneficial, BOPS service is a precarious competitive strategy that may trap retailers. Our findings contribute to the expanding BOPS literature and offer valuable practical implications for online retailing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.20
自引率
16.00%
发文量
285
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review is a reputable journal that publishes high-quality articles covering a wide range of topics in the field of logistics and transportation research. The journal welcomes submissions on various subjects, including transport economics, transport infrastructure and investment appraisal, evaluation of public policies related to transportation, empirical and analytical studies of logistics management practices and performance, logistics and operations models, and logistics and supply chain management. Part E aims to provide informative and well-researched articles that contribute to the understanding and advancement of the field. The content of the journal is complementary to other prestigious journals in transportation research, such as Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Part B: Methodological, Part C: Emerging Technologies, Part D: Transport and Environment, and Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. Together, these journals form a comprehensive and cohesive reference for current research in transportation science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信