Emerging Markets: Microsoft’s Evolving China Strategy

Strategy Tripod: Industry-based, resource-based, and institution-based views are the three leading perspectives guide our exploration of globalization.
Microsoft’s first decade in China was disastrous. It established a representative office in 1992 and then set up a wholly owned subsidiary, Microsoft (China), in 1995.The firm quickly realized that it didn’t have a market share problem—everybody was using Windows.
Problem: How to translate that market share into revenue, since everybody seemingly used pirated versions.
Microsoft’s solution? Sue violators in Chinese courts. But Microsoft lost such lawsuits regularly. Alarmed, the Chinese government openly promoted the free open-source Linux operating systems. Chinese government was afraid that Microsoft’s software might contain spy-ware for the US government.
Mid-2000s: Chinese government required all government agencies to use legal software and all PC manufacturers to load legal software before selling to consumers. Prior to these requirements, many foreign (and some US) PC makers in China sold numerous machines “naked,” implicitly inviting their customers to use cheap illegal software.
Changing the China strategy would inevitably lead to changing the globally “one-size-fits-all” set of pricing (such as $560 for the Windows and Office toolset as in the United States).
“Does Microsoft need China?” Nobody needed China less than Microsoft, which became a dynamo without significant China sales. However, in the long run, China’s support of Linux could pose dangers to Microsoft. This was because a public infrastructure for a software industry built around Linux could generate an alternative ecosystem with more low-cost rivals that break free from dependence on Windows.

Questions:

1. From an industry-based view, why does Microsoft feel threatened by Linux in China and globally?

2. From a resource-based view, what valuable and unique resources and capabilities does Microsoft have in the eyes of the Chinese users and the government?

3. From an institution-based view, what are the major lessons from Microsoft’s strategic changes?

 

Sample Solution

Emerging Markets: Microsoft`s Evolving China Strategy

From the industry view, China is one of the country`s any company would run to venture. The large population in China is likely to broaden the market for any company and so for Microsoft. Microsoft Company is concerned about the opportunities available in China due to this large market. Linux possesses threat for Microsoft to leap this benefit. China`s support of Linux could pose dangers to Microsoft. This is because a public infrastructure for a software industry built around Linux could generate an alternative ecosystem with more low-cost rivals that break free from dependence on Windows.

With increasing pA1, A2 decreases. Consequently, the business model relies on setting low prices in period 1, pA1, to capture a larger market share and raise prices in pA2, to maximise profits. For instance, in the electricity retail market, a dispersion of prices exists through a range of different tariffs offered to consumers. (Giulietti, et al., 2014)

In essence, firms exploit people who are generally less tech savvy, resistant to change and less willing or able to go through the hassle of searching e.g. the elderly. Ofcom studies show ‘customers with landline and broadband service together pay on average 19% more after their discount deal has expired…94% of individuals can switch to faster broadbands but less than half choose to’ (Sweney, 2018).

Consumer and firm behaviour are together responsible for this strange phenomenon. While consumers may remain stubbornly loyal, for those that do wish to switch, firms respond by endogenously increasing switching costs. I illustrate the economics behind this behaviour using the Belleflame and Pietz model. Here, r, is the reservation price, x, is the distance from the consumer to the firm and pxy, is the price charged by firm x in period y. We assume customers are uniformly distributed along a unit line.

In the first period model, the consumer purchases from firm A if the inequality holds:

In a two-period model, customers that buy from firm A continue to do so with the switching cost, z, if:

Switching costs relaxes price competition between firms by creating a “dead area”, as long as price differences between rivals are not too large. This is because these exit fees can offset savings incurred by switching. However, there are also other important factors we can consider. Customer loyalty, f(l), is likely to ensure that a customer stays with the incumbent firm whilst search costs, s, makes it more expensive for customers to find better deals, thereby decreasing the proportion of people that will switch suppliers. Customers continue to buy from the same firm if:

Firms are also devious in creating endogenous switching costs. Companies like Vodafone are

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.