摘要：This paper extends D’Aveni’s hypercompetition concept based on the core competencies’ approach by means of the addition of an institutional economic explanation.In this process it is demonstrated that the hypercompetitive conduct of economic protagonists in addition to the core competence approach can be explained by means of the differing levels of markedness of the contingency factors of dynamics and complexity.The transmission of the markedness of environmental variables to the two prevailing alternative forms of conduct in the area of hypercompetition – indirect,cooperative,marketbased and direct,hierarchical confrontational coordination – occurs whilst reverting to institutional economics (property rights approach,transaction costs theory and their dynamic extension by Langlois & Robertson).The aforementioned three approaches shall be inspected as to whether they provide an authoritative basis for assessing conduct under the premise based on D’Aveni’s concept of hypercompetition that dynamics and complexity are (increasingly) marked in a horizontal direction and (increasingly) less marked in a vertical direction.The analyses demonstrate that the contrary markedness or development of dynamics and complexity lead to equally contrary statements per indirect,cooperative market-based or direct,hierarchical confrontational behaviour in a horizontal and vertical direction:companies shall tend to expand in a horizontal direction and concentrate vertically.
关键词：This paper extends D’Aveni’s hypercompetition concept based on the core competencies’ approach by means of the addition of an institutional economic explanation.In this process it is demonstrated that the hypercompetitive conduct of economic protagonists in addition to the core competence approach can be explained by means of the differing levels of markedness of the contingency factors of dynamics and complexity.The transmission of the markedness of environmental variables to the two prevailing alternative forms of conduct in the area of hypercompetition – indirect,cooperative,marketbased and direct,hierarchical confrontational coordination – occurs whilst reverting to institutional economics (property rights approach,transaction costs theory and their dynamic extension by Langlois & Robertson).The aforementioned three approaches shall be inspected as to whether they provide an authoritative basis for assessing conduct under the premise based on D’Aveni’s concept of hypercompetition that dynamics and complexity are (increasingly) marked in a horizontal direction and (increasingly) less marked in a vertical direction.The analyses demonstrate that the contrary markedness or development of dynamics and complexity lead to equally contrary statements per indirect,cooperative market-based or direct,hierarchical confrontational behaviour in a horizontal and vertical direction:companies shall tend to expand in a horizontal direction and concentrate vertically.
