4.7 Article

Innovation diffusion of repeat purchase products in a competitive market: An agent-based simulation approach

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 245, 期 1, 页码 157-167

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.03.008

关键词

Agent-based simulation; Diffusion of innovations; Second-generation biofuel

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P20136-G14]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P20136] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When introducing a new product into market, substantial amounts of resources are put at stake. Innovation managers therefore seek for reliable predictions of the respective innovation diffusion process. Making such predictions, however, is challenging, because the diffusion trajectory is affected by various factors such as the type of innovation, its perceived attributes, marketing activities and their impact, or consumers' individual communication and adoption behaviors. Modeling the diffusion of innovations accordingly is of interest for both practitioners and management scholars. An agent-based model can overcome many limitations of traditional approaches. It accounts for heterogeneity in consumer preferences as well as in the social structure of their interactions and allows for modeling consumers as boundedly rational agents who make decisions under uncertainty and are influenced by micro-level drivers of adoption. We introduce an agent-based model that deals with repeat purchase decisions, addresses the competitive diffusion of multiple products, and takes into consideration both the temporal and the spatial dimension of innovation diffusion. The corresponding simulation tool can support decision makers in analyzing the prospective diffusion of an innovation in scenarios that differ in pricing strategy, distribution strategy, and/or communication strategy. Its applicability is illustrated by means of an empirically grounded example for a second-generation biofuel. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据