[8] 2002 e-business-strategies-for-virtual-organizations
[8] 2002 e-business-strategies-for-virtual-organizations
[8] 2002 e-business-strategies-for-virtual-organizations
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
e-Business Strategies <strong>for</strong> Virtual Organizations<br />
36<br />
paperwork and time seem pedestrian, even though they<br />
have clearly led to big savings in procurement time and<br />
cost.<br />
� Next came third-party exchanges, independent firms that<br />
bring together many buyers and sellers to create a genuine<br />
market. The potential is bigger, but gaining critical mass is<br />
harder. There are still plenty of companies who fail to see<br />
why they should go out of their way to cut their profits by<br />
taking part in an open trading system.<br />
� Now comes the third phase: when the giants of an industry<br />
get together in a consortium. On 25 February 2000 General<br />
Motors, Ford and Daimler Chrysler abandoned their standalone<br />
ef<strong>for</strong>ts and joined <strong>for</strong>ces to create the world’s largest<br />
<strong>virtual</strong> market, which will buy $240 billion worth of parts<br />
from tens of thousands of suppliers. Within days Toyota,<br />
Renault and its Japanese affiliate, Nissan, had all expressed<br />
interest in joining; others will follow. On 28 February 2000<br />
America’s Sears, Roebuck and France’s Carrefour announced<br />
a retail consortium, called GlobalNetXchange, that will<br />
handle US$80 billion worth of purchases annually. And on 1<br />
March Cargill, DuPont and Cenex Harvest, an American<br />
farm cooperative, set up Rooster.com, which will both<br />
supply farmers and sell their crops. These consortia are an<br />
improvement on previous independent online ef<strong>for</strong>ts.<br />
How will other markets evolve? The answer depends on the<br />
structure of their industries. Compare the following two<br />
extremes. Pyramid-shaped industries are exemplified in car<br />
manufacturing, the PC industry and chemical markets. These<br />
are ones in which there are few big buyers and an enormous<br />
and fragmented mass of small suppliers. In PCs, Ingram Micro<br />
aggregates big manufacturers and sells to thousands of small<br />
resellers. FOB.com aggregates small chemical suppliers <strong>for</strong><br />
DuPont, Dow and a few other big buyers. Because of the<br />
asymmetry in these industries, such exchanges tend to be<br />
‘biased markets’: they naturally favour one side of the deal<br />
flow.<br />
Exchanges have several advantages. Because of the power they<br />
consolidate, they easily reach critical mass and so avoid the<br />
Catch-22 of having to persuade sellers to join when buyers are<br />
scarce. They can also be financed, or owned, by market<br />
participants (as in the car and retail exchanges) without<br />
compromising themselves, since small firms are used to the<br />
idea of working with big ones.