1987Journal of Economic StudiesRequires access

When Does Market‐Share Matter?

Graham Hall

Open publisher page 21 citations

Abstract

One of the tenets of the conventional wisdom of the strategic management literature is that if a business succeeds in increasing its market‐share it will usually enjoy an improvement in its profitability. It is not simply that it serves as one of a battery of measures of relative performance, nor that, ceteris paribus, increases in the volume of sales must be linked to increases in the total amount of profits earned, but that increases in market share will directly cause increases in profitability, that is profits deflated to take into account the level of output. As might be expected, the strength of feeling that is displayed about the virtues of market‐share as a strategic tool varies enormously among opinion leaders. Those from the influential Boston Consulting Group (1970) are almost messianic in their exhortations to businesses to aim single mindedly for increased market‐share in order to move down their experience curves. Others, most notably from the Strategic Planning Institute, through its Profit Impact of Market Strategies Programme (PIMS), e.g. Schloeffer, et al., (1974), Buzzell, et al., (1975) and Gale (1972), imply the importance of market‐share by the emphasis they place upon its influence in their reporting of the results of regressing return‐on‐investment in a model which contains over thirty other variables.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

One of the tenets of the conventional wisdom of the strategic management literature is that if a business succeeds in increasing its market‐share it will usually enjoy an improvement in its profitability. It is not simply that it serves as one of a battery of measures of relative performance, nor that, ceteris paribus, increases in the volume of sales must be linked to increases in the total amount of profits earned, but that increases in market share will directly cause increases in profitability, that is profits deflated to take into account the level of output. As might be expected, the strength of feeling that is displayed about the virtues of market‐share as a strategic tool varies enormously among opinion leaders. Those from the influential Boston Consulting Group (1970) are almost messianic in their exhortations to businesses to aim single mindedly for increased market‐share in order to move down their experience curves. Others, most notably from the Strategic Planning Institute, through its Profit Impact of Market Strategies Programme (PIMS), e.g. Schloeffer, et al., (1974), Buzzell, et al., (1975) and Gale (1972), imply the importance of market‐share by the emphasis they place upon its influence in their reporting of the results of regressing return‐on‐investment in a model which contains over thirty other variables.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

One of the tenets of the conventional wisdom of the strategic management literature is that if a business succeeds in increasing its market‐share it will usually enjoy an improvement in its profitability. It is not simply that it serves as one of a battery of measures of relative performance, nor that, ceteris paribus, increases in the volume of sales must be linked to increases in the total amount of profits earned, but that increases in market share will directly cause increases in profitability, that is profits deflated to take into account the level of output. As might be expected, the strength of feeling that is displayed about the virtues of market‐share as a strategic tool varies enormously among opinion leaders. Those from the influential Boston Consulting Group (1970) are almost messianic in their exhortations to businesses to aim single mindedly for increased market‐share in order to move down their experience curves. Others, most notably from the Strategic Planning Institute, through its Profit Impact of Market Strategies Programme (PIMS), e.g. Schloeffer, et al., (1974), Buzzell, et al., (1975) and Gale (1972), imply the importance of market‐share by the emphasis they place upon its influence in their reporting of the results of regressing return‐on‐investment in a model which contains over thirty other variables.

Key concepts: Ceteris paribus, Market share, Market share analysis, Profitability index, Profit (economics), Order (exchange), Marketing, Profit impact of marketing strategy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
When Does Market‐Share Matter? — Research Paper | ScholarLens